User talk:Vyaiskaya

Welcome!

Hello, Vyaiskaya! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Peaceray (talk) 04:56, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Introduction • Contributing to Wikipedia • Your first article The five pillars of Wikipedia • Simplified ruleset How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Get help at the Teahouse Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions Department directory Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Verifiability • No original research Reliable sources • Citing sources • Content guidelines What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style (Simplified) • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sockpuppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists The Signpost (Wikipedia's newspaper)
Things to do
Task Center • Be bold in editing Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Copy editing • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguation • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

December 2020

Hello. This is a message to let you know that your recent contributions, such as edits you made to Russia and North Asia did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Danloud (talk) 21:21, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

On what grounds? End this pettiness. These edits were all in line with the talk pages, and reversions of them has been petty targetting with no discussion or attempts to mediate or explain your actions. Vyaiskaya (talk) 19:15, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

Hello. This is a message to let you know that your recent contributions, such as edits you made to Russia did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you.--Renat (talk) 02:04, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, discussion pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.--Renat (talk) 02:18, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I revised edits by Danlaud which had compromised dozens of edits. If your material or any other important changes are still missing, please let me know and I will help restore it. Vyaiskaya (talk) 02:25, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Danloud (talk) 11:32, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Says the person giving no explanation for reversions and going across multiple pages out of spite. There is no reason for your reversions. If you have something constructive please add it, or bring up concerns about article quality in the talk pages instead of this bologna following someone around and cancelling their every edit big or small. Don't you have anything better to do? This petty behaviour is against Wikipedia guidelines. Vyaiskaya (talk) 19:13, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

Hello. This is a message to let you know that your recent contributions, edits did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Noelcubit (talk) 20:48, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Stop putting made up information in articles without sources. last warning. Noelcubit (talk) 21:38, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions alert

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 Eastern Europe or the Balkans. 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.

--Ymblanter (talk) 22:17, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm trying to report these two editors who harassingly followed me around all my edits systematically reverting all of my content, refusing to discuss, calling me names, saying I was useless, calling me a bot, calling out "my mom" etc. Users: Danloud and Noelcubit Vyaiskaya (talk) 22:22, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Eurasia vs Eurasian Steppe

About this diff
Eurasian Steppe≠Eurasia.--Renat (talk) 11:55, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message, lets update that. Vyaiskaya (talk) 19:26, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 2021

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31h for edit-warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. User:Ymblanter (talk) 20:23, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I submitted a new report on the edit-warring and continued being followed around by Noelcubit. (I was actually coming to mention this again to you.) I have reached out to admin about this. I have tried using the talk and discussion pages to no avail and no cooperation. Why am I being harassed? Please help. Vyaiskaya (talk) 19:51, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Look, if you know your edits are contested by several users and continue edit-warring, this is a situation which leads to a rapid block. Irrespectively of whether you had time to file a report at 3RR or not. Edit-warring is not a valid dispute resolution avenue at this project.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:53, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have consistently asked for resolution in the talk papes and been met with crickets. In the revert sections I have been given statements about no source (where a source was added) and various other non-sense statements. I am entirely open to communication and sick if this edit warring and being followed around. None if this seems to be based in any discernable point of content, no specific qualms regarding material have at all been under attempt to be addressed even after repeatedly asked. The given users have tracked my page and all edits, from fixes tó small grammatical errors to anything else solely based on my user and not content. I do not per se mind everything being frozen, but these users' senseless personal reversions, lack of willingness for dialogue is not a valid avenue ath this project. And those are methods which I have actually reached out with. What I want, is for these users to stop following me around, and if they have an issue with any key points, toa actually talk about and discuss what it is or at least stop harassiming me. Vyaiskaya (talk) 20:01, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the typos. Vyaiskaya (talk) 20:03, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a sock! I just want to not be followed around and harassed! And I was not reverting noelcubits edits but he was reverting mine with hostile and taunting remarks. Why should his reverts have more weight, when he is the one who is intentionally rekindling it as an edit war. I asked him multiple times to stop. I openned talks and no one responded. These people have refused to have any kind of civil discussion. And have not been working to improve the pages or converse on them or provide any helpful input. I hace repeatedly asked them to communicate and been met with mocking responses!! Vyaiskaya (talk) 01:16, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

.

