User talk:Glc72

Your article talk page edits
Please acquaint yourself with the "Show preview" button directly to the right of the "Save page" button. Eighteen edits to one post makes it difficult for those that wish to reply to understand exactly what they are replying to. You can find more detail in utility and etiquette (such as proper indenting) at Talk page guidelines. Regards  Tide  rolls  21:36, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks)Glc72 (talk) 11:20, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of states with nuclear weapons, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alfa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:14, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at List of states with nuclear weapons shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.  Neil N  talk to me  20:32, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Italy shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.  Neil N  talk to me  20:58, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Stop Doing This Please
As Tiderolls alluded to above, making nine edits in a row to the same post is annoying, bordering on disruptive. Think about what you want to write, proofread it, think about it some more, proofread it again, think about it again and then and only then, post. -- Neil N  talk to me  22:49, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

In fact ,i'm beginnig to think to my lawyer.I don' t like to offend and neither to be offended in a direct or indirect way.There will be a real person behind Cyclopia to see in the tribunal of my town. I don't know if denounce that WRACKY for offending.I felt it like an offending.I'm sorry, i can't forget it easily.Glc72 (talk) 22:54, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Your recent edits could give Wikipedia contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Wikipedia itself. Please note that making such threats on Wikipedia is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a dispute with the content of any page on Wikipedia, please follow the proper channels for [[WP:DR|disput

e resolution]]. Please be sure to comment on content, not contributors, and where possible make specific suggestions for changes supported by reliable independent sources and focusing especially on verifiable errors of fact. Thank you.  Neil N  talk to me  23:00, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

I didn't like that "wacky".I know that a denounce is valid all over EU and within 5 days is published all over it.Real life ids different from the virtual one.I'm sorryGlc72 (talk) 23:03, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Then stop mentioning the CIA, and start following our guidelines (this isn't the EU). You'll find things go much smoother that way. -- Neil N  talk to me  23:09, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Why can't i cite CIA in Wikipedia? ( i know that you know that i know why).I'm skeptical about that smoother.I go to sleep.It's hard to forget WACKY.I'm living a real life not a virtual one.Glc72 (talk) 23:12, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * All I'm saying is if you continue to post that the CIA tries to control the content of articles then be prepared to have your edits be dismissed as "wacky". -- Neil N  talk to me  23:18, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

I never wrote that CIA controls,i just wrote that CIA is active in the articles.Don't use the word CONTROL referred to me that i never used.Wacky was used towards me.I repeat ,it's hard to forget WACKY.I have to decide.I think at the end i'll pardon in me.Anyway when i'll need a help i'll look for you in Wikipedia.Next days i'm busy so don't worry. Make to restore that MAIN on Italy article with my citation.I'd be glad of it.I repeat don't worry and have a good night.Glc72 (talk) 23:22, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi :)
Look, I get 'somewhat' where you're coming from. There is no conspiracy against you. But you need to take a step back on your approach to editing articles. I'm glad you are finally engaging in talk pages. You need to slow down a bit and get your arguments in order and referenced. Take a breath and relax. It takes every newbie some time to acclimate to how things are done on Wikipedia. It was no box of cupcakes for me when I started either. It's not a soapbox, but a collaboration. If you come in telling everyone it's your way or not, you'll get nothing but the resistance you are now dealing with. Your contribution is very much welcome, provided you can give it in a form respectful of the Wikipedia method. Slow down a little bit, collaborate and communicate. I hope you can find a way to give your passion a little space and find the time to underpin your research with broadly acceptable facts and citations.

Respectfully- Doyna Yar (talk) 04:35, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks.I just received by email the warning of your writing.I will answer in "List of nuclear powers weapons list".Glc72 (talk) 05:53, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

"Wacky"
Since you seem so worried about this, let me explain clearly. I'll do it in Italian to be sure it is clear (If editors need an English translation, please ask). I hope this helps and makes things clear. Again, sorry if you felt offended, and apologies. -- cyclopia speak! 08:45, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) "Wacky" non è un insulto, significa "bizzarro" o "strampalato"
 * 2) L'aggettivo non era riferito a te, bensì alla campagna che stai apparentemente conducendo sullo status dell'Italia come "grande potenza"
 * 3) In ogni caso, finito questo post cancellerò l'aggettivo dal mio post e ti faccio le mie scuse se questo ti ha offeso in qualche modo.
 * 4) Sappi comunque che, benchè su en.wikipedia ci sia invero una policy contro gli attacchi personali, non è esattamente applicata in modo rigoroso ,e sappi che in generale su Wikipedia ti toccherà molto di peggio che sentir definire qualche tuo edit "bizzarro". Anche dagli admin. Non lo sto giustificando, ti dico solo come stanno le cose.

