User talk:Visnelma

Welcome!

Hi Visnelma! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Double sharp (talk) 15:16, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Valli Kafka

Thank you for the article. It needs more references, - perhaps you can find some at Ottla Kafka. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:42, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Elli Kafka moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Elli Kafka, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Darren-M talk 13:18, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Darren-M:, but same article exist on de Wikipedia. I translated it from there. --Visnelma (talk) 14:07, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Visnelma, Different Wikis have different requirements - the fact that an article exists on one wiki doesn't mean it should exist on all of them. The article only has one reference at the moment and it doesn't indicate that the subject meets notability. I would suggest working on the article in the draft area where I've moved it to, and then submit it for review once you have added more references. Best, Darren-M talk 14:10, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply but I would like to inform you that I will not be improving this article. --Visnelma (talk) 14:13, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Visnelma

Thank you for creating Palanka (fortification).

User:Herpetogenesis, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Pretty interesting. Great job!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Herpetogenesis}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

HᴇʀᴘᴇᴛᴏGᴇɴᴇꜱɪꜱ (talk) 15:05, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Herpetogenesis:, I have been editing in Turkish Wikipedia for about 6 month, so I am a somewhat experienced user. Also thanks for you kind words :) --Visnelma (talk) 15:47, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Visnelma: Thanks for your contributions. Hoping to see more new articles from you soon! HᴇʀᴘᴇᴛᴏGᴇɴᴇꜱɪꜱ (talk) 15:52, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of 2021 Boğaziçi University protests

The article 2021 Boğaziçi University protests has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Pretty much small protest which already stopped. This is about some students protesting against a president of an university which was appointed according the law.

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. Beshogur (talk) 19:18, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

History textbooks

Thanks for your edits on Armenian Genocide denial, but I'm afraid that the sources you cite don't actually support the claim that Turkish schools frequently use history textbooks other than the approved ones. The sources cited say that history is a subject kept under especially close centralized state control in the education system. (t · c) buidhe 09:59, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Buidhe: What do you think about the last source I have added?--Visnelma (talk) 10:37, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Visnelma, I just don't see where the source directly states what it is cited to support: "Although this requirement is disregarded in practise." (t · c) buidhe 10:46, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Buidhe:The source says "Students' history reading and learning materials are not limited to school history textbooks." If download the PDF, it also states, "Özellikle özel okullarda öğretmen ve öğrenciler tarafından kaynak kitap olarak yararlanılıyor." (They are also being used in private schools as source books.) and "Yayınlarımız özel okullarda okutuluyor." (Our publications are being used in private schools.) Most of the article discusses this situation. So, it can be concluded that the legislation stating "Turkish schools, regardless of whether they are public or private, are required to teach history based on the textbooks approved by the Ministry of Education." is not always enforced. I appreciate you reply. Best regards.--Visnelma (talk) 10:56, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The source supports "Some private schools also use alternate textbooks." I've changed to that wording. Thanks! (t · c) buidhe 11:26, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Buidhe: Actaully some prominent state schools also use text books. The source states, "Katılımcılardan üçü (Y2, Y3, Y4) yazdıkları kitapların devlet okullarından ziyade özel okullarda derse yardımcı bir kaynak olarak kullandığına vurgu yapmışlardır." (The participants [y1, y2, y3] stressed the book which they wrote are being used more often in private schools than state schools.) So it can be said state schools also use other textbooks to a lesser extent. I will add that information too.--Visnelma (talk) 11:52, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Palanka (fortification)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Palanka (fortification) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Visnelma -- Visnelma (talk) 21:21, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Palanka (fortification)

The article Palanka (fortification) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Palanka (fortification) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Visnelma -- Visnelma (talk) 16:42, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Knight, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dark Ages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:14, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Elli Kafka

Hello, Visnelma. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Elli Kafka, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 14:02, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Content alert

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 Armenia, Azerbaijan, or related conflicts. 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.

Barkeep49 (talk) 14:52, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This barnstar is for you!

		The Editor's Barnstar
		Sometimes, text removal is the most effective way of improving an article, as is the case of the Turkish Land Forces where you removed fringe nationalist dates from the article. Thank you! - ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ \| contribs ✎)} 10:53, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Protection

I've semi-protected your page due to your request here, and the persistent vandalism on your talk page. I've also added the WP:ROLLBACK (best to read before using) feature to your abilities to help with the vandalism. If you don't want it, let me know. If you have any further problems, feel free to let me know. — Ched (talk) 22:08, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I second this offer. Please do reach out (email is okay if more appropriate/warranted in a particular instance) to myself, ched, or 331dot etc. if needed. We are here to help. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 05:50, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If protection proves it needs to be extended or upgraded, let us know. I've watchlisted your talk page, but don't always catch everything in my WL as it's a busy place. Pings, TP messages, or emails are the best way to reach out and raise my attention as required. Please don't be shy, do reach out if the need arises or the trolls return. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 05:52, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry to hear that you are receiving legal threats and am glad the miscreants were blocked. I don't live in Turkey so, luckily, I don't have to worry about it. (t · c) buidhe 01:33, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar

