User talk:Kudzu1/Archive 3

Bahraini uprising
Hello,

Since you were involved in the past in editing the article, I though you might be interested in a this discussion.  Mohamed CJ  (talk) 16:29, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

2012 insurgency in northern Mali
Yep, sorry my bad...jsut saw talk page too Lihaas (talk) 02:52, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * There are discussions about the Jihad flag and the further reading on the Malian insurgency page. Please partake in any or all issues that you feel you want/need toLihaas (talk) 12:39, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * whats with this UNEXPLAINED edit? Its the 2nd without reasn...Lihaas (talk) 15:55, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * With NO reason? its hardly AGF. We cant blindly parrot things and per BRD on 2n dinstance it needs discussion. Per OTHERCRAPEXISTS its not the smae. In this case the groups running it are different (and specific). Could you readd and tag to gnerate discussion?Lihaas (talk) 16:02, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * clearly the two guidlines conflcit. At any rate it shoudl lsit that as, in this case, AFRCIOM commands the operations. But the gflag is there to rep the govt as would the AFRICOM article link to some command structure that eventually links to the govt. Although fr the other links removed what reason was that?Lihaas (talk) 18:00, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Start adiscussion on talk i guess, its the AGF thing to do
 * bt- you removed the commander dates without reason...Lihaas (talk) 18:07, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * ah, yes! got lost with the removal of the first date oin jan...but its fine.
 * well do the rest at talk ;)Lihaas (talk) 19:33, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Libyan army article nominated for deletion
Hi, could I ask you for your view on this particular issue? Wikilink is Articles for deletion/Libyan National Army. Thanks. --EllsworthSK (talk) 01:26, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 5
Hi. When you recently edited Iyad ag Ghaly, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tuareg rebellions (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) 10:45, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Azawad
Nice userbox...though may is uggest the background colour change so it doesnt flow over from the flag colour? Also you seem to be interested so should we try and set up the project/project page then move on to tagging and bot work and expansion0? We could use SOuth Sudan a s a model (seems like the glas is too)Lihaas (talk) 07:32, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Sectarianism in the 2011–2012 Syrian uprising‎". Thank you. -- R a f y  talk 22:30, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 12
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * Berberism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Tuareg rebellions


 * Impact of the Arab Spring (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Tuareg rebellions

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:58, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

This is a warning
You have removed the tags I placed on the Libyan Civil War without addressing the issues raised on the talk page. You do not remove tags unless consensus has been reached on the talk page or the problems fixed. Do not do it again. This is a warning. You will be reported if you refuse to adhere to Wiki policy. Either you work according to the rules or you work against it. Your choice.Tamsier (talk) 13:53, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

second try on Tuareg social stratification..
Hello Kudzu, you were right in your critique, its a sensitive page. I gave it a second try: I added extra sources, and threw out the stuff for which I could'nt find any. Hope its acceptable now. Cheers, Pieter.Pieter Felix Smit (talk) 22:26, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

History under Muammar Gaddafi of Libya
Regarding the last change you have made. Well i think that the book isn't reliable to add in the article, since in the main page of the leader it's not added either, and i just had discussion here :-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Regarding_a_book_related_with_Libya_and_US

I think it confirms that the source should be used as much as we are using, and because the words which have been added have no other source i heavily doubt.Clarificationgiven (talk) 12:48, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Requested move of Côte d'Ivoire
There is currently a discussion on moving the article Côte d'Ivoire to Ivory Coast. You are being notified since you participated in a previous discussion on this topic. Please join the discussion here if you are interested. TDL (talk) 02:36, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

"Preponderance of sources confirm mercenaries."
Did you even looked at the source? Or just blindly reverting any edits which have been made by me? The source actually suggests that no mercenaries were used by Government or Gaddafi, take a look at the link which had been claimed by the editor. Clarificationgiven (talk) 10:51, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Excuse me...
Haven't you seen the human rights section I've written? Check it out, it's just below the Censorship section at the moment. I despise Assad. All of the stuff I am deleting is just fluff. IT is not possible to document every last incident of what happened to whom. Please check my edits more carefully, and I think you'll reconsider your opinion of me. Fanzine999 (talk) 09:16, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

