User talk:UrbanVillager

You. Message. Now.

October 2010

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular the three-revert rule states that making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording and content that gains consensus among editors. If unsuccessful then do not edit war even if you believe you are right. Post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. SpinningSpark 12:50, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Weight of Chains

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of The Weight of Chains, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.weightofchains.com/about.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 22:42, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, UrbanVillager. You have new messages at Talk:Kosovo#No_split_and_no_moves.
Message added 20:25, 26 February 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

pls email

Hi, could you please email me in regards to a checkuser issue. jayvdbgmail.com Thank you John Vandenberg ^(chat) 22:37, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

weight of chains II

I've responded to you on the talk page for the weight of chains article.Sleetman (talk) 04:05, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Balkans warning

In a 2007 arbitration case, administrators were given the power to impose discretionary sanctions on any user editing Balkans-related articles in a disruptive way. If you continue with the behaviour on Boris Malagurski, you may be placed under sanctions including blocks, a revert limitation or an article/topic ban. Thank you.

This kind of an edit is unacceptable, no matter how you characterized those sources on Talk. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 09:34, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Boris Malagurski - the article

My revision is based on pure facts about the case pending appeal. The facts are public, open to public scrutiny and relevant to the article about the author. On the other hand, however, your user account is being investigated as a potential sock puppet of Boris Malagurski wich makes your "undo-revisions" questionable. I have reported this incident as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.245.66.8 (talk) 08:02, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you remove these facts from "your" article on Boris Malagurski??

Do these facts hurt your business? Boris Malagurski does have a Croatian passport, thus, he is a Croatian citizen.

Why did you remove SAP Vojvodina from the "pretty picture"? -- 17:50, 5 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.235.54.49 (talk)

Assuming good faith

Please remember to assume good faith in your interactions with other editors. Specifically, please don't characterize a difference of opinion on the content or categorization of an article as vandalism, as you did in this edit summary's comment on User:Bobrayner's edit.

That said, why are you wasting your time engaging with User:Opbeith on his user talk page and on Talk:The Weight of Chains? As you've examined his contribution history you already know perfectly well that his condemnation of others distoring, manipulating, and misrepresenting facts is entirely disingenuous; he's shown himself to have no compunctions whatsoever in introducing into articles his own factual distortions and misrepresentations when they serve to advance his point of view. His criticisms of your edits are grounded in neither Wikipedia policy nor reason itself, nor (as you have discovered) is he willing or able to identify specific problems with the article text, even when pressed with direct requests to do so. As long as he's not editing the article itself, and (not having actually seen the film) is in no position to make any informed contributions to the section he takes issue with, why respond to the kibbitzing? —Psychonaut (talk) 10:25, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Psychonaut, you're absolutely right. :) Thanks for the advice, and for alerting me about Opbeith's contribution history, I'll try to ignore his pointless comments from now on. Cheers, --UrbanVillager (talk) 23:50, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Me too. (And I knew he wouldn't be able to resist commenting here with more of his usual dissembling and disingenuous protestations of ignorance.) Just ignore him as long as he's not actively interfering in article space. —Psychonaut (talk) 09:37, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm interested to find you intervening here, Psychonaut, and particularly to find you supporting UrbanVillagers' approach to editing. Interested also that you find my interventions disingenuous compared with UrbanVillager's. You consider UrbanVillager's contributions to the Boris Malagurski and The Weight of Chains articles consistent with the spirt of Wikipedia and my reaction to them spurious. That's no real surprise to me, given my impression from our encounters over the years. Perhaps you'd remind me of my lack of compunction in introducing factual distortions and misrepresentations that serve my own point of view. If you've any reasonable examples I'm happy to remove them. Opbeith (talk) 00:51, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. --◅ PRODUCER (TALK) 13:08, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

November 2012

When adding links to material on external sites, as you did to Boris Malagurski, please ensure that the external site is not violating the creator's copyright. Linking to websites that display copyrighted works is acceptable as long as the website's operator has created or licensed the work. Knowingly directing others to a site that violates copyright may be considered contributory infringement. This is particularly relevant when linking to sites such as YouTube, where due care should be taken to avoid linking to material that violates its creator's copyright. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you believe the linked site is not violating copyright with respect to the material, then you should do one of the following:

If the linked site is the copyright holder, leave a message explaining the details on the article Talk page;
If a note on the linked site credibly claims permission to host the material, or a note on the copyright holder's site grants such permission, leave a note on the article Talk page with a link to where we can find that note;
If you are the copyright holder or the external site administrator, adjust the linked site to indicate permission as above and leave a note on the article Talk page;

If the material is available on a different site that satisfies one of the above conditions, link to that site instead. You included numerous Youtube links violating copyright all the while lecturing others for the same thing. --◅ PRODUCER (TALK) 19:34, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:PRODUCER was correct to remove the links within the references because of the above-noted copyright concerns. However, copyright concerns alone don't justify the removal of the remainder of the reference. You would likely be acting within policy to restore references (minus links to unauthorized copies) to any reliable sources. I have notified PRODUCER about this and suggested that he do so himself, though it appears he also disputes that some or all of the sources are reliable. —Psychonaut (talk) 20:34, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I understand. --UrbanVillager (talk) 20:38, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

When adding links to material on external sites, as you did to Serbian Canadians, please ensure that the external site is not violating the creator's copyright. Linking to websites that display copyrighted works is acceptable as long as the website's operator has created or licensed the work. Knowingly directing others to a site that violates copyright may be considered contributory infringement. This is particularly relevant when linking to sites such as YouTube, where due care should be taken to avoid linking to material that violates its creator's copyright. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you believe the linked site is not violating copyright with respect to the material, then you should do one of the following:

If the linked site is the copyright holder, leave a message explaining the details on the article Talk page;
If a note on the linked site credibly claims permission to host the material, or a note on the copyright holder's site grants such permission, leave a note on the article Talk page with a link to where we can find that note;
If you are the copyright holder or the external site administrator, adjust the linked site to indicate permission as above and leave a note on the article Talk page;

If the material is available on a different site that satisfies one of the above conditions, link to that site instead. --◅ PRODUCER (TALK) 17:44, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, didn't notice the link was on Malagurski's website. Regards, --UrbanVillager (talk) 17:47, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, UrbanVillager. You have new messages at Mark Arsten's talk page.
Message added 18:01, 13 November 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Mark Arsten (talk) 18:01, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Jim1138. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bormalagurski without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks, Jim1138 (talk) 19:07, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.255.57.233 (talk) 10:24, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Nova srpska politička misao for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nova srpska politička misao is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nova srpska politička misao until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Herp Derp (talk) 22:52, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

AN/EW

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 14:43, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI notice

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. (Note that I didn't initiate this discussion. I'm informing you only because the editor who posted it failed to do so themselves.) —Psychonaut (talk) 09:36, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You, Malagurski

You, Boris Malagurski, are a proven liar, cheater and fraudster. --Mladifilozof (talk) 19:38, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. —Psychonaut (talk) 09:18, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pots and kettles

Such as here [1], at least Bob was actually involved. Pincrete (talk) 21:07, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus for your recent removal at The Weight of Chains?

The Weight of Chains (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
UrbanVillager (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Hello UrbanVillager. Both you and Pincrete were warned about making changes without consensus at WP:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive255#User:Pincrete and User:UrbanVillager reported by User:Psychonaut (Result: Both warned).