Hello, while I am a complete stranger, and should first explain how I got here (found weird reverted edit-> opened userpage of editor-> found out he was blocked->found out why->found you) I wanted to give you a barnstar to cheer you up. Having gone through somewhat similar experiences I know how stressful dealing with vandals are (not to call them worse names). Threatened with deportation and being put on lists and -somewhat hilariously- getting complaints about God is not what most people expect from Wikipedia but still it happens. Stay strong and keep up the good work. - Kevo³²⁷ (talk) 23:22, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded. I came across this reviewing what's new at AN. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 05:53, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed too what happened. I second this as well. Visnelma we are sorry for what you have been through, stay strong. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 12:13, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Turkuvaz Media Group, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 2019 Istanbul mayoral election.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AN/I notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Turkish War of Independence. Thank you. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 23:07, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Beer Hall Putsch

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Beer Hall Putsch. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can 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 you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Beyond My Ken (talk) 11:18, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to remind you about WP:BRD. When your Bold edit has been Reverted by another editor, the recommended next step, if you continue to think the edit is necessary, is to Discuss the dispute on the article talk page with other editors, but not to re-revert it, which is the first step to edit warring, a disruptive activity which is not allowed. Discussion on the talk page is the only way we have of reaching consensus, which is central to resolving editing disputes in an amicable and collegial manner, which is why communicating your concerns to your fellow editors is essential. While the discussion is going on, the article generally should remain in the status quo ante until the consensus as to what to do is reached (see WP:STATUSQUO).
In this instance, the material that was removed, that Hitler's Beer Hall Putsch was inspired by Ataturk, is an opinion held by one single author in one book. It is not generally accepted by subject experts, and therefore it is a WP:FRINGE theory, and by WP:UNDUE should not be in the article. How long the material has been in the article is irrelevant. In order for this material to appear int he article, you MUST get a consensus from the editors of the article on the talk page. Failure to do this, and attempting to force the material to stay in the article without a consensus is highly likely to lead to your being blocked from editing. Beyond My Ken (talk) 11:18, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To help move things along, I have started a discussion on the article talk page about the disputed edit, which you will find Talk:Beer Hall Putsch#Ataturk here. Please take the opportunity to make your views known there. Thanks, Beyond My Ken (talk) 11:30, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Beyond My Ken: The information has been there for months maybe even about a year. So, by deleting that information you are doing something Bold, then I am Reverting it, so you are the one who should Discuss it.--V. E. (talk) 11:54, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is no consensus on the talk page for the addition of the information you just added to this article, no matter how many additional sources you tag on to it. It's not a matter of sourcing, it's a matter of WP:FRINGE and WP:UNDUE, and the talk page consensus is clearly that this is a FRINGE theory and should not be in the article. WP:BOLD does not give you permission to edit against consensus, which is WP:DISRUPTIVE and can lead to being blocked from editing.
You can certainly present your new sources on the talk page in an effort to convince editors there to change their minds, but do not add the information to the article again without first getting a consensus to do so. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:31, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Raising the User Talk Page's protection level

You may not know that, but you can request from the admins to raise the protection level of your User Talk Page to prevent similar harassments from happening in the future. I have been victim of similar issues by IPs (harassments or propaganda posts) and it was thanks to the Admins that my User Talk Page has been protected and these problems ceased for me. Consider doing the same, my friend. I am sure the admins at the Noticeboard or at the Teahouse will be more than glad to help by raising your talk page's protection level. Edit: better try here first: [1]. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 18:31, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I would like to do that but since this was the only attack on my talk page since 40 days, I am not sure if admins would consider this persistent vandalism.--V. E. (talk) 18:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

June 2021

Please note that using another account to avoid scrutiny of your edits is a violation of WP:SOCKPUPPETRY. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:41, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For anyone who is interested in the topic, you can see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Visnelma/Archive. The case was closed due to "insufficient evidence". Also pinging @Beyond My Ken: if they want to make any comment.--V. E. (talk) 20:19, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Flower

Many thanks! Giant Snowman 17:31, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Thank you for your attention. Fsmatovu (talk) 18:53, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you too!

Hey Visnelma, thank you very much for the heartwarming surprise.