The article badly needs shortening. I've been told off for adding stuff about Russia's involvement in the horror. A user keeps trying to delete the section. Fanzine999 (talk) 09:18, 30 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Hey, it's OK. I will check the article talk page now and seek consensus as you suggest. I don't want to do anything wrong. Fanzine999 (talk) 09:21, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Libyan civil war
I have gone ahead and added an RFC to the chat to gain more of a consensus here, there is also the military wikiproject, I just feel like this edit warring is un-needed by both sides. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 05:15, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

July 2012
Your recent editing history at List of modern dictators shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 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. ''You have deleted 4 times the same content. if you do it again, I might report you. Reach consensus on talk page, please.'' —Hahc 21 21:03, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Assad government and terrorists
Well I was searching for info on the cooperation between Syrian officials and the regime, and instead I ran into this explosive report:. I don't think I'm likely to do anything with it, for now.

I am interested in hearing your thoughts on the Sectarianism in the 2011–2012 Syrian uprising page. In particular, I'm unsure what to do with the Fides reports. On the one hand, we don't have any source outside this letter by a priest to a rebel site ([]), which I'm not sure about using. On the other, we do have (albeit, arguably pro-rebel) sources which blast the sources of the Fides report (i.e. Syrian church officials, like the one who sent the letter) as agents of regime intelligence (but not connecting this to the Fides report). Right now I just have denials by the opposition and the Vatican's ambassador to Syria of reports in general that Christians are singled out, but not specifically that report. What are your thoughts? --Yalens (talk) 23:12, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Chronical
One way to be suspicious an account is chronical is to go to their contributions, and click "account" on the bottom of the page. This is the list of global accounts, and the french wikipedia is usually the first one to be automatically created on his socks. Sopher99 (talk) 13:00, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 30
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Doctor (Doctor Who), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Power of Three (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) 13:58, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Addounia TV
Hello Kudzu1, I just saw the report you added to 3RR. Wouldn't it be more appropriate at ANI? Just a thought. Yazan (talk) 06:05, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Raul Ruiz move?
Hi, I just came across your article on Raul Ruiz, the newly-elected congressman, but I was thinking that it may need a better title to differentiate with Raúl Ruiz, an unrelated filmmaker. I don't think I'm authorized to move articles, but perhaps his article would be better off as Raul Ruiz (congressman), or Raul Ruiz (politician). Thanks. Delaywaves &bull;&#32; talk  20:58, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Raul Ruiz, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Native American (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) 11:17, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia edit-thon: Saturday, February 9, 2013
Hope to see you there! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 16:53, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of 2011–present Libyan factional fighting for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2011–present Libyan factional fighting is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/2011–present Libyan factional fighting until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. EllsworthSK (talk) 13:01, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

South Sudan internal conflict (2011–present)
Hi, I saw that you put a lot of work into the South Sudan internal conflict (2011–present) article so I wanted to get your input on moving the bulk of the content that focuses on the Murle-Nuer conflict to a clearer title. At the moment it is a hodge-bodge of several conflicts that are distinct even if they are related by geography. If you're still interested in this topic, could we get your opinion on the talk page? Thanks! Keitsist (talk) 06:09, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Boléro, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Doctor (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) 12:29, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Portland "Wiknic" 2013!
Hope you are able to attend! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:41, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Aftermath of the 2013 Egyptian coup d'état, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mohamed Ibrahim (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) 10:57, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Could you give a third opinion
Two-person discussion doesn't seem to be getting anywhere (but threats, apparently), and I wanted to know what you thought about this issue here. I understand if you don't have time though. --Yalens (talk) 20:28, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your input. --Yalens (talk) 19:14, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia Takes Portland 2013!
-- Another Believer ( Talk ) 22:10, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Ghouta chemical attacks
Why did you remove valuable content in the UN report section, hiding it under the comment of "reorg+condense"? --Emesik (talk) 16:35, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
 * It wasn't valuable. WP:NOTNEWS. I condensed it to the important parts. If somebody wants to read the article, they can read the article. We're not going to quote passages from a blog at length. -Kudzu1 (talk) 01:33, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia Edit-athon!
Hope to see you there! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 16:01, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

"Wiki Loves Libraries" edit-athon in Vancouver, WA
''You are receiving this message because you are listed as an active member of WikiProjectOregon or WikiProject Washington. This message was delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 15:07, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Weirdo
Not helpful: I redacted it silently. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:19, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Suspicisions over Daki22
I think he is a sockpuppet of giatharodaki ,and I opened an spi report,but need an admin to checkuser and see if they match.Alhanuty (talk) 17:11, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Get your cameras ready! Christmas in Oregon and PDX Pods
This month, WikiProject Oregon features two photo campaigns:
 * PDX Pods
 * Christmas in Oregon

