User talk:Bayramoviç

April 2019[edit]

Hello, I'm Everedux. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Battle of the Catalaunian Plains— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. Everedux ^(talk) 00:57, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hagia Sofia[edit]

Hi - I received your e-mail. The assertion that it was reclassified as a mosque is supported by this source. The source you are using to describe it as a museum pre-dates that source - it appears clear that it is 'officially' known as a mosque. The other material you added I am not so exercised about, but I'm not sure that it's needed in the first paragraph of the lead, and would benefit from a rewording if it is to be retained. Please start a thread on the article's talk page to discuss this if you wish it to be reinstated. Best GirthSummit _(blether) 08:22, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I received your second e-mail. I am not going to discuss this with you by e-mail - that is what the article talk page is for. Your nationality and personal knowledge is not relevant here, we rely on what we can verify from published sources, per our verifiability policy. Best GirthSummit _(blether) 08:25, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On more thing - all of your edits to the article were flagged as 'minor changes'. Don't do that - fixing spelling mistakes, changes to punctuation, adding links - those are minor changes. Anything which changes meaning is not a minor changed, and should not be marked as such. Best GirthSummit _(blether) 08:27, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, again. I have received, but have not read, your third e-mail. As I said before, I am not going to discuss this with you by e-mail, please don't send me another one on this subject. If you want to argue that the changes you made to the article were appropriate, you should do so on the article talk page. Best GirthSummit _(blether) 08:54, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I just got your fourth e-mail. At this point, I'm going to disable your ability to e-mail me. Use the talk page. GirthSummit _(blether) 08:56, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May 2021[edit]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. MarnetteD|Talk 07:41, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you purposefully and blatantly harass fellow Wikipedian(s) again, as you did at User:Visnelma, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Shadow4dark (talk) 09:07, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions notification[edit]

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.

FDW777 (talk) 07:51, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Editing other's comments - May 2021[edit]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, you may be blocked from editing. Cambial foliage❧ 08:33, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration enforcement[edit]

See Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. FDW777 (talk) 08:33, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Changes[edit]

Please do not keep changing the article like you did here. Let's talk on the talk page. Be patient please. Believe that wikipedians can solve this and produce a non-biased text after disscussion.--Basak (talk) 08:50, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May 2021[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. 331dot (talk) 09:20, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To admins, probably this should be an AE but I'm not too experienced with those. If someone wants to change it, feel free. 331dot (talk) 09:27, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

Wow, armenian lobby is more important than the truth for Wikipedia. Alright, you can believe what do you want, the truth is only one and ASALA supporter terrorists can not change it. You might `rule` Wikipedia on the Internet but you`ll face the truth in the real life. 3 hatred-filled Turkish enemies (ProcrastinatingReader, FDW777, buidhe) are more important than the truth as far as I can see. Okay.

Decline reason:

This is a rant, not an unblock request. See WP:GAB to understand how to write an unblock request. Yamla (talk) 11:00, 4 May 2021 (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.

Email access withdrawn; this talk page will be next should you make that necessary. If you want to have a civil discussion with other editors, regardless of their views, to achieve a consensus as to what the article should say, you will need to radically change your attitude- but that's clearly not what you are interested in. 331dot (talk) 09:33, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

331dot (talk) 12:08, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Access withdrawn due to legal actions you have undertaken. If you wish to deny your history, you will have to do that elsewhere. Good day. 331dot (talk) 12:09, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]