User talk:Salto Loco

Welcome!

Hi Block baby! I noticed your contributions to Opinion polling for the next Ukrainian parliamentary election 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! Drmies (talk) 15:34, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

July 2021

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to Opinion polling for the next Ukrainian parliamentary election, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history, as well as helping prevent edit conflicts. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the article will look like without actually saving it.

The *Show preview* button is right next to the *Publish changes* button and below the edit summary field.

It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Please combine edits and use Preview, rather than clog up the entire history with tiny edits. Drmies (talk) 15:35, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 15:36, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Move warring

Please stop immediately--Ymblanter (talk) 08:01, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The name you are moving the article to is not compatible with WP:V, one of the cornerstones of Wikipedia. If you do not stop, a block of your account is the most likely action.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:02, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Ukrainian presidential election moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, 2024 Ukrainian presidential election, is not suitable 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. ... discospinster _talk 15:38, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

August 2021

Hello, I'm SunDawn. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Next Ukrainian parliamentary election—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. SunDawn talk 15:44, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: 2024 Ukrainian presidential election has been accepted

2024 Ukrainian presidential election, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Devonian Wombat (talk) 22:15, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your help desk question

You have a response.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 23:12, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

December 2021

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Module talk:Political party, did not appear to be constructive and have 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 your 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. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:14, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As a follow-up note, there is nothing wrong with adding edit requests, but you are submitting blank edit requests, which gives us zero clue as to what needs fixing. Primefac (talk) 14:20, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. clpo13_(talk) 20:13, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use talk pages for inappropriate discussion, as you did at Module talk:Political party, you may be blocked from editing. - FlightTime (open channel) 16:24, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tell me, what am I disrupt in the article you mentioned? I want the colors of Ukrainian parties to be in order, I do not disrupt anything. Block baby (talk) 16:36, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is the issue This is not an edit request, it has nothing to do with this article. You're using talk pages as a forum, that is what this warning is all about. - FlightTime (open channel) 16:51, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March 2022

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to National Corps‎, did not appear to be constructive and have 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 your 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. Sources are provided within the articles. K.e.coffman (talk) 11:31, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 2022

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Platform for Life and Peace, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. HapHaxion _{(talk / contribs)} 12:10, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Opposition Platform — For Life, you may be blocked from editing. Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 14:32, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Editing newsletter 2022 – #1

Read this in another language • Subscription list for the multilingual newsletter • Local subscription list

The New topic tool helps editors create new ==Sections== on discussion pages. New editors are more successful with this new tool. You can read the report. Soon, the Editing team will offer this to all editors at most WMF-hosted wikis. You can join the discussion about this tool for the English Wikipedia is at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Enabling the New Topic Tool by default. You will be able to turn it off in the tool or at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing-discussion.

The Editing team plans to change the appearance of talk pages. These are separate from the changes made by the mw:Desktop improvements project and will appear in both Vector 2010 and Vector 2022. The goal is to add some information and make discussions look visibly different from encyclopedia articles. You can see some ideas at Wikipedia talk:Talk pages project#Prototype Ready for Feedback.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk)

23:14, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Editing news 2022 #2

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this multilingual newsletter

The new [subscribe] button notifies people when someone replies to their comments. It helps newcomers get answers to their questions. People reply sooner. You can read the report. The Editing team is turning this tool on for everyone. You will be able to turn it off in your preferences.

–Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 00:35, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

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) 01:51, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

January 2023

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at Platform for Life and Peace. HapHaxion _{(talk / contribs)} 03:37, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I gave reason. Why I may be blocked? Block Baby (talk) 11:20, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your rationale(s) was not a valid one(s) to remove content with a source/reference. The statements of a faction leader is generally acceptable when attempting to state the faction's beliefs/ideology (assuming they are uniform), and other sources you removed such as this one with the reason given as the link not opening was not valid as I checked and the link does open, unless you are stating the claim is not verified in the source given. You have also been warned multiple times about edits you've made in the past both last year and earlier this year for various reasons. HapHaxion _{(talk / contribs)} 14:40, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Platform for Life and Peace 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; read about 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. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 17:06, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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 ~~~~}}. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:37, 4 January 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