The concept is simple: upload photos of these two topics and share your work! Whether you upload one or one hundred, these images will help capture the culture of our state and illustrate Wikimedia projects. Have fun, and happy holiday season! ''You are receiving this because you are listed as an active member of WikiProject Oregon or WikiProject Washington. This message was delivered on behalf of Meetup/Portland by EdwardsBot (talk) 19:41, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

December 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=586002223 your edit] to Ghouta chemical attack may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:22, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * sep/16/un-inspectors-submit-syria-chemical-weapons-report-live] The Guardian, 16 September 2013 and analysed footage of the putative launchers inside government territory.<ref name=

Syrian civil war
Hey some guy added a section onto the Syrian Civil War page called "shelling of peaceful quarters", where he uses a bunch of Russian sources to say that "opposition terrorists" are always the ones shelling peaceful neighborhoods according to residents. Its really undue and POV pushing, can you remove it? I would my self but I am topic banned until the 18th Sopher99 (talk) 19:37, 14 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree with you and I've reverted to the last version by FutureTrillionaire, but you should know for future reference that asking editors to do things for you while you're blocked or topic-banned is generally seen as an effort to circumvent the block or topic ban, and it can get you in pretty serious trouble. For the record, I'm not doing this on your behalf, but because these edits are clearly not up to Wikipedia standards. -Kudzu1 (talk) 20:51, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

answer, response you absolutely all the sources are removed, how can you prove that they are not respected? you say that I wrote is not neutral, I can file a complaint and your approval will be impeached, you didn't even look at the discussion page of the article, now there is 5 points (chapters) of the shooting forces Assad and there is no one about shooting the opposition, because you deleted my edits. and by the way I use sources not only in a different language but in EnglishRqasd (talk) 02:14, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I strongly reiterate, used documentaries say journalists, representatives of a very large mass-media, and moreover these words confirmed videos. besides these sources are in English. how can you argue about credibility.

I may be incorrectly translated text in its editing? or can I remove all sources in English from Russian wiki? well I'll straighten my editing (translation), but your personal opinion about credibility of the company's mass media is negligible unless you have a *Authoritative sources* about not their credibility. --Rqasd (talk) 02:21, 15 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm trying to figure out what you're saying, and it's not easy, but as to the reliability of your sources, YouTube videos don't typically qualify and Itar-TASS is a state-run propaganda outlet. -Kudzu1 (talk) 03:01, 15 December 2013 (UTC)


 * well. I improved translation and I improved wiki encoding. however, in the future, you as an experienced user, it is better to look sources, previously delete all at once, just because someone you asked. used my sources is a documentary sources, they are now the majority) quality of the translation, there are translations to other languages. in addition the sources of no less respected around the world than CNN-TV/The Wall Street Journal newspaper. in addition I have fixed and improved the discussion page.Rqasd (talk) 04:40, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

-Itar-TASS.....maybe, but this does not mean that they are lying. similarly, if the Secretary of state of the USA that says it doesn't mean that it's a lie just because propaganda.

-and Yes it is true I had just write, mass-media (1,2,3,4) report.... - I wrote on the talk page about what YouTube used as a free source to copy has the same video on the official websites. Rqasd (talk) 04:56, 15 December 2013 (UTC) http://www.mvestnik.ru/shwpgn.asp?pid=2013121332
 * just like the argument about the reliability, you can just use a machine translation, and viewing the page to see the very strong opinion about not of vacancy selection in the mass media. literally - the Norwegian mass-media fully in every detail, increase the role of 1 parties and reduce the role of the 2 parties.
 * this opinion on the page cannot be disproved, because that is the statistics of the Norwegian mass - media. they really do always (on *this* topic). similarly, I used sources (not in words as in the BBC), and the frames where you can see what is said rather than what it shows and how it commented. this documentaries that I used. and not so bad that it turned out that the Syrian opposition is *all* bastards. what, on yesterday like the one shown them only good. Rqasd (talk) 07:14, 15 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, but I honestly have no idea what you're talking about. My position stands that the sources you inserted aren't reliable or verifiable, the tone wasn't remotely encyclopedic, and you need to have a consensus from involved editors to add that content. Take it to Talk:Syrian Civil War, please. -Kudzu1 (talk) 08:39, 15 December 2013 (UTC)


