User talk:Yana1118

Welcome!

Hello, Yana1118, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one of your contributions does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Questions page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Below are a few other good links for newcomers:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
How to edit a page
Help pages
Tutorial
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! LJF2019 ^talk 15:27, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That is, when slander a person, it is necessary to swallow and smile? The US Senate is a bunch of Russophobes. And everyone understands why this document was published through the Senate, so that no one could sue them! You are an encyclopedia !!! You are not like idiots !!!

Yeah, I agree. Read what I said below. You're still wrong. LJF2019 ^talk 15:41, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 2021

Hi Yana1118! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Ike Kaveladze that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia – it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. WikiVirusC^(talk) 12:36, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Ike Kaveladze, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. M.Bitton (talk) 14:43, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Aras Agalarov, you may be blocked from editing. LJF2019 ^talk 15:05, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

When Wikipedia first appeared, I was one of the sponsors so that this site does not collapse. Now you are turning the site into a political swamp, where the truth has no place ????

The encyclopedia must be true! And not to reprint the media delirium from the Democrats!

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Aras Agalarov. LJF2019 ^talk 15:26, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note

@Yana1118: I'm no Democrat, and I'm not turning the site into a political swamp. I voted for Donald Trump in the 2020 election. I'm simply upholding Wikipedia's policy on no original research. You're removing a sourced claim from an article based on your opinion. That's not allowed. And to be clear, I 100% agree that this site is overrun by the left and I 100% agree that most of the political articles here are heavily biased towards the Democrats. That doesn't change the fact that you're wrong here. LJF2019 ^talk 15:30, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 2022

Hello, I'm Tdslk. 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 your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. Tdslk (talk) 05:28, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Aras Agalarov, did not appear to be constructive and have 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. Serols (talk) 15:18, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As I wrote earlier, It's a lie! The publication of deliberately false information is a crime! On the website of the US Department of the Treasury, there is a link to the sanctions lists.

Follow the link https://sanctionssearch.ofac.treas.gov/ enter the name of Agalarov and you will not see him in such lists. This is the most reliable information! If you can't check it yourself, I did it for you! The Forbes article you link to is just a guess. And the fact is the website of the US Department of the Treasury. Yana1118 (talk) 15:22, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In view of this, it is necessary to stop publishing false information! You can get a subpoena and pay very large compensation for the published lies! Yana1118 (talk) 15:25, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The person in question, and as described in the article, is a non-poor inhabitant. And has an expensive lawyer! Yana1118 (talk) 15:27, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When Wikipedia needed financial help to keep going. I shared money with Wikipedia. Because I believed that Wikipedia is worthy of existence! But what are you turning it into? Some kind of gossip dump? It's an ENCYCLOPEDIA!!! It should contain proven facts based on the truth, not on conjecture! Yana1118 (talk) 15:31, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making legal threats or taking legal action.

You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved.

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 ~~~~}}. ... discospinster _talk 15:35, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I did not threaten to sue, but only suggested that this could happen. If they continue to publish lies! Yana1118 (talk) 15:38, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But it turns out to be easier for you to block a person for the truth than to admit your lie! Yana1118 (talk) 15:39, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refund my dues as you did not meet my expectations! Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia! And became a tabloid newspaper! Yana1118 (talk) 15:41, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently there are no literate people left! There is official information from the US Department of the Treasury, but some "editors" do not consider it true and prefer to copy and paste gossip! I fixed it, but for the truth they block me! Is this correct? And my fears for the fate of Wikipedia, that a just claim may follow for a published lie, are taken as a threat! Are you reasonable? It's better to block the person and kind of be right that he's posting a lie, instead of admitting a mistake and deleting the false information! Yana1118 (talk) 15:59, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A few things, after replying to your UTRS request; Wikipedia does not claim to be the truth, only that the information here can be verified, see WP:TRUTH. Only you can decide what is true for you; Wikipedia presents sources to the readers so they can evaluate and judge them for themselves. If you choose to not believe them, that is your decision. Wikipedia does not charge dues, it solicits donations- voluntary contributions that are not required to use Wikipedia. If you don't wish to donate, based on whatever criteria that you wish to use, that is also your decision.

By constantly telling people that posting false information in a crime, you are using the threat of legal action as a cudgel to suppress debate and chill legitimate editing. That is considered a legal threat even if you yourself have no intention of taking legal action. Your constant harping about how posting false information is a crime certainly leads me to think you are going to call up the US Department of the Treasury or some other government should the edits you have an issue with remain. To be unblocked, you will need to unequvocally withdraw any and all legal threats, agree to stop using the possibility of legal action to suppress edits, and pursue any grievances you have using established Wikipedia processes(such as talk page discussion and dispute resolution). We cannot stop you from using the judicial system of your country if that is what you want to do, but you cannot make legal threats on Wikipedia or edit if you have legal actions underway. 331dot (talk) 08:11, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia was created as an encyclopedia that users can add to. It was completely free until they decided that the Internet is also a business and a business should generate income. And Wikipedia turned to users for help to simply exist! This is first! Secondly - when Wikipedia was turned into a business and political platform, I stopped my contributions, but still hoped that the founders would adhere to the principles of truthfulness and verification of data! But, many editors consider only their point of view to be correct and keep posting false information over and over again! And I believe that to remind that any action carries a responsibility! Libel, in any country of the world, is a crime! Check all sources before posting! But no, over and over again you just delete the truth and post slander! Specifically for this person, there have already been two episodes of lies! I didn't threaten anyone! And they threatened me! And it looks like on a national basis! What is in the UN convention is also considered a crime! No need to hide behind far-fetched threats, but you need to check the information the first time !!! I deleted false information several times and only then wrote that it was a crime to publish a lie! And what, I was blocked for the truth! You are just a fool and a coward!

Since you have chosen to make personal attacks, rant further about the truth after I told you that we don't claim to be the truth, and double down on your legal threats, you will need to go back to UTRS to make an unblock request, but unless it shows a radical change in attitude and an agreement to stop using the threat of legal action (even if not by you) as a cudgel, you shouldn't waste your(and our) time. 331dot (talk) 08:31, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]