User talk:Ssashok

Hello, Ssashok! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. We're so glad you're here! If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills, the sandbox is for you. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! — Mikhailov Kusserow (talk) 14:49, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images
Getting help
Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and guidelines
Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community
Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review
Miscellaneous
User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Ice hockey at the Olympic Games

Wikipedia conventions are to list all medals in a sport together, rather than to split them up. You already got your victory with the World Championship pages, please stop trying to spread this edit warring to other pages. -- Scorpion ⁰⁴²² 15:20, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Combining men's and women's medals is not desirable primarily for a triple gold club page and statistics. Then, like it or hate it, there is much higher interest for men's hockey Olympics tournament. Your argument about Soviet Union, having 7 medals...Canada is still on the first place and it is first on the second table as well, so do not worry about that. And since IIHF is different from IOC you don't have to worry about combining. World Championship is governed by IIHF and it was obvious that it recognized Russia and Czech Republic as successors (it passed the rating on that countries from Soviet Union and Chekhoslovakia accordingly) even before that email. Finally, although I am from Soviet Union, I am not from Russia. In fact I am from Belarus and I was cheering for my country in quarterfinals when they lost 2:3 to Russia. So don't tell me it is nationalism that drove me to combine countries.

I was going to nominate the page for FAC today, and I can't nominate it with an ongoing edit war, thanks to you and your damn nationalism. Wikipedia is not supposed to be an in depth statistical database, so combining the totals was perfectly acceptable. And what do you mean by "not desirable primarily for a triple gold club page"? The Triple Gold Club is about players, not nations. -- Scorpion ⁰⁴²² 16:00, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Scorpion0422, you continually breach the Harassment and No personal attacks policies. Please stop accusing everyone of nationalism. Andreyx109 (talk) 15:53, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is not about awards. This is about information and the right to access it. I am merely presenting an alternative, which makes more statistical sense to me, so stop accusing me of nationalism. If there is any nationalist is it you, I read history of edits in ice hockey championship medals page, you were at first even against IIHF as an authoritative body...in order to defend Canada. As for Triple Gold club, there is a reference on the template to that page, and as you know this club is for men only (currently at least), so it is important to have a separate table for their teams as well. There would not be an edit war if you stop deleting my work without proper justification.

The Triple Gold Club has its own page (and list), so I still don't see what is has to do with this. When did I say the IIHF wasn't a governing body? All I said is that they have their rules, we have ours, and we shouldn't necessarily always follow what the governing body says. You're right, its not about awards, its about making pages as good as they can be, and an FAC would help get some much needed reviews. After all, the only users who seem to comment these days are POV pushers. And by the way, I fully expect to have a debate about whether Soviet Union/Russia's totals should be combined next February if Russia wins (and they likely will), so I'll see you then. -- Scorpion ⁰⁴²² 16:36, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's so nice that you're now telling me how to do the page. Where were you when I was desperately asking people for opinions and reviews for the page (I still am, but why should you care about such a minor thing as creating good content)? No, instead you show up not long after the World Championships, and you got your victory with the Worlds. Okay, that's how the IIHF does it, fine. But no, that's not enough, now you want to skew the Olympics statistics too. Forget the fact that the page is about ice hockey at the Olympics as a whole. Forget the fact that the page is already immensely long. Forget the fact that that's how almost all of the similar pages do it. No, you want to split the tables so that it clearly shows that in men's hockey Canada and the Soviets both have seven gold medals. You're not the first, and you won't be the last (especially if Russia wins next year). And how coincidental that you joined not long after Andreyx109 started the mess at the Worlds page and now you are using the same arguments he is. If you want to do something useful, copyedit the page, because what you are doing isn't. -- Scorpion ⁰⁴²² 03:19, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please, stop these personal attacks. I am open to discussion of this issue as long as it is constructive. It true that I formally joined recently, but I was adding stuff anonymously before. The only reason I created username is so that I can defend my point of view (my changes were never edited so mercilessly and with such anger and accusations before).--Ssashok (talk) 03:46, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Could you folks please have this conversation on the article talk page instead of here or, worse, in your warring edit summaries? That would be greatly appreciated by other editors of the article. And try to keep it civil? Accusations of censorship and nationalism don't help anyone. Thanks. -- Jonel (Speak to me) 16:18, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing, those accusations are not appropriate, I think both of us got carried away a little bit.--Ssashok (talk) 16:50, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked for a period of 24 hours for slow moving edit warring on Ice hockey at the Olympic Games. It is essential that you are more careful to discuss controversial changes with the user in question, rather than simply revert them repeatedly: this applies even if you think or know you are correct. Edit warring helps nobody, and actually harms the page in question, and the encyclopedia. If you agree to stop edit warring, and take the issue to talk pages I am more than willing to unblock. To contest this block please place {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Tiptoety ^talk 03:48, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I said I am more than willing to discuss the issue of separate vs. combined Medal tables in a civil manner.--Ssashok (talk) 03:57, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May 2009

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48hrs in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for engaging in an edit war at Ice hockey at the Olympic Games. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. GARDEN 21:36, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Immediately after a block to prevent this mindless reverting and claiming that a consensus exists which clearly doesn', it continues. Thus you are blocked for two days. Please do not continue this war after the block. GARDEN 21:39, 16 May 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

Please provide the exact reason for the block, since I followed instructions received after my first block by starting the topic in dispute on the discussion page and reverted only when I received no replies for 24 hours. If any of my actions in this sequence was wrong please, state which one, so I will not get blocked again.Thank you. Also, I never wrote anything about existing consensus.

Decline reason:

Silence isn't consent. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 22:47, 16 May 2009 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Please elaborate on your last comment. What if nobody ever answers in the discussion? How long should the period be before it is assumed that nobody cares, or I should never make such assumption? And if that is the case, what would my course of action be in order to defend my point of view? I apologize for taking your time to review the block and explain procedures, but unfortunately I found no information of the proper course of action in this case.

Decline reason:

It isn't edit warring. You could have taken it to AN/I, or some other forum: the ice hockey project talk page, the Olympics project talk page. Other users' unresponsiveness does not give you a pass to edit war. Ever. -- Daniel Case (talk) 03:47, 17 May 2009 (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.

Articles for deletion nomination of 2014 Men's World Ice Hockey Championships

I have nominated 2014 Men's World Ice Hockey Championships, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2014 Men's World Ice Hockey Championships. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Pookeo9 ^{Talk If you need anything} 18:03, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]