Cio' che non credo razionalmente delle scuse
WACKY e' stato detto in un contesto di negativita' (vedere anche Talk Italia). Quanto richiesto non e' stato detto quando detto a botta calda,anzi non mi e' stato risposto e lo scrivere da parte mia sul Talk e' stato bloccato.Piu' negativita' di così non si puo'. Molto probabilmente cio' e' avvenuto solo dopo informazione FYI (for you interesting suppongo).Queste scuse dopo cio' forse mi infastidiscono ancora di piu'.L'aggettivo WACKY (che tra l'altro ha piu' significati, e sono stati citati i 2 meno pesanti) riferito ad una mia azione colpisce me stesso nella realta'.Strampalato o bizzarro (i 2 significati meno pesi del termine) in un contesto negativo non sono davvero esaltanti da accettare. Tutto dipendera' dal mio stato d'animo,se fosse per la parte razionale e queste tue scuse mai richieste ,poiche' io ti chiesi solo spiegazioni ( dicevano i romani "excusatio non petita accusatio manifesta"), farei quello che dovrei fare.Glc72 (talk) 07:56, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Non puoi pretendere che ci sia sempre positività nelle interazioni umane. Le mie scuse erano sincere, non ho altro da spiegare. -- cyclopia speak! 08:53, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Per cortesia gia' sto sopportando l'offesa ricevuta.Cosa decidero' di fare nei prossimi tempi sul piano giudiziario dipendera' dallo stato d'animo.Un'altra cosa ,d'ora in poi esiste (se dovesse servire) solo il Lei.Teniamo le dovute distanze.Glc72 (talk) 11:55, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Please offer an English translation, Glc72. The machine translation I obtained made it appear that you have violated Wikipedia's policy regarding no legal threats.  Please read that policy and explain your post.   Tide  rolls  12:40, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't like to be offended.Glc72 (talk) 12:46, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
 * No one does, but I find your explanation insufficient. If you will read the policy I linked to (WP:No legal threats) you will see that your account could be blocked under certain circumstances.  Please make it clear that you are not considering legal action.   Tide  rolls  12:48, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

I do what i like.My freedom and my respect ar more important thamn being here.If i'll do something i haven't to warn anybody att all.This my privacy.Glc72 (talk) 12:53, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
 * You are misunderstanding my message. I am in no way attempting to impede you from any action.  I am informing you that you cannot continue to edit Wikipedia while threatening legal action.  I am extending a leniency toward you due to the language barrier, but I warn you that unless I see an unambiguous, timely statement from you regarding this matter I will block your account.  Tide  rolls  12:59, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

I can't tell you what is privacy.Anyway i could pardon Cyclopia but i want to know if Wikipedia takes the right  measures against Cyclopia.You should take against her the right measures.Like to ban her. What about it?Please answer me.Now it's me to ask.Glc72 (talk) 13:11, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Ban someone for apologizing? No, that will not happen.  Tide  rolls  13:14, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

I'll decide waht to do.I haven't decided anything at the moment.You act as you like.I don't care.Glc72 (talk) 13:21, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
 * No, you have decided not to make the unambiguous statement I requested. "I'll decide what to do" renders "I haven't decided anything at the moment" meaningless.  This may well be due to a lack of English language skills but if you required assistance I would've been glad to help.  Tide  rolls  13:27, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Blocked
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making legal threats or taking legal action. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved.  Tide  rolls  13:23, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

I removed your topic on potential superpowers
Your ip address has been abusing the potential superpowers talks page for pushing matters that do not seem civil to others. It is why it was removed for protecting the interests of other discussions.--82.212.85.183 (talk) 19:00, 28 December 2013 (UTC)