Recently you've been making unilateral changes in the Reviews section with no evidence that anyone except you supports the changes. For example, here you said you were 'removing Pavlica per talk'. It is evident that Pincrete wants Pavlica to remain in the article. Can you link to anyone supporting your removal of Pavlica? If not, I advise you to restore the material to avoid sanctions. EdJohnston (talk) 13:42, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ed, can I ask you if blogs and bloggers described as "idiots" by those same blog editors are allowed on Wikipedia just because a Wikipedia editor wants them there? If so, please let me know, and I'll re-add it, since I thought Wikipedia guidelines were not a matter of consensus. And in that case, I will apologize and restore the Pavlica blog post. Regards, --UrbanVillager (talk) 22:07, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You should restore the Pavlica material. WP:Edit warring is a policy and it takes precedence over guidelines. The question on whether to include the Pavlica material can be settled through consensus. The steps of WP:Dispute resolution are available to you if you believe it doesn't belong. EdJohnston (talk) 22:16, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I restored the Pavlica material while I was waiting for clarification. Thank you. And I will see about going through the steps of WP:Dispute resolution, as I'm afraid this issue can't be settled in any other way at this point. --UrbanVillager (talk) 22:21, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Printscreen of "The Weight of Chains" credits.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Printscreen of "The Weight of Chains" credits.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:42, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies UrbanVillager, the fault for this may be mine, I haven't restored the .jpg to the page, but I did insert a 'diff' which may reference the .jpg. I will contact Stefan2 and explain, and if necessary remove the 'diff'.Pincrete (talk) 12:19, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It appears this wasn't my fault after all, I leave the matter therefore to you and Stefan2. Pincrete (talk) 13:28, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem: John Bosnitch

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Bobby Fischer into John Bosnitch. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. Psychonaut (talk) 22:09, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Weight of Chains, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Washington. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI

There is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Topic_ban_for_UrbanVillager that concerns you. Please feel free to comment there. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 22:31, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Topic ban

Ok, pursuant to this discussion, you are now banned from making any edits on any Boris Malagurski-related articles. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 02:31, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The close of the topic ban has been reverted. Ricky81682 was involved and should not have closed that discussion. GB fan 19:40, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Since you have roundly ignored the topic ban as imposed above, I have blocked you, for an initial period of 48 hours. If you go on ignoring the restriction after that, blocks will very quickly escalate towards indefinite. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:26, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(Sorry though for not posting this notification immediately after the block; I got interrupted while typing it.) Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:26, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fut.Perf., the ban has been lifted: [2] Please unblock me. --UrbanVillager (talk) 19:30, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have unblocked as the topic ban was not properly enacted. GB fan 19:38, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, User:GB fan! Regards, --UrbanVillager (talk) 19:41, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry indeed for imposing this block in the mistaken assumption the ban was valid; those responsible for the reversion of the ban failed to leave any notice here, so I had no way of knowing it had been superceded. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:01, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's OK. I really freaked out when I saw that I was blocked, I couldn't believe that it happened, I pride myself on respecting decisions in the Wikipedia community as well as Wikipedia rules. Glad this was quickly sorted out. --UrbanVillager (talk) 20:04, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Boris Malagurski

While the topic ban has been lifted, it is certainly under discussion. How about you voluntarily refrain from editing the topic for now as a show of good faith?--v/r - T P 19:50, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I hereby voluntarily promise to not edit Malagurski-related articles until the discussion has concluded. --UrbanVillager (talk) 19:59, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

T P, too bad my sourced edits (the ones made before the above given promise) get reverted right away with a "Knock it off UrbanVillager" reasoning, briefly explaining why one part of my edits are reverted (the merge of two sections in which one section contains only one listing) and then the deletion of two sourced listings (festivals) with absolutely no discussion on the talk page by the editor who reverted. Still, I'll refrain from editing, but you can see what happens on a daily basis - disruption, disruption and disruption when all I do is add referenced material that I thoroughly back up on talk pages (in this case, [3] and [4], and as for the merge, well, it just made more sense). --UrbanVillager (talk) 20:37, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That you can step back will reflect positively on the discussion at ANI. Perhaps editing another topic for awhile and just making a straight forward case on ANI is the best way forward right now.--v/r - T P 20:40, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Though I already wrote my opinion regarding the ban, so I'll let other editors voice their views and will move on to other topics until the matter is resolved. Thanks again. --UrbanVillager (talk) 20:45, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

