Hi UA0Volodymyr! I noticed your contributions to Red fascism 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:
Happy editing! Drmies (talk) 00:11, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
Hello, UA0Volodymyr, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.
I noticed that one of the first articles you edited was Kira Rudyk, which appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.
To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.
One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)
In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms of use and our policy on paid editing.
Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place ((Help me))
before the question. Again, welcome! Drmies (talk) 19:21, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 86.28.234.5 (talk) 19:13, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
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:
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.
Mellk (talk) 10:55, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
((unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~))
. User:Ymblanter (talk) 05:32, 10 October 2023 (UTC)UA0Volodymyr (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I just wrote correct transliteration from Ukrainian and created a redirect for that. I didn't break WP:RUSUKR, because I didn't wrote about a war itself. UA0Volodymyr (talk) 06:29, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
Accept reason:
The block has expired. If you don't understand the reasons for it, I suggest you ask the blocking admin. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:50, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
In your edit on Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe Party you introduced a number of violations of WP:ENGVAR. It is your responsibility to ensure that your edits conform to policies and guidelines. You cannot make a edit that is riddled with errors and expect someone else to clean it up for you. If you want to make the few changes in your edit that are not ENGVAR violations, please do it yourself and don't ask other editors to do your work for you. Thank you. CodeTalker (talk) 14:39, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello, UA0Volodymyr!
Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Theroadislong (talk) 20:43, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
|
Please stop. If you continue to add promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, as you did at Kira Rudyk, you may be blocked from editing. Drmies (talk) 13:01, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Your interactions with that IP editor, you should really rethink all of that. Without exception, the IP editor was correct on the matter of article content, and you were wrong. Your edit summaries were likewise wrong--I suppose I was guilty of vandalism too in that article? Drmies (talk) 13:13, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, such as those you made to Alexander Butterfield. Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. - Tim1965 (talk) 14:03, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Crimean Tatar language 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. Mellk (talk) 12:38, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello, UA0Volodymyr. Thank you for your work on Donbas separatists. User:Voorts, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Please remember to tag redirects that you create per WP:REDCAT.
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with ((Re|Voorts))
. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
voorts (talk/contributions) 01:40, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 37.245.43.164 (talk) 12:52, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Mellk (talk) 12:57, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
((unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~))
. Bbb23 (talk) 13:56, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#UA0Volodymyr, at your service. Please reply there. Ymblanter (talk) 10:20, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
I have indefinitely blocked your account because you have been persistently and egregiously engaged in POV pushing and edit warring, and have failed to heed the many warnings you've been given, including two previous short-term blocks for the same thing. Your approach is incompatible with Wikipedia's goals or collaborative approach to writing an encyclopaedia. For the avoidance of doubt, this is not an AE block or a community sanction. You an appeal by placing ((unblock|your reason here))
below this message and another administrator will review the block. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 11:14, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
UA0Volodymyr (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I understood that I was wrong and I promise not make non-consensus edits and and constructively discuss controversial changes. Also I'll remove a flag of controversial historical organization from my User page if policies forbid have this on User page. I made a lot of constructive edits and wrote 2 articles. I don't want to make POV pushing and edit warring anymore I want building an encyclopedia.
Decline reason:
I don't trust you. You've been POV-pushing and edit warring. The block is appropriate. Vanjagenije (talk) 00:01, 20 November 2023 (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.
UA0Volodymyr (talk) 11:38, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
UA0Volodymyr (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I understood that I was wrong with my edit warring and POV-pushing, all controversial changes must be discussed to establish a consensus. If I'm unblocked I'll not make non-consensus edits and will constructively discuss controversial changes. Also, I'll remove a flag of the controversial historical organization from my User page if there is a policy forbidding having this on a User page. I've made a lot of constructive edits and written 2 articles and I want to write more, I want to benefit from this wonderful Free Encyclopedia and bring up for discussion controversial things that I want to change here, not pushing my personal POV though edit warring and disruptive behavior. I don't want to make POV pushing and edit warring anymore I want to build an encyclopedia. Please give me a second chance and unblock me to let me do so.
Accept reason:
This unblock is accepted. The user is subject to a one-revert restriction, and they are subject to the two topic bans below. These topic bans and the 1RR will be enforced as unblock conditions. Per agreement below, these conditions may be appealed three months after this date to the administrator's noticeboard. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 01:04, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
21:51, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
UA0Volodymyr (talk) 21:51, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
not make non-consensus edits and will constructively discuss controversial changes. I note that you are a user in good standing on the Ukrainian Wikipedia, and based on my reading you haven't had these same sorts of issues over there in the time since your block here. I am possibly open to unblocking you under the standard one-revert restriction. This would mean that, if you make one revert of another editor's contributions to a page, you may not make a second revert on that same page within a 24-hour period under pain of receiving a block. In this vein, you are expected to discuss you reversions on talk pages should they be contested.
It would be a major error to unblock this user even partially. From the moment the account was registed, its sole purpose was aggressive POV-pushing. The only edits it made that were not directly adding bias (and extremely bad English) into Ukraine-related articles were malicious reverts targeting editors who had reverted them.
Furthermore, there is ample evidence that the user is a sockpuppet:
I see absolutely no evidence of any kind that the user wants to or is able to contribute constructively, on any topic. It is one of the most obviously merited indefs one could hope to see, so quite why anyone is considering unblocking the user, I cannot imagine. 86.187.226.245 (talk) 20:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)