 * edit warring? so you're saying that those sources that I use are not authoritative. well, but get the source to what you are saying. I want to you personally consider these sources bad. while this was said, why so? because my sources are very large mass media operating in the news for decades, and all over the world.Rqasd (talk) 04:56, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * look (my answer + the bottom (at the end) new variant of the edits: **mortars**).and Yes, I wrote in Russian about 30%, articles about Syria (civil war) and more than 50% of the article about Syria (war crimes). Me there are no claims, only the discussion and editing of edits, but not cancel deleting edits.
 * There are many fixes: in English and of the official English language sources.Rqasd (talk) 05:40, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * If ITAR-TASS is a state-run propoganda outlet, then lets forbid the BBC as being a state-tun propoganda actively promoting the case for war? Are we forgetting something.? Sorry thats POV.(Lihaas (talk) 22:37, 16 December 2013 (UTC)).


 * BBC News is editorially independent of the British government, not infrequently running pieces that portray senior British officials in a negative light, etc. The same cannot be said for Itar-TASS or indeed any Kremlin-controlled media outlet. Freedom of the press effectively doesn't exist in Russia. This discussion has been had many times on the reliable sources noticeboard. -Kudzu1 (talk) 23:05, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Really? Toeing the government line FRAUDULENTLY is not independent. At thats proves. conversely for the other yours is hearsay
 * Clearly you have presumed ist is effectively non existant, and that it is exists in the other case(Lihaas (talk) 22:18, 17 December 2013 (UTC)).

look. I've done according to the rules (the media *media* say *information* + source. I pointed you to some sources, with the transfer of, or video + text from this video. formally, should be all right. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Syrian_Civil_War#the_neutrality_of_the_article.27s_content_according_to_the_rules_for_writing_articles

Rqasd (talk) 16:26, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * BBC News ? they are 100 times alluded to George Bush? no. only zero times. can they spoke English soldiers kill and rape Iraqis? no. only zero times. can they say that in urban neighbourhoods in England there are areas where there is no police but there are posters *this territory is controlled by Islam*. no. only 1 (2) times


 * Talk page stalker here. most of what you say is incomprehensible, but making demonstrably false statements weakens your case, not strengthens it. I saw your edits to Syrian Civil War, and there were terrible. If Kudzu hadn't reverted them, someone else would have (and did once you started edit warring). This is not a web forum, we have standards for sourcing that you are not going to be allowed to bluster your way around. If you seriously believe that BBC is not a reliable news source, then feel free to take it to the reliable sources noticeboard and see what happens. VQuakr (talk) 02:03, 18 December 2013 (UTC)


 * similarly, no one can say that the BBC is false = ITAR-TASS that is a lie. if you do not have a source that *ITAR-TASS that is a lie*. why you war edits against ITAR-TASS ?? it's not right (your cancellation ITAR-TASS).Rqasd (talk) 11:21, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited New Zealand–United States relations, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anglophone (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) 17:03, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

2014 Crimean crisis revert edition
Dear Kudzu1. Before make reverting of my edition just try to look in the source i talked about. There are no info "Russia declared that its troops would stay". If you feel that you can cancel my edit, so edit this sentence to right form, to be real neutral according to WP:POV. --Melee (talk) 06:24, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is "Sevastopol". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! --Guy Macon (talk) 02:20, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1140 Crimea, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page European (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) 08:51, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1000, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Norse (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) 08:56, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Egypt coup détat
Hi, Can you stop giving sh**t to people by providing false information on the article? I wish you understand 111.235.66.34 (talk) 07:20, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

April 2014
Hello, I'm LiphradicusEpicus. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Incorporation of Crimea into the Russian Federation without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. ''Hello! I noticed your recent deletion of 18 reliable, needed sources. You are pushing Russian PoV and will be reported to administration if you fail to heed this warning. I will not accept someone continually vandalizing a page so that a biased point-of-view can be displayed. Thank you. Goodbye.''  მაLiphradicus    Epicusთე   20:29, 6 April 2014 (UTC)


 * I find your lack of assuming good faith disturbing. -Kudzu1 (talk) 20:40, 6 April 2014 (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. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you.  მაLiphradicus    Epicusთე   20:47, 6 April 2014 (UTC)