User talk:Anton Tudor

AfD nomination of [[Histo--Gligan (talk) 17:55, 22 January 2008 (UTC)ry of Romania since 2007]]

An article that you have been involved in editing, History of Romania since 2007, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of Romania since 2007. Thank you. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:40, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Currently the article is just a copy of the 2004-2007 section of the Romania since 1989 article, however if the article could be expanded and sourced it might be kept. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:42, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome!

Hello, Anton Tudor, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ~~~~, which will automatically produce your name and the date.

If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

TonyBallioni (talk) 15:54, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Don't make me laugh. --Gligan (talk) 17:55, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

January 2008

Hi, the recent edit you made to Bulgaria has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. · AndonicO ^Hail! 18:34, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ack, quite sorry. I clicked the wrong button with WP:HUG... · AndonicO ^Hail! 18:36, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Vidin. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. LightAnkhC|MSG 18:38, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Gligan user

Then I suggest you take it to the dispute resolution instead of edit warring. This is certainly a better way IMO. Edit warring does no good and is likely to get the both of you blocked by an admin. LightAnkhC|MSG 18:44, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vidin

The page Vidin has been protected from editing due to edit warring. Please discuss changes on the talk page; in the future, please consider the dispute resolution process. Note that further edit warring or three revert rule violations may be met with a block.

If you have questions or concerns, I would be happy to answer to them. - Revolving Bugbear 19:36, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violation of the three revert rule at Rousse. Note that neither of you is vandalizing the article, as each of you claims, and both of you are revert warring and editing disruptively. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

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).

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

Request reason:

As per WP:NAME naming conventions regarding the cities, I am entitled to introduce the Romanian names to the border cities from Bulgaria which are neighbouring Romania. I together with User:Olahus tried many times to explain and speak nice with the engaging edit warrior User:Gligan. He failed to understand the benefits of introducing the alternative Romanian names to the articles, instead he lounched nationalistic personal attacks me and user:Olahus. I would like to be unblocked and please someone to ask that user to stop edit warring and accept the result of the Poll and consensus reached on talk pages.

Decline reason:

Per WP:3RR, users who revert excessively may be blocked, even if the version they are reverting to is correct. This is not about being right or wrong, it is about using the revert function in an unproductive and disruptive manner. I would highly recommend, that if you think your version of the article is right, that you seek independent, uninvolved help from neutral editors, as described in the page on dispute resolution. Two possible avenues to find uninvolved editors to help solve this conflict are through requests for comment and requestes for third opinions. Even if it means leaving the "wrong" version (in your mind) up for a short time, seek dispute resolution INSTEAD of repeatedly reverting the article. You can do all of these things after the block expires at 17:55, January 24, 2008 (UTC). — Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:16, 23 January 2008 (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.

For the record, re this unblock request, this is the poll in question. This user was reported and warned for a similar conflict on a different page yesterday. - Revolving Bugbear 18:09, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked again

For your ethnic hate speech (on User talk:Kékrōps and elsewhere.) Wow, just coming off a block for edit-warring, and then this? Are you trying to commit Wiki-suicide or what? This block is 72h, after that you are on personal-attacks parole, and after the next occasion of revert-warring you'll be placed on 1r/day revert limitation according to the recent Arbcom decisions at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Macedonia. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]