User talk:Deepdish7

COI suspicions

Yes, I agree that there is a reasonable suspicion of COI here. There have been similar suspicions before, so it's not a surprise. Also, it seems that User:Videsutaltastet could be his sockpuppet. So now have multiple accounts pushing the same POV, and some usual suspects who have suddenly arrived to defend the SPA. That's pretty worrying. Nanobear (talk) 17:09, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notice re ANI

A discussion concerning you has been initiated at ANI.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:06, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Klebnikov

Your recent edits seem to have the appearance of edit warring after a review of the reverts you have made on Paul Klebnikov. Users are expected to collaborate and discuss with others and avoid editing disruptively.

Please be particularly aware, 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 the 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 engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. - Off2riorob (talk) 05:45, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of Two Weeks for Edit Warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. FASTILY ^(TALK) 08:23, 16 September 2011 (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).

Deepdish7 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I engaged in edit war on Paul Klebnikov page with Off2riorob because he violated wikipedia Deletion policy and deleted well sourced material, so my edit warring was justified (why isn't he blocked as well by the way????? and why nobody pursues him for violating wiki deletion policy?????)Besides, we are in a broader edit war with Off2riorob and Kolokol1 on Berezovsky-related pages on Wikipedia. This is currently being looked into on the administrators' noticeboard. http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Article_or_topic_ban_for_two_users I'd like to ask you to lift my ban until a broader resolution is achieved there (as now I'm unable to defend myself). Otherwise it should be fair to ban Kolokol1 and Off2riorob as well so that everyone was in equal position to protect himself in that dispute. Thank you Deepdish7 (talk) 09:06, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You seem to forget that the ONLY justified edit-warring involves the biographies of LIVING persons, and verifiable outright vandalism. Otherwise it's a content dispute - such as the one you're involved. As per the guide to appealing blocks this unblock request must address your behaviour, and your block - whether or not someone else is blocked has no bearing. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:37, 16 September 2011 (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.

You may add to that discussion the same way all blocked users can: by posting below what you want to add to the discussion, and use {{helpme}} to request it be copied/pasted to ANI. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:24, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My ANI Input

First of all, it wasn't that you "removed what I inserted", since it was you who started cutting text from the page on Sept 5th, and I reversed your edits, and you reversed mine again. And secondly, my edits did not break BLP policy, despite you're claiming the opposite, and everyone can see that if they look at my changes. Dispute arbitration is the only way to go here, as you're using the name of BLP policy to cut any text from the article that you want, wheverer it is conflicting with BLP or not. Since we have very different views on BLP (and Kolokol1 obviously has a conflict of interest here), we need dispute resolution here. Otherwise it's just my word against your word, that's all Deepdish7 (talk) 13:53, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Can you please insert my input to the end of http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Article_or_topic_ban_for_two_users Thanks! Deepdish7 (talk) 13:53, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done -- John of Reading (talk) 14:49, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked indefinitely

Per the AN/I thread here, I have chosen to block you indefinitely for repeatedly edit warring on articles related to Boris Berezovsky (businessman). Although there was consensus in this thread for a topic ban for either pages related to Berezovsky or even related to all of Eastern Europe, I have chosen not to block you instead, because a block is, in the long run, far easier to undo when you realize what you have been doing wrong. Feel free to request an unblock through the usual means, but I suggest that you read this essay first. Cheers. lifebaka++ 21:17, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Boris Berezovsky (businessman) (January 20)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Boris Berezovsky (businessman) instead.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This page was an abandoned draft that has now been declined or rejected as duplicating an existing article. Any details in this draft that are not in the article may be added to the article. This draft should be allowed to be deleted six months after this date.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Boris Berezovsky (businessman) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Boris Berezovsky (businessman), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 04:54, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Deepdish7! Having an article 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! Robert McClenon (talk) 04:54, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]