User talk:Dardania12

May 2020

Hello, I'm Kylo Ren. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Lekë Dukagjini—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. Kylo Ren (talk) 15:26, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that in this edit to Principality of Arbanon, you removed content without adequately 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. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 23:19, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Progon, Lord of Kruja, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Kylo Ren (talk) 22:00, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Progon, Lord of Kruja, you may be blocked from editing. Materialscientist (talk) 01:48, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

the status of arbanon being autonomous is nothing but propagand made by nationalists like 'zoupan". he also used nationalistic sources to even imply that the concept of the albanian state never existed in the medieval era. Some of his propaga were improved some were kept still to this day Dardania12 (talk) 01:59, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So Robert Elsie, Alain Ducellier or Tom Winnifrith are Serbian nationalists when they say that Arbanon was a semi-autonomous principaly that lasted from 1190 to 1216? The issue is that you remove sourced content, and you don't engage in discussion to resolve the possible issues that you perceive within current articles. Alcaios (talk) 02:26, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

{UTC}

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:43, 16 May 2020 (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).

Dardania12 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I got blocked in a topic that regards with history of country. I tried to be a supporter of Wikipedia's policy and therefor I removed and reedited some unreliable sources with those that I think seemed more reliable and better but supposedly it wasn't accepted which I think I got unfairly accused for violating Wikipedia's policy Dardania12 (talk) 05:06, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

That does not address the reason for the block, which is the misuse of multiple accounts. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 06:36, 19 May 2020 (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.

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).

Dardania12 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I got blocked in a topic that regards with history of country. I tried to be a supporter of Wikipedia's policy and therefor I removed and reedited some which it seemed to me unreliable sources with those that I think seemed more reliable and better, but supposedly it wasn't accepted which I think I got unfairly accused for violating Wikipedia's policy. I hope this time administrators will take my request more into consideration and understand that my intentions are not to do harm Dardania12 (talk) 18:56, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You still haven't addressed the reason you were blocked: you used multiple accounts to edit Wikipedia, in an abusive manner, such as with User:Dardanian0. Though your editing regarding Albanian nationalism was troublesome, it was not the reason for your block. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 20:14, 23 May 2020 (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.

Please don't remove declined unblock requests while you're still blocked. I have restored them for you. —Wasell^(T) 19:17, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Andrea II Muzaka moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Andrea II Muzaka, 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. Mccapra (talk) 14:14, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]