User talk:Artur Zinatullin

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Artur Zinatullin. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Artur Zinatullin~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 22:10, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Disruptive editing
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Obtshak. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. You removed the majority of this article's content, including all references, providing only a weak rationale. This appears to be borderline vandalism and is not the way good-faith edits are performed on Wikipedia. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:04, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.


 * The content of the article I have being editing was mostly a) factually incorrect, as it has attributed to the subject the properties it does not have; b) concentrated on particular case, though the title of the article suggests general topic. So it has to be either renamed to "Obschak in Estonia back in 2000s". Or rewritten so the reference to particular cases have minor illustrative meaning. That I have suggested before on an article talk page half a year ago and as there where no objections I undertook the change.
 * The article as it is today have no real value, as it does not describe the meaning of the term correctly. Artur Zinatullin (talk) 14:25, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I can't speak to the content of the article itself, as I'm not familiar with the topic, and therefore I can't determine whether what you are claiming is true or not. This is beside the point, however. You went ahead and basically removed the majority of the article's content, including all references, leaving it as a completely useless page, and all you could offer as a justification was that it isn't accurate information. This simply isn't how an encyclopedia is written and edited. In order to support such large-scale changes as you are attempting to perform, you need to provide supporting evidence, preferably in the form of references. You did the exact opposite, by removing any hint of credibility the article may have had. Before proceeding with further edits of the page, please make sure you are able to properly cite any information that you leave on it and that you are able to demonstrate why the current content is not appropriate to the page. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:42, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
 * What you are saying here is that you do not care much about if the article is factually correct, but the formal rules of editing should be met.
 * Regarding current content being not appropriate, imagine the article named "Automobile" all of the content of which consists of brief description of Fiat 500 and elaborate description of how one of Fiat 500s crashed in the wall in 1968 in Salerno. And claims it is used to plow the fields. I think it is pretty obvious the content of the article does not match the subject, right? Artur Zinatullin (talk) 05:44, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Please don't misrepresent my position, that won't get us far in this discussion. What I am saying is that you cannot simply delete all references from an article, claim the content was inaccurate, and walk away. You may be correct in what you are saying, but how is anyone to know this if you do not support your statements and edits with proper citations?Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 13:53, 27 July 2022 (UTC)