User talk:Aniramka

Kuban
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Kuban. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism. Thank you.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); January 8, 2015 ; 17:33 (UTC)
 * Не пори чушь в статье, украинский не официальный язык на Кубани — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aniramka (talk • contribs)
 * ...nor is the article about an official modern entity, but rather about a historical region. You must be thinking about Krasnodar Krai, where adding Ukrainian spelling would indeed make no sense. Also, WP:CIVIL, please.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); January 8, 2015 ; 18:07 (UTC)
 * Now Kuban includes Adyge republic, Krasnodar krai, parts of Stavropol krai and Karachaevo-Cherkessia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aniramka (talk • contribs)
 * How does that disprove the main point? If anything, it reinforces the message that we should be looking at the whole historical perspective, not just the official status of languages which happen to be official on the bits and pieces of the official regions Kuban comprises.
 * I'm going to restore the original version once again and also point out WP:3RR to you. In all, while it is perfectly your right to disagree, you need to engage in a discussion, not keep reverting to the version you prefer. You are welcome to continue here, but if I were you, I'd open a new thread on Talk:Kuban and stop with the reverts until some kind of consensus is worked out. Even if you were in the right, WP:BRD still put the burden of Discussion on you, right after the first time your addition was reverted.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); January 8, 2015 ; 19:16 (UTC)
 * Ну такой большой текст на английском я не осилю, так что читай на русском. Начнем с того, что украинцы как титульная нация никогда не проживали на Кубани, были запорожские казаки, переселенные на Черноморское побережье, и говорили они на малороссийском наречии русского языка, да и украинцами они себя не определяли. Источники - исследования любого краснодарского историка. Если же брать языки по наибольшим группам населения, то нужно добавиь кабардинский, черкесский, армянский и греческий языки, так как их этнические группы достаточно велики и присутствуют в регионе с 18 века — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aniramka (talk • contribs)
 * If you don't have language skills to participate in a discussion, perhaps you shouldn't be making controversial edits, or to insist on reverting to them when they are questioned? There are multiple other venues to bring your point across. Continuous reverts are not one. How would you feel if some Americans, who barely speak any Russian, barged into the Russian Wikipedia, started correcting the pieces they disagree with, and then refused to discuss their actions because their language skills are inadequate? This is exactly the position you are in right now.
 * With regards to your arguments, I doubt anyone would question the addition of other languages you mentioned, and if you know any of them, you are welcome to do just that. Removing an applicable language simply because other applicable languages are not there is not very productive and smacks of POV. We are here to build an encyclopedia, not chew away little pieces of it!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); January 8, 2015 ; 20:15 (UTC)
 * В отличие от тебя я пишу о своей стране, ты же можешь советовать в русской версии истори штатов сколько угодно. Да и добавляя информации в статью следовало бы подкрепить ее официальными источниками. Но, видимо, для американцев не принято отступать от главной линии пропаганды
 * "Unlike me", LOL... As for the sources, you realize that the lonely pathetic source currently in that article was added by me? Also, the inclusion of variants in other languages in the lede is not something that requires sources; the lede itself is supposed to be a summary of the main text (which is where the sources belong, and which serves a substantiation for including the languages). And finally, if propaganda accusations are going to be your argument, I'm afraid I won't be able to help you any further. It is a matter of common courtesy to learn the rules of a community you come in contact with; you might fare better if you adjust your attitude. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); January 8, 2015 ; 20:31 (UTC)
 * Хорошо, где же ссылка на украинскую часть истории? На основе чего претензии украинцев? В какой период там было украинское государство? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aniramka (talk • contribs)
 * This is about the people, not the state. Kuban was settled by the Cossacks in the 18th century; by the Black Sea Cossack Host in particular. And you know where those guys came from, right? I'm also somewhat fascinated that you see an innocuous inclusion of Ukrainian spelling as a Ukrainian "claim". It is perfectly acceptable (indeed, expected) to include spellings in languages of ethnic groups who are in the present not necessarily in the majority but who played an important role in the region's history. To deny the role of the (ethnically) Ukrainian Cossacks in the settlement of Kuban would be quite bizarre and unscholarly.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); January 8, 2015 ; 21:04 (UTC)
 * Свидомый, где название на черкесском языке? До казаков на Кубани было государство-Черкесия, оно занимало большую часть черноморского побережья. Основные группы - черкесы, адыги, кабардины, убыхи.
 * I already answered this question above. If you are capable of adding the name of Kuban in Adyghe (or Armenian, or maybe even Greek), by all means do so. I know none of those languages and neither, it would seem, did any of the article's contributors. Some information is not included simply because expertise is unavailable. That's not an excuse to remove what's already there.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); January 8, 2015 ; 21:31 (UTC)

Edit Warring Notification
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 get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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&mdash;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&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. --Taivo (talk) 20:11, 8 January 2015 (UTC)