Good day. Today, while editing the article "Opposition of platforms for life", I removed content that I believe is false. I asked for supporting sources, as per the Rule 6. Cite, cite, cite in the Wikipedia:Ten simple rules for editing Wikipedia. In response, the user(s) did not provide sources, saying they are outside the template. But I checked and they are not there. Here is the argument of User:Valjean in Revision history: The party is a Russia-aligned party I responded to: The fact that it is a Russia-aligned party does not mean that it protects Russian minorities. The party supported Russia, which is now killing Ukrainian citizens, particularly Russians, because it is not "Russian minority interests", but manipulation of concepts. In response, the user started directly threatening me and writing outright nonsense: Even if you are 100% right, you will be blocked. Use the talk page and get a consensus before changing this. I haven't seen a rule anywhere that says a user asking for confirmation of a claim must seek consensus to get that confirmation. Therefore, I ask you to correct this misunderstanding related to my removal. I planned to make articles about Ukrainian resistance movements during the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine and it's sad that I can't do it because of this.

Decline reason:

You were quite accurately told "Stop edit warring. You have been warned. Even if you are 100% right, you will be blocked." You didn't stop edit warring. You were blocked. It's sad you don't understand our policies regarding edit warring; what misunderstanding exists is on your part, and I am now attempting to correct it with this explanation. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 19:06, 4 January 2023 (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.

Block Baby (talk) 19:01, 4 January 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

Supplement to the previous one. In that case, I had no other options. What kind of nonsense is this: Even if you are 100% right, you will be blocked? What was I supposed to do, keep quiet and do nothing?

Decline reason:

You don't have to keep quiet or do nothing, but you cannot edit war. If others are edit warring, you report them. See dispute resolution. 331dot (talk) 19:40, 4 January 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

Supplement to the previous one. Also, I stopped editing from this account after warning, why is it banned then?

Decline reason:

"It wasn't me". No, it clearly was. And talk page access turned off for the duration of the block. RickinBaltimore (talk) 21:12, 4 January 2023 (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.

Because you logged out to continue edit warring. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 20:07, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jpgordon: It wasn't me. Block Baby 20:36, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

please unblock me for this reason Block Baby 21:08, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Editing news 2023 #1

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this newsletter

This newsletter includes two key updates about the Editing team's work:

The Editing team will finish adding new features to the Talk pages project and deploy it.
They are beginning a new project, Edit check.

Talk pages project

The Editing team is nearly finished with this first phase of the Talk pages project. Nearly all new features are available now in the Beta Feature for Discussion tools.

It will show information about how active a discussion is, such as the date of the most recent comment. There will soon be a new "Add topic" button. You will be able to turn them off at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing-discussion. Please tell them what you think.

An A/B test for Discussion tools on the mobile site has finished. Editors were more successful with Discussion tools. The Editing team is enabling these features for all editors on the mobile site.

New Project: Edit Check

The Editing team is beginning a project to help new editors of Wikipedia. It will help people identify some problems before they click "Publish changes". The first tool will encourage people to add references when they add new content. Please watch that page for more information. You can join a conference call on 3 March 2023 to learn more.

–Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:19, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

September 2023

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for disruptively mass-reverting edits incorrectly claimed as general sanctions violations. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:57, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And I will revert all the edits to the pre-warring state. If you want to reinstate them, pls start a talk page discussion.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:12, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note that this is vandalism. Ymblanter (talk) 11:14, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

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 Russo-Ukrainian war. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose contentious topics restrictions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. 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.

~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:59, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Salto Loco, I have to assume that while you pointed to WP:GS/RUSUKR in your edit summaries, you have not actually read that page. Please take the time to do so before taking any other action, then have a look at Special:CentralAuth/Mellk (sort the table by number of edits). Afterwards, you can request an unblock and it may perhaps be granted if you demonstrate the newly-gained understanding in your request. Part of this understanding should be that further disruption can lead to a topic ban from this area. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:04, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:56, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ANI February 2024

I opened this topic about you since you do not seem to be learning from warnings and blocks. Please respond there. Ymblanter (talk) 12:17, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]