User talk:Scheianu

YOUR EDITS in the Hungary–Romania football rivalry

This a warning for your disruptive editing in the correspondent page. By your edit comments it is apparent your anti-Hungarian motives, moreover you are not properly aware of the editing rules of Wikipedia, since the NPOV (Neutral Point of View) of the article has to be kept.

First of all, you have an inproper wordage (FYI: I am not a "Kid"), you accuse me/Hungarians about lying, although all the matches are recorded both Bucharest and Budapest, and it is clearly apparent and verifiable in Bucharest you practically do not hear anything from the anthem of the horrible booing and whistling, in Budapest you can clearly hear the Romanian national anthem, not any relevant or permanent, disruptive whistle is carried out.

Thus, if you even cite a source, despite it is harming the neutral point of view of the article because on one hand you collect anything you consider negative from the Hungarian fans, at the same time you are not citing or highlighting some negative attitudes from the Romanian fans ("Bozgor, Unguri afara din tara", etc.) This is a DISRUPTIVE EDITING.

Moreove your dont respect WP:CONSENSUS and you continuosly deleting the fact the Rapid and Steaua Romanian fans beated each other in two matches and it was major incident.

I like very much the truth and the balanced, neutral point of view articles, as you see, although you posted continously negative manifestation of Hungarian fans - meanwhile you ignored to be balanced regarding the Romanian fans - I did not reverted those edits, but the serius imbalance you introduce by the anthems is inacceptable.

Please try to build consensus, for this use the correpsonding talk page, moreover I am not afraid of the "Wikipedia Staff" since I work with them and they also know how Wikipedia rules are maintained properly.

Please try to follow Wikipedia editing guidelines with a good faith, it is a final warning in order to avoid any possible further conflict.

Thank You (KIENGIR (talk) 22:02, 13 July 2016 (UTC))[reply]

Answer

- I did not make any extensive edit in the correspondent article less than you did

- I had to warn you because you harmed those rules that I cited, moreover you were not netral but heavily biassed, as you proved also your heavy dislike for Hungarians

- In this article that what is put "on the first place" has no real relevance, chronological order better

- B****s..t, if I would have wanted to hide anything from the Hungarian fans I would have make disappear half of he content that is heavily citing everything about Hungarians, but less the incidents about the other side

- In Arena Nationala the first major incident was in the Romanian sector where Romanians beated Romanians, after the Romanian security started to beat these Romanian groups, including children, journalists, etc., it had no connection ot the Hungarian fans

- Then you have a big problem about objectivity, since in the broadcasts you clearly hear the Romanian national anthem and only very little time your hear anything disturbing that not the majority of the Hungarian fans, but very rarely some little groups. In Bucharest, everybody is horribly whistling and booing, so you continus modus-operandum about disrupting the article to maintain that lie that Hungarians generally "boo" the anthem and meanwhile silencing about the continous and persistent horrible behavior in Bucharest is one the greatest shame of all time of yours, and it is ridicoulus you try to wash yourself out from this!

- I let that one sentence citated because if we check all the matches, the behavior of the Hungarian fans there was the most apparent, although still the anthem is clearly to be heared, my objectivity and good heart was the reason although you did not deserve it. It my citations was badly written, why did not you rewrite it immediately? :) Maybe you were concentraing of the your Hungararian-hatred...

- I am not ashamed of anything, you have to ashamed about your behavior

- I was NOT banned "multiple times", once it happened by mistake because I did not check the clock and my action violated a time limit. I never gave "any positive stance" in the favor of Hungary, my edits were increasing obejctivity, moreover I corrected heavy and childish mistakes, inaccuracies, etc. thus I raised the trustability and credibility of the pages. Any yes, I work together with the Wikipedia Staff if any issue is emerging

- You again mixed your person with me, in Wikipedia there are Wikipedians, no natinalities, not any national pride is influencing me, but you showed in from of the Wikipedia community that you are heavily disliking Hungarians moreover you wanted to bias the article about the national anthems, than can be VERIFIED by every people since ALL THE MATCHES ARE RECORDED. Point.

- You have again a bad faith, because Hungarian Wikipedians mostly struggle to put on an objective manner the heavy imbalance in some articles, recently mostly Romanian Wikipedians are fair most of the times and they are also interested in good articles, not proaganda articles.

- The youtube video I know, it has heavy propaganda and bias towards the events, it is silencing of many-many other distractions that any objective, professional documentary should contain

- We don't hide any truth, the laughable is now you want to act in the manner of being objective, but also with your continous Hungarian-accuser, prejudicate statements you just prove the opposite that you'd like to appear.

- As you proved it also with your last edit, you again posted information of the Hungarians, but not anything that would be negative about Romanians. This is your way of the "truth", "obejectivity", etc. We know your type, generally we meet this regarding some beginners (the youtube video you wanted to use as stress pattern of your views, claims, opinion about the Hungarians and with this you wanted to justify your negative approach on the Hungarians today, moreover regarding a sport event that has not connection to the video. Amateur.)

That's all for now.(KIENGIR (talk) 20:01, 15 July 2016 (UTC))[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:HagiUEFACup.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:HagiUEFACup.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the file appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted content borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Safiel (talk) 20:07, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

September 2017

Hello, I'm TPTB. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Stop vandalizing the CSA Steaua Bucuresti (football) page. TPTB (talk) 18:29, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Origin of the Romanians

Your recent editing history 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 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. Borsoka (talk) 15:12, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]