User talk:Corwin2K

how is this vandalism? it makes an actual factual statement, it is no different from citing any other fact about the person, i provided citations as well? care to offer some constructive criticism instead of blank "BLP issue or vandalism" statement?

=
======== Did not realize calling people mistakes of the nature and literally wishing them their demise can be seen as a "storm in a teacup". There's plenty of condemnation from the community, one just has to be open to find it. As for citing the name - it is getting a bit uncomfortable and aggressive, please refrain from making it personal.

Yagudin
Please, stop removing sourced info about his controversial statements. Thank you. Kineolody (talk) 16:43, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

June 2020
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Alexei Yagudin; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. JimKaatFan (talk) 23:12, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

June 2020 - again
Your recent editing history at Alexei Yagudin shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. JimKaatFan (talk) 17:44, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. JimKaatFan (talk) 13:36, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Yagudin
Please give a more verbose/substantiated reasoning for removal of the info, rather than generic "minor corrections", since they don't seem to be minor. Deegrayve (talk) 15:20, 9 Nov 2020 (UTC)