User talk:Ivica015
May 2020[edit]
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 12:38, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 16:38, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to censor or remove encyclopedic content based on the fact that it is offensive to some readers, as you did at Vasil Adzhalarski, you may be blocked from editing. Wikipedia is not censored, and attempts to censor encyclopedic content will be regarded as vandalism. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 21:49, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Jingiby (talk) 07:47, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 09:39, 21 May 2020 (UTC)Managing a conflict of interest[edit]
Hello, Ivica015. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:
- avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
- propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
- disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
- avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
- do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.
In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.
Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 09:39, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
May 2020 - 2[edit]
Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but your recent edits appear to be intentional disruptions designed to illustrate a point. Edits designed for the deliberate purpose of drawing opposition, including making edits you do not agree with or enforcing a rule in a generally unpopular way, are highly disruptive and can lead to a block or ban. If you feel that a policy is problematic, the policy's talk page is the proper place to raise your concerns. If you simply disagree with someone's actions in an article, discuss it on the article talk page or, if direct discussion fails, through dispute resolution. If consensus strongly disagrees with you even after you have made proper efforts, then respect the consensus, rather than trying to sway it with disruptive tactics. Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 16:22, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to engage in subtle vandalism, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not change information such as numbers and dates without explanation. Jingiby (talk) 17:27, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
Not changing numbers, just editing the important things, such as identification facts based on relevant sources, not just Bulgarian propaganda. Tnx!
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you engage in subtle vandalism on Wikipedia. Stop trying to change information (like numbers and dates) without explanation. Jingiby (talk) 17:48, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Jingiby (talk) 18:33, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. User:Ymblanter (talk) 19:07, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
Ivica015 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
The information provided on the page is incorrect. I tried to correct the page to reflect the fact, but blocking me shows that Wikipedia is not the relevant source. Meaning, the admin decides which facts are truer than the other. Now you have the Macedonian Wiki and the English Wiki page, showing different information. Your block is completely unfair and ungrounded. You don't allow Macedonian publication on the page, and balanced info shown Ivica015 (talk) 20:36, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that
- the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
- the block is no longer necessary because you
- understand what you have been blocked for,
- will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
- will make useful contributions instead.
Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 20:39, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
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.
Ivica015 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
The real damage is this page not providing the relevant information. The info on this page is not true nor reflects the facts. Trying to correct that is not vandalism. Imposing propaganda, on the other hand is. Obviously few other pages on this topic need to be created with different admins. Ivica015 (talk) 20:58, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
Decline reason:
The unblock template is to be used solely to post an appeal addressing the reasons for your block, not to continue making the same arguments that led to the block. If you continue in this vein you will likely lose access to this talk page. It is essential that you review WP:GAB prior to making another appeal.Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:04, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
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.
Ivica015 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I fully understand why I have been blocked, and in order the block to be lifted, I must comply with the untrue content of the page. My contribution and rationale is simple - Vasil Adzalarski, was born in Macedonia and can only be Macedonian, as well as the people living in Macedonia can not be Bulgarians. Thank you! Ivica015 (talk) 21:17, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
Decline reason:
As you aren't listening to us, I am declining your request and removing talk page access. You will need to use WP:UTRS for further appeals, but those appeals must actually address the reason for the block. I would also suggest you read WP:TRUTH. 331dot (talk) 21:33, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
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.
May 2020[edit]
(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. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.