~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:07, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

The barnstar was a nice gesture, many thanks. Steven Walling • talk 21:07, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

I saw a thread related to you and a sysop at the ANI, did you template them? If yes, please do not do that next time. It is rude to template a regular and templating admins is even worse. Furthermore be careful of going to drama boards such as the ANI, Things can go south very quickly there, See WP:BOOMERANG, especially if it concerns an administrator. Celestina007 (talk) 00:52, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the barnstar. I appreciate it.--FeanorStar7 (talk) 12:32, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You!!

Good morning:

Thank you for your token of appreciation! That was very kind of you and was a very pleasant surprise.

Take care

Twofingered Typist (talk) 12:38, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re-Verifiability

Hello, My comment about the "reading up on history" was in fact, not directed towards you but instead, it was to C.Fred. In my statement, I meant for it to come across as a bit of a joke, unfortunately text cannot convey that. I do understand the need for citations, and at the time I knew I needed some, but didn't know how to. Overall it was a learning experience for me.

Hope you have a wonderful day/night, and god bless.

--MavvydeKornerReal (talk) 23:39, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Ceren Sözeri

Hello, Visnelma,

Thank you for creating Ceren Sözeri.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Article needs more information to meet requires of WP:NACACDEMIC

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Whiteguru}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Whiteguru (talk) 05:09, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Whiteguru: Hi, I added more than 2 reliable sources to the article. According to this procedure, it doesn't need to meet any of the academic not. criteria since there are enough reliable sources already. Please correct me if I am wrong.--V. E. (talk) 07:29, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So, not exactly sure where else to put this...

So sorry if this is not the right place to talk about this, but I need some help I guess? So, I don't usually edit on Turkish Wikipedia, I've seen it a couple of times and every time I edit on there it feels like I'm slowly killing myself because of all the toxicity, but I have been involved with a few articles on there as of late. And you know questionable policies exist here too I guess, but I have never seen a more ridiculous policy then putting every article into pending changes protection, and looking at how it goes against the BRD cycle, a million other foundational things about what makes Wikipedia work, and how even uncontroversial edits get rollbacked to insanity by patrols, I simply don't get it.

So, as you are an experienced editor on there, could you please explain if there's any reason why this policy is this way, and/or suggest a way to not anger the patrol gods?

Thank you, and sorry again if this is slightly inappropriate for here. Uness232 (talk) 16:35, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Uness322: Hi, the policy in question here is probably tr:VP:SK. The page says it was implemented in 2011, way before I joined Wikipedia. However, you may be able to find an answer to your question if you dive into the talk page archives. And yes, Turkish Wikipedia has very different dynamics; for example, I was blocked once for writing "I said I didn't want to discuss it further; don't prolong the discussion."[2]. Your best bet is editing uncontroversial articles for a while; and they will give you whitelist rights about 100-200 edits.--V. E. (talk) 17:49, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I see, thank you. I was quite angry when I wrote that by the way so it might have sounded a bit aggressive, did not mean it that way. Uness232 (talk) 17:56, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Harassment

This warning has absolutely no merits, do not warn other users wrongfully again.--V. E. (talk) 15:11, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

You are kindly requested to stop harassment. Please do not repeat such disruptive behaviour. Best wishes. Dr. Coal^Message 14:58, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Coal: That edit contains absolutely no harassment; if you are so sure it is you can attempt to report it at ANI.--V. E. (talk) 15:05, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to warn first. Please do not repeat anyways. Dr. Coal^Message 15:07, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Coal: Go away, I won't ask you for something that absolutely does not violate any Wikipedia policies.--V. E. (talk) 15:08, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