. Vyaiskaya (talk) 20:30, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Abusing multiple accounts

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for Abusing multiple accounts.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Using User:DxRxXxZx as a sock in an edit war on Westernization. EdJohnston (talk) 20:39, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

?? Vyaiskaya (talk) 20:48, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to appeal this. What are my avenues. Vyaiskaya (talk) 20:51, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've been being harassed and followed all around by my sn. And trying to delete this account so I can be left alone. My attempts at asking users to stop edit warring have been ignored, my attempts at discussion or even basic decent conversation have been ignored. I have been called names, slandered, followed around everywhere. Please help. Vyaiskaya (talk) 20:57, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, please help!!! TT Vyaiskaya (talk) 21:30, 6 January 2021 (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).

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

Request reason:

I've been being harassed and followed all around by my sn. And trying to delete this account so I can be left alone. My attempts at asking users to stop edit warring have been ignored, my attempts at discussion or even basic decent conversation have been ignored. I have been called names, slandered, followed around everywhere. please help!!! TT

Decline reason:

Checkuser verified abuser of multiple accounts. You edited Westernization with this account on Dec. 23, were warned about edit warning on this page, and the created the second account to continue edit warring. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 22:24, 6 January 2021 (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.

Vyaiskaya (talk) 21:32, 6 January 2021 (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).

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

Request reason:

it was not created to "continue edit warring" it was created in hopes they would leave me alone and Stop Edit Warring, since they were going after everything with my sn as part of their vindictive multiarticle and destructive edit war and not responding to any attempts at dialogue. Repeatedly I asked for dialogue and was met with insults and pointless reversions based on my sn and nothing else. Edits made with the account were separate entries to the back and forth and only to escape that harassment, not to continue it or gang up or any thing else of the sort. What kind of space is Wikipedia were people follow you around from article to article call you names, taunt and harass you. What kind of space allows this? What kind of person wants to be attacked by that? Why should I be faced with that behaviour and chasnd all around Wikipedia? Can you tell me why I should be harassed? Can you tell me why you allow this toxic behaviour? I have had one request, to stop being harassed and to have dialogue, and that has been repeatedly violated, and I have been chased around on this site. There is something very wrong with that.

Decline reason:

But this isn't what happened. If you were trying to be left alone and have a fresh start, you would have given up using this account and you would have stopped editing the contentious articles. Instead, you used both accounts together, with overlapping edits, to continue working on the same articles. This is a blatant violation of WP:SOCK. You'll want to read WP:GAB as well, prior to any future unblock; you want to talk about your own actions, which were inappropriate, not those of other editors. Yamla (talk) 11:04, 7 January 2021 (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.

And what about the others and that harassment? Is Wikipedia policy to allow that kind of behaviour and being chased around? Hmmm? You condone cyberbullying, taunting, calling people pointless, etc.? If I recall only new edits were added. + The reverts started with them following me around, not with contentiousness. If the article itself were the issue, they wouldn't have followed me around everywhere would they have? And if something were contentious, they would have taied communicating about what was problematic. If you look, I continuously asked for dialogue. And was met with resistance to talking, or with explanations which did not at all have any authenticity. And not wanting to be harassed is not the same as not having interest in an article. The accounts are not used in conjunction in anyway. One stopped being used, not both at once. I think you can see why, given how I was being followed from article to article, I felt they would leave updates by someone else alone, since I was very clearly being targetted. You understand what targetting is? If the articles were contentious on their own right, that would be discussed. And that was open to discussion. And many times I asked to talk and was denied. And many times over they hopped onto any page I had been in contact with. This is targetting and harassment. Not "contentiousness of an article". Apparently, you're just allowed to stalk and harass people here and you condone that. Vyaiskaya (talk) 18:53, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May 2021

UTRS decline

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that either the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or that the block is no longer necessary because you understand what you have been blocked for, will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and will make useful contributions instead. Please read https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Guide_to_appealing_blocks for more information. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:26, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #43252 --Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:26, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Draft:Black and white cookie

Draft:Black and white cookie, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Black and white cookie and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Draft:Black and white cookie during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Apocheir (talk) 16:23, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]