User talk:Unkownsolidier

Disambiguation link notification for February 5

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Theodoros Kolokotronis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arcadia.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:49, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Armatoles

Hello Unkownsolidier, first let me say that I strongly support your work around here, as you have improved many badly neglected articles. Unfortunately, at Armatoles you have violated the 3 revert rule, and an administrator may temporarily block you from editing. Your opponents have already gone behind your back and reported you to an administrator [1]. If you are blocked, this will result in a permanent black mark against your record, which your opponents will then use against you in further efforts to drive you away from editing. I have dealt with these individuals extensively (unfortunately) and this is exactly what they want; don't give it to them. Your work here is extremely valuable and improves the encyclopedia. The dispute at Armatoles is not so significant that it is worth getting a permanent black mark on your record over (no dispute is, really). If you have any questions feel free to ask me, and if you would like to discuss things in private, you can shoot me an email by going to my user talk page. Whatever you do, it is vital you not revert again at Armatoles for now. Khirurg (talk) 16:49, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Khirurg for your support, advise and for the notification. I extremely respect your work–you're an experienced editor. I apologize for my intervention–I felt that the edit I made was necessary to the article, also citing a reliable source to clarify. There are users (you know who I'm referring to) who are constantly marking disruptive edits to articles related to Greece, and somewhat trying to rewrite its history. Unkownsolidier (talk) 17:01, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your understanding. I totally understand your frustration, it has happened to me too. But it is very important to keep your cool at all times. To avoid getting blocked, I recommend going to the talkpage of the admin your opponents contacted and letting them know that you got carried away and won't be reverting at that article again. Your work here is valuable to the encyclopedia and it would be a pity to have a mark on your otherwise excellent record for such a trivial dispute. Khirurg (talk) 17:30, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Khirurg I noticed that Maleschreiber has recently re-added on the article of Evangelos Zappas an unreliable source published by an unverified Albanian publishing house which claims that the mother of Zappas had the surname 'Meksi' (apparently a member of the Albanian Meksi family). This change itself was instigated previously by a guest user 81.26.200.93. Maleschreiber also reverted the edits of the user 2a02:85f:e0ef:82d2:5105:910d:61ff:444 who rightfully so, sourced the part of his Greek origin. Can you please intervene? Unkownsolidier (talk) 15:42, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I cannot do that as it would be a violation of WP:EVASION. As you can see, wikipedia has rules, and when those are violated, bad things happen. That said, your situation is not irreversible and you should be able to restore your editing privileges provided you follow the right steps. You need to be 100% honest with your actions, the unblock request you have posted below is unlikely to succeed. You may want to contact the admin that blocked you by pinging them or emailing them. In the meantime, it is critically important you not edit from IPs in the meantime. This will require patience on your part, but it is doable. I strongly encourage you to do whatever it takes to restore your account, because you have made very valuable contributions to the encyclopedia and it is a pity to be in the situation you are now in. Khirurg (talk) 23:04, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Khirurg Thank you and sorry for my stupid request. Unkownsolidier (talk) 11:51, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. If you want to get unblocked, and I believe you do, you need to create a new section in your talkpage and paste the unblock template there (See [2]). Your current unblock request below is malformed and will not receive a response. Please also read this before requesting an unblock [3]. Since this is an Arbitration Enforcement block, only the blocking admin can lift it. So you need to either ping them or email them. Given the situation, my guess is getting your account unblocked will require you to not edit unlogged for a certain period of time, probably months, to show that you abide by the rules of wikipedia (see also WP:STANDARDOFFER). That may seem like a long time, but it is the only way for you to edit wikipedia again; if you edit unlogged your enemies will simply revert all of your edits per WP:BANREVERT. I will try to help as much as I can, but only you can get yourself unblocked. Khirurg (talk) 19:31, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Daniel Case (talk) 20:02, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Daniel Case (talk) 20:03, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of one month for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Daniel Case (talk) 18:57, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apart from edit-warring and many issues which are related to WP:RS, there are other WP:NPA-related issues about Unknownsoldier's activity. I left him a 3RR warning and his response was: I said stop threating and insulting me. I do what I have to do: make productive contributions to articles related to Greece. And I will not allow you ('expert' editor on everything has to do with Albania) to rewrite my country's history. [4].--Maleschreiber (talk) 23:14, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Daniel Case (talk) 21:54, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To enforce an arbitration decision, and for continued block evasion, you have been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. Daniel Case (talk) 04:21, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Unkownsolidier (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I'm willing to appeal, because I believe my work here is being unfairly maligned. First of all, I apologize for my intervention on the article of Armatoles–I realize now that I violated the 3 revert rule. I insisted because the information I added was purely for clarification with a reliable source that includes Theodoros Kolokotronis' memoirs. No need to excuse myself because I had accidentally skipped the protocols, purely out of spite. The fact that this single incident however gets my account blocked indefinitely is completely unfair/unjust. My contributions here has been appreciated by many colleagues and has earned me a barnstar. I've been here for four years and have steadily followed the flow and operation of the encyclopedia, while I myself have improved over the years as an editor. So I ask the enforcing administrator to reconsider their original decision. I don't understand that while the block was initially temporary, the deadline gradually increases, when in fact I haven't done anything during this time. Unkownsolidier (talk) 12:56, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Please appeal to WP:ARBCOM. Yamla (talk) 13:19, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Disambiguation link notification for February 12

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Theodoros Kolokotronis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mani.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]