November 2014

Your addition to The Weight of Chains 2 has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Psychonaut (talk) 15:20, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Psychonaut, I thought that article was erased a while back and redirected to The Weight of Chains, so how was something removed now when everything was removed a while back? I do remember gathering some information only about the film's synopsis from the film's website (I added the source), I couldn't describe something in my own words when I haven't seen the film (it hasn't come out yet, as far as I know), and it was tricky to even re-phrase stuff from the website because the topic wasn't even that clear to me. In any case, I was hoping that this could improve as more information about the film comes out, but the article was quickly blanked and redirected. If and when the article does become active again, I'll just avoid using the official website as a source for anything other than technical specifics regarding the film. In any case, I've promised not to edit Malagurski-related articles until a decision is made whether I should be banned from those articles and I will respect Wikipedia guidelines. Thanks for the heads-up. Regards, --UrbanVillager (talk) 15:44, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Weight of Chains / Balkans

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding the Balkans, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.

--slakr^\ talk / 09:18, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Slakr, I'm just curious - my edits have nothing to do with the Balkans, but rather with a film that discusses the Balkans. I never talked about the war in Yugoslavia nor do I intend to edit on Wikipedia regarding the matter - what I'm interested in are Malagurski's films that do talk about the Balkans, but I don't use Wikipedia as a public forum on what I think about the issues discussed in the films, but rather to bring sourced information about the films themselves. So, my question is - why am I being notified of this? The films are out there, I'm not the one discussing whether I like what's said in the films or not, perhaps you could have a look at others editing Malagurski-related articles for biased reasons, because I'm worried your warning is at the wrong address. --UrbanVillager (talk) 18:40, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That is a lie. There are many diffs showing that UrbanVillager's edits do actually discuss the Balkans in general, and recent wars in particular. For example: [5]. Previous attempts to encourage UrbanVillager to comply with policy have failed; I merely comment here just in case any other passer-by (such as Slakr) actually believes what UrbanVillager says. bobrayner (talk) 19:08, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry; I missed the ping the first time around. Check out Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Macedonia#Discretionary_sanctions; it covers any topics related to the Balkans, broadly construed. The case, itself, was apparently due to Balkans-related ethnic conflicts leading to edit wars, which looks to be what also happened on the article in question. That said, you could file a request for clarification (Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment) if you feel there's confusion over those general sanctions. Cheers. --slakr^\ talk / 20:26, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You!

Indeed! I downloaded and enjoyed the first Weight of Chains and now I'm waiting for a bootlegged version of the second. As far as your comment goes, I was under the impression that it's a biographical article... and that is why I added those films to the template, but haven't wikified them. Agreed, there should be a separate article for the sequel. Regards, RealButter (talk) 15:02, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I'll take a look and contribute soon. --RealButter (talk) 17:15, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Weight of Chains 2

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Ivanvector (talk) 18:55, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Dubravka Lakić

The article Dubravka Lakić has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Vanjagenije (talk) 22:42, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My talk page

UrbanVillager I have already asked you several times to take any content matters to the relevant talk pages. I have asked you several times to confine discussions to content matters. Today you have had the audacity to REVERT my talk page, to tell me what I should or should not delete from MY talk page and to have made a lot of meaningless remarks about my being English and not having any native FRY language (neither of which I have ever made any secret of). I am asking you once again and for the last time to observe these basic conventions. Pincrete (talk) 01:19, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pincrete, when you wrote to me "I have a talk page you know!" ([6]), I was under the impression that you wanted me to write on your talk page. However, I will not do so anymore. --UrbanVillager (talk) 01:54, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Pincrete: Pincrete, UrbanVillager didn't tell you what not to delete from your talk page. He in fact stated specifically that, "You have a right to delete this, of course". Jsharpminor (talk) 05:23, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jsharpminor, you can see the reason why editors who bring actual useful content to Wikipedia (like me) leave, while those who are "technocrats", disputing everything, improving only grammar and other details anyone can do, refusing to "share" articles with others (like Pincrete) stay. --UrbanVillager (talk) 15:03, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

May 2015

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Revolucija Studio.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Revolucija Studio.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.Pincrete (talk) 13:33, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:16, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, UrbanVillager. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, UrbanVillager. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Globalno (TV show), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New World Order. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:15, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, UrbanVillager. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, UrbanVillager. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Alternativna TV.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Alternativna TV.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:26, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Boris Malagurski dispute

