User talk:Fascinum

Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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. Iryna Harpy (talk) 21:48, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The RF position on

Budapest memorandum is provided by several citations with a reference only for a latter one. Moreover, statements of Russian president are superior to statements of Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs or Prime minister. I said enough. You can discuss grammar somewhere else. I'll certainly do everything you advised to stop your desperate edit war, when I have free time. For now, it is simpler to undo your deletions. Good luck with blocking.Fascinum (talk) 22:35, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on others again, as you did at User talk:Fascinum, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Referring to this edit summary. Toddst1 (talk) 22:42, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(

WP:BRD. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 22:47, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

"Well done, Fascinum!" - such sarcasm is considered as a "personal attack", isn't it? Suggestion: watch "Desperate housewives" series. Fascinum (talk) 23:00, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 your being

WP:BRD. Iryna Harpy (talk) 20:45, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Fascinum reported by User:Iryna Harpy (Result: ). Thank you. Iryna Harpy (talk) 03:48, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring on

Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

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.

The full report is at the edit warring noticeboard. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 14:48, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Articles about Ukraine, Russia and Eastern Europe are covered by discretionary sanctions

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The

discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Eastern Europe, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here

.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

EdJohnston (talk) 14:51, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]