User talk:MorteBiancaFan
Welcome!
[edit]Hi MorteBiancaFan! 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:
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:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.
Happy editing! Kleuske (talk) 16:40, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
June 2022
[edit]
Your recent editing history at List of ongoing armed conflicts 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Kleuske (talk) 16:40, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Kleuske: I tried to talk with Whitesin to don't start an edit war but he continue to deleat my edit without unswear me in his talk page. MorteBiancaFan (talk) 16:43, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- That’s no excuse. Other options are available. Kleuske (talk) 16:44, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Kleuske: Other options don't work, I also tried writing in my edits to talk with him but he continue to deleat my edits (reading the parameters, my edits are correct) without a reason or talking with me. MorteBiancaFan (talk) 16:50, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- And edit warring did work? Kleuske (talk) 16:54, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Kleuske: nope, so Im sorry for have done an useless edit war vandalising the page and the history section. Im going to read the page "edit war" to avoid doing it again in the future. Have a nice day. MorteBiancaFan (talk) 17:01, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- To your credit, I did notice attempts to communicate on your part, which were simply reverted by Whitesin21, plus you’re new here. Failure to communicate, coupled with WP:OWN is frowned upon pretty severely, so I am contemplating filing an ANI report. Kleuske (talk) 16:57, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Kleuske: another thing. There is a phone account that makes the same changes that Whitesin21 does, maybe it has another account. From what I've read there shouldn't be two accounts, as the secondary account could be used to avoid a hypothetical block. This account has deleted your recent edit MorteBiancaFan (talk) 17:05, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- And edit warring did work? Kleuske (talk) 16:54, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Kleuske: Other options don't work, I also tried writing in my edits to talk with him but he continue to deleat my edits (reading the parameters, my edits are correct) without a reason or talking with me. MorteBiancaFan (talk) 16:50, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- That’s no excuse. Other options are available. Kleuske (talk) 16:44, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 02:07, 7 June 2022 (UTC)- You were warned above by Kleuske, and then I warned you again at Guerillero's talk and on the article's talkpage. Repeatedly reverting other good-faith edits is not the solution. Discuss on the article's talkpage, perhaps in the section I started. Please note that while this is only a temporary block, it is not a free pass to resume edit-warring in a week. If you continue edit-warring on that page after the block ends, I will have to reinstate it indefinitely. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 02:09, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
As a viewer of the edit war between Whitesin and you..
[edit]I do believe there's some Sockpuppetry going on, and I support any claims (that make sense and have moral) you make against Whitesin in terms of sockpupperty. Hope this can all be solved peacefully. Smotoe (talk) 18:33, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Your edits on Maoist insurgency in Bangladesh
[edit]Hey there, i would like to open a discussion with you about your edits on Maoist insurgency in Bangladesh i have several times added markers for failed verification as the citations you used were not sufficient in proving the claims that were made, an example of this being the "During the Bangladesh Liberation War the group aligned itself with Pakistan and China against Bangladeshi nationalists and the Soviet Union." near the start of the article the source you gave (https://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/bangladesh/terroristoutfits/PBCP.htm) does not mention this and in fact this source states that "In the opinion of the PBCP, oppression by the people of the then West Pakistani was the principal reason that lead to the liberation war in the territories of the then East Pakistan following which Bangladesh was formed" and also "The PBCP is staunchly nationalist and perceives that India is a hegemon in the sub-continent" which contradict the statement made in the article that the PBCP opposes Nationalists and allied with Pakistan, despite this you have reverted my failed verification marker without updating the citations and fixing these issues i would kindly ask you not to again revert my decision to add these markers back again, i would be open to discuss these citations with you and if i have made a mistake please point out where i did so. I do not want this to devolve into a pointless edit war so please discuss with me how we can resolve this problem. Saoreire72 (talk) 12:27, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Saoreire72: Hi and thanx to start that discussion, I also don't want to do another edit war. I probably made confusion on the sourches, in fact in UCDP if you go into the section on conflict between PBCP and PBCP-J and the government you can check my sourches was correct.
- I was distracted so I put the sources in the wrong places, sorry for the mistake. Im waiting your answear to solve the mistake. MorteBiancaFan (talk) 21:01, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:55, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Blocked as a sockpuppet
[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Salvio giuliano 19:09, 25 February 2023 (UTC)