User talk:Kostun

Fair use rationale for File:Evangelical Church in Zemun - 1929.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Evangelical Church in Zemun - 1929.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 22:38, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Church of Saint Basil of Ostrog.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Church of Saint Basil of Ostrog.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:52, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Evangelical Church in Zemun - 1929.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Evangelical Church in Zemun - 1929.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:53, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Fantasy football flags
Please respect the consensus at WT:WikiProject Football and WP:Manual of Style (icons). These "fantasy football flags" are not helpful as icons in articles like this. Thanks, — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 22:58, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Please stop. There is clear consensus at WT:WikiProject Football against little icons for team colors. Usage on other Wikipedias is irrelevant for the English Wikipedia.  — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 05:05, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:What is consensus?. If you continue to insert these images against consensus, you will be blocked for WP:Tendentious editing. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 20:41, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Subnational flag templates
Please respect the consensus at WP:WikiProject Flag Template, and WP:Manual of Style (icons). Flag templates are not needed for flag images that aren't used in icon form on en.wiki, and the MOS specifically discourages the use of subnational flags like this. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 23:03, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
 * To second that, per WP:BRD, you have boldly added flags, they have been challenged and removed, it should now be discussed. To insist on adding these flags back in is edit-warring. Please stop, discuss, and wait until consensus is agreed before adding the icons in. -- Club Oranje T 07:18, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Violation of WP:3RR
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war on 1967–68 Mitropa Cup. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively. In particular, the three-revert rule states that:
 * 1)    Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
 * 2)   Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Note that logging out and editing from an IP address (in this case 94.203.115.56) does not exempt you from the 3RR rule.

You are definitely in an editing dispute and have been reverted by multiple users. Please continue discussion until a clear consensus is reached, the article will still be here next week. 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 continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Note also I have no firm opinion whether the flags should stay or go - however I have reverted your last edit agan as it is a) against the apparent current consensus, and b) made using the IP address in an apparent attempt to circumvent the 3RR policy.-- Club Oranje T 11:26, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Due to your continued persistence a report has been filed at Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring for WP:3RR policy violation. You are entitled to defend yourself at that discussion.-- Club Oranje T 12:49, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Blocked
It is clear that you are not willing to work cooperatively and abide by consensus, so you have been blocked temporarily from editing. Please take this time to understand the WP:Consensus and WP:What is consensus? essays before returning to editing. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 12:52, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigation
You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Sockpuppet investigations/Kostun. Thank you. Digirami (talk) 16:26, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Blocked again
Hello Kostun. I've blocked you for three weeks as a result of the sockpuppetry mentioned above, specifically continuing to edit war logged out, using open proxies, and in violation of your block. You could almost be accused of referring to yourself in the third person, but I'll let that one slip. The block would probably have only been two weeks if you hadn't denied it when it was so obviously true. It's probably still not too late for that. This appears to be a limited episode so I have given you the benefit of the doubt, and assumed you'll be able to collaborate and contribute constructively when you return. If there's further edit warring at that time, or sockpuppetry, or block evasion in the meantime, another admin or I will block you long time. You would be well advised to steer completely away from the flags on your return. Please also see the links provided above and WP:APB. Thanks. -- zzuuzz (talk) 07:10, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 24 November 2015 (UTC)