No editor objected to relevant edit not containing harassment on ANI.--V. E. (talk) 07:14, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Visnelma - I do view the diff above as harassment. I don't know what has gone on between you on Turkish Wikipedia, but you should explore resolution channels over there rather than berating someone on their talk page here. If you ever post anything like that again on a talk page here, you should expect to be blocked, and possibly globally locked for cross-wiki abuse. Please consider this a 'first and only' warning. Girth Summit _(blether) 22:38, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Girth Summit: WP:HARASSMENT is, by definition, "a pattern of repeated offensive behavior"; So, a single link that criticises a block is unable to constitute a harassment. Furthermore, userspace harassment states that "Examples include placing numerous false or questionable "warnings" on a user's talk page, restoring such comments after a user has removed them, placing 'suspected sockpuppet' and similar tags on the user page of active contributors, and otherwise trying to display material the user may find annoying or embarrassing in their user space". I did not repost my message after he deleted it; however, he posted 3 new messages on my talk page after I stated he is not welcome on my talk page. Please tell me how it is me, who criticised a block, not someone whose harassment claim does not fall in the definition of the related Wikipedia policy. that is the one being harassing, and will not just never do it again but even apologize to him. Best regards.--V. E. (talk) 02:03, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It does not matter whether your conduct meets the exact technical definition of behavior prohibited under that particular policy. I will be the second administrator to let you know that your conduct was not acceptable. I would strongly encourage you to move on and focus on making constructive contributions. The English Wikipedia is not an appropriate venue to address a dispute originating on another project. Jake Wartenberg (talk) 03:38, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jake Wartenberg: I don't know if it is prohibited to contact a Wikipedian on another Wiki; if this was what you called to be "not acceptable", and there is a policy or guideline that forbids that, I make you sure to absolutely respect that and promise to not doing such a thing again. Secondly, I strongly object that "it doesn't matter"; for a behaviour to be a harassment, it obviously needs to meet the definition, besides the word "repeated" was placed right at the start of the policy and is repeated 11 times throughout the text which is in fact what I was accused of. It is even stated in the section "What harassment is not" that it needs to be a repeated behaviour. Lastly, you mention a different perspective stating that English Wikipedia is not a place to criticise a block of another Wiki, I can understand your reasoning for that, however, that was not the thing the user -apparently falsely- accused me of, and wrongly warning users is also an harassment. I hope you can see my reason, best regards.--V. E. (talk) 04:06, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Other admins said the edit was "unacceptable" because it brought disputes from other-wikis not because allegedly "harassment". Considering other comments this seems to be an opinion of yours.--V. E. (talk) 08:08, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I see that you've closed this, but am responding to your ping above. That the harassment policy uses the word 'repeated' does not give you a free pass to leave singular trollish messages on people's talk pages. I think you know perfectly well that putting a note on a user's talk, addressing the world in general but not the user themselves and criticising their actions on another wiki, is entirely inappropriate - trying to argue that it is not explicitly defined by our policies is wikilawyering.

Your archive close, incidentally, is factually inaccurate. You were explicitly told at ANI, by the third administrator to comment on what you did, that your edit was unacceptable. Please accept that, and do not repeat it, and all will be well. Girth Summit _(blether) 07:22, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Girth Summit: The admin on ANI told it was "unacceptable" because I brought disputes from other-Wikis not because it is allegedly a "harassment". In fact the third admin said harassment is irrelevant in this case as also Jake Wartenberg said a similar thing. Nobody except you mentioned my edit to be a "harassment" yet alone "trollish". Furthermore, I have already acknowledged that bringing disputes from other Wikis does no good[3] but I don't understand why you are repeating the same thing.--V. E. (talk) 07:46, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Won't bring disputes from other Wikis but it is not called "harassment".--V. E. (talk) 08:34, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Whether we call it trolling, harassment, or 'importing a dispute from another wiki', it's unacceptable, and needs not to happen again. Provided you accept that, and you don't intend to let it happen again, I'm happy to draw a line under it. Girth Summit _(blether) 08:12, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know which policy it is related to but I assure you I had no intention of "trolling" or doing "harassment", and I still find it wrong to call it like that. However, I am glad we agree on the third one. Best regards.--V. E. (talk) 08:25, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Thank you

Visnelma, I appreciate that you notified us at the ANI [4] about the sockpuppet attempt at [5]. Thanks to the objective evaluation of the Deletion Request by User:Gbawden, the request is denied and the sock attempt failed. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 11:00, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

can you remove orange info?

Hey, I noticed you put Information orange on my talk page but it's used for vandalism revert warnings. I didn't do any kind of vandalism. I think you were supposed to use Information.svg but I am not sure. Anyway can you remove orange info or replace it with the blue one. ZeusAmmon1 (talk) 12:45, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Update

I just wanted to let you know that “ERLIK” [6] got banned from Twitter. [7][8] Deji Olajide1999 (talk) 17:04, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Deji Olajide1999: He must be like "Oh, how dare they to ban me for denying a genocide and inciting hatred! These (put an ethnicity here) lobbyists do not want the truth to be heard!" LOL.--V. E. (talk) 08:42, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Separatist kebabists

The article Separatist kebabists has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Neologism; while media have picked up on it recently we can't say yet whether it will be a lasting figure of speech.

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. ... discospinster _talk 15:35, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

		The Wikipedia Motivation Barnstar
		I understand that this year -which is almost over now- has been rough for you, considering the intimidating attempts against you by nationalist IPs and POV warriors because of your neutral contributions in this difficult topic area, but know that you aren't alone. Your contributions are acknowledged and the community still needs you. We hope to see you back someday and if you ever get any Wikipedia-related intimidating incidents again, this time please try reporting them at the AE. Take care. - ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ \| contribs ✎)} 00:37, 16 November 2021 (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) 00:59, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Ottoman military organization

Template:Ottoman military organization has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:12, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Separatist kebabists for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Separatist kebabists, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Separatist kebabists (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]