User talk:Anna Shvets

Edit war

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. - Ace111 (talk) 20:00, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's a gender and racial discrimination

Anna Shvets (talk) 20:45, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of WP:AN/EW report

Hello Anna Shvets,

This is an automated friendly notification to inform you that you have been reported for Violation of the Edit warring policy at the Administrators' noticeboard.
If you feel that this report has been made in error, please reply as soon as possible on the noticeboard. However, before contesting an Edit warring report, please review the respective policies to ensure you are not in violation of them. ~ NekoBot (MeowTalk) 21:40, 17 July 2011 (UTC) (False positive? Report it!)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a short time for your disruption caused by edit warring by violation of the three-revert rule. 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 would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Kuru (talk) 21:44, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

-->{{unblock|reason=Weitere externe Links am Artikelende sind nur erwünscht, wenn diese einen deutlichen Mehrwert gegenüber dem Artikel und den Internetauftritten bieten. Hierbei sind einige Hinweise zu beachten: 14. Für Links auf Film- und Audiomaterial sind die Regeln dieser Richtlinie anzuwenden. Dies betrifft auch Verweise auf Film- und Audiomaterial ohne Webverlinkung. And I added a link of videos related to this historical figure. User Ase111 deleted it several times without discussion. Of course I overturn the unjust destruction of my work.}}

The discussion of your articles about the saga written by Anna Shvets, a student of Kiev Conservatory, (also "symphony dedicated to Michael Korybut Wiśniowiecki" or "symphony dedicated to Jeremi Wisniowiecki") took place in two Wikipedias: Ukranian (uk:Вікіпедія:Статті-кандидати на вилучення/11 липня 2011#Сага Вишневецька 5—2—1) and Russian (ru:Википедия:К удалению/11 июля 2011#Сага Вишневецкая). The decision was to delete both articles due to a lack of notability.
You seem to ignore the Wikipedia rules. Just above the instruction written by user Kuru was to "Do not include the "tlx" argument", you didn't do that. It was written "but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first", but you also ignored it. There it was a reference to Wikipedia:Spam which explains that "Spam is the inappropriate addition of links or information to Wikipedia with the purpose of promoting an outside organization, individual or idea; it is considered harmful, please do not do it". Instead you post self-promoting links to your musical composition to 11 separate Wikipedias which is surely violation of Wikipedia rules. Wikipedia is not a space for personal promotion. -- Ace111 (talk) 21:24, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I repeated a thousand times: this is NOT a sef-promotion ! And your pursuit seems to be a little patient ...

Anna Shvets (talk) 15:00, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]