User talk:Historiaantiqua

Welcome!

Hello, Historiaantiqua, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! —Paleo Neonate – 08:55, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:Marija Gimbutas are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines, not for general discussion about the topic or unrelated topics, or statements based on your thoughts or feelings. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Also note that we couldn't use any of that in the article unless it discussed her. Doug Weller talk 15:02, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, guess what. Go fuck yourself. This website is fucking shit since it hired 20000000000 petty little Nazis to police every fucking thing. Even my suggestion on how to improve something in the DISCUSSION page - why it exists - is subject to your bean counting fascism. Get a life you 800lbs loser. I'm done with this site you fucks try to ask me for money again will you. people like you are seriously sick in the head Nazis. Tarantulas, Nietzsche called you. You live to be a judge. Forgot to tell you: FUCK YOU Historiaantiqua (talk) 11:14, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright infringement

I can see that you are a new editor, but you need to know that Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. You must not copy and paste text from sources you find on the web into articles as you did in the article Accountant. The infringing text has been removed, but the material you copied is subject to copyright, as is almost everything on the web, and when creating or expanding articles, you should completely rewrite the information from the source using your own words. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:50, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a silly rule, as the website was public ownership and governmental website that did not claim the material as copyrighted. I cited it, and by all definition of copyright, cited material is not an infringement. You are simply an overzealous policeman as are most of the people with your job on this site. Do what you will, but you're wrong on this point. And wrong is what people like you absolutely hate to be. Wrong. Historiaantiqua (talk) 11:11, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in Falun Gong. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 20:01, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for letting me know. I didn't make any edits. Just a comment on the talk page. Thank you for your information. Historiaantiqua (talk) 11:43, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here we go again, I see a weird talk page comment of yours was reverted at Talk:Irving Finkel

WTF was this even meant to be about? And looking at your outburst above at me, I'm wondering if you are editing at times under the influence. Some editors do, but it's not advisable. Clearly most of the time you can edit coherently and well so far as I can see. Doug Weller talk 12:17, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your rational observation. Historiaantiqua (talk) 22:30, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

History of the alphabet

You might consider putting a {{disputed}} on the whole article? The dates in the sidebar conflict with those in the article (all much earlier) but the source for "second millennium BCE" is yet another author. So before doing so, I suggest you need to provide much more evidence that the current content is WP:fringe by citing more convincingly reliable sources. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 12:37, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief 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:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

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.

--Joy (talk) 18:44, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This notice is also on top of Talk:Jasenovac concentration camp, but I'm going to assume you accidentally didn't see that, that's why I posted this one.

Please review your comment there and redact it accordingly. --Joy (talk) 18:46, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You've responded to my warning about casting aspersions by proceeding to cast even more serious aspersions against myself.

Once again, please observe the rules, or you will be prevented from further abusive editing. --Joy (talk) 10:47, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]