Boris Malagurski (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Why not post on the talk page and explain your rationale for removing the tags? My 3RR closure was not a mandate for removing them, it's just a pointer to policies. If someone adds the tags back I will probably apply full protection. What is currently on Talk:Boris Malagurski does not appear to be a full talk page discussion. It's just an exchange of complaints and unpleasantries. (For example, there is no RfC and nobody has tried WP:DRN). EdJohnston (talk) 15:31, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Boris Malagurski covered by discretionary sanctions

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in Eastern Europe or the Balkans. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

EdJohnston (talk) 15:34, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:28, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of John Bosnitch for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Bosnitch is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Bosnitch until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Joy [shallot] (talk) 16:49, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of The Weight of Chains 3

The article The Weight of Chains 3 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Appears to fail WP:NFILM

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DonaldD23 talk to me 02:43, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Belgrade (film)

The article Belgrade (film) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Appears to fail WP:NFILM. Tagged for notability

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DonaldD23 talk to me 02:45, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:The Weight of Chains 3 poster.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:The Weight of Chains 3 poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:23, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Belgrade with Boris Malagurski poster.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Belgrade with Boris Malagurski poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:03, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:34, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

September 2024 - unsourced, misleading edits, sourced text removal

Hello, I'm Manyareasexpert. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Russians at War , but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. The details are at Talk:Russians at War#Hadn't watched . ManyAreasExpert (talk) 09:11, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was very hard to assume good faith edits on the part of UrbanVillager. I suspected WP:COI especially as they also established a Wikipedia page for the Director. 62.197.35.21 (talk) 17:16, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, ManyAreasExpert. I was writing in a hurry, don't really have much time for Wikipedia lately, but wanted to contribute. Or maybe 62.197.35.21 figured me out since I wrote an article about the film's director, that proves my complicity in a conspiracy 100%. --UrbanVillager (talk) 19:56, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @User:UrbanVillager. I recently verified the sources and voted for inclusion of a big section proposed before by other editors of the film Russians at War. I saw that section had emerged 2 days ago but now it is gone again! The editor User:Manyareasexpert, who is (considering the history of edits) mostly edits and censors pages related to Ukraine, nothing else - keeps cutting the new edits out. I wonder if the case should be escalated for constant vandalism for review as it is a stalemate. The page meanwhile is (again) outdated. The most impressive collection of sources and a good structure of the page was recently proposed on the Talk page by the User:EVS-VR. I wonder if you can have a look at it too - perhaps we can post that one and then protect it? I noticed that User:Manyareasexpert again reversed it. This is vandalism, as I know it. Complexity1 (talk) 02:52, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of ANI report

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 12:28, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 21:33, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Revert wars on the Russians at War page

Hi, @User:UrbanVillager, I just checked this page and I see another reversion war between you and Manyareasexpert. This is just to say that I admire your integrity. Also, as I suggested to User:EVS-VR, if these reversions continue, to contact the senior editor who protected the page. I will advise the same again to User:EVS-VR, I will write to them shortly. I checked the edit on their Talk page, it is up to date. In any case, thank you for helping with this pro-peace page on the Wikipedia, you are a noble editor. Complexity1 (talk) 22:08, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1) Just to let you know, User:UrbanVillager and User:Complexity1, that on November 4th, 2024 I've left a request for review of these revert wars to the senior editor Daniel Case who protected the page Russians at War. So far I don't see the need to bother him again but if there will be more reverts, I will.

2) My Talk page Talk is much more updated than the current version of the page online (Athen's festival cancellation, more references with opinions on other issues) - I suggest to re-post it that text or at least to have a look. It was updated Nov 4th.

3) Also, I agree with opinions that the Introduction on the existing page is mixed up and suggest using the Introduction that is in my version on my Talk page Talk

4) for the MP Yevheniia Kravchuk - the square brackets should be removed, she doesn't have a Wiki page.

Thank you all for participation in editing this page. EVS-VR (talk) 17:21, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]