User talk:Let's keep it neutral/archive 1

Welcome!
Hello, Let&#39;s keep it neutral, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful: Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome! BracketBot (talk) 11:15, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

Moves
Hello, it is really simple to set up a Requested Move, just copy and past the box below onto the relevant talk page and a Bot will do all the rest:

NewName

Kind regards IJA (talk) 16:40, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Recent edit to Peć
Hello, and thank you for your recent contribution. I appreciate the effort you made for our project, but unfortunately I had to undo your edit because I believe the article was better before you made that change. The name of the article is Pec. I see on the talk page that there was a brief discussion to move the page. Why don't you be BOLD and move the page to Peje. If you do, revert my revision first. The article would also need more clean-up to reflect the name change. Feel free to contact me directly if you have any questions. Thank you! Onel5969 (talk) 12:21, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I requested a move many months ago and nobody challenged it, why hasn't it been moved yet? I demonstarted that the sources no longer prefer the Serbian name Pec and that the locals consider it an insult. So I cannot see why it was changed back to the Serbian name. Let&#39;s keep it neutral (talk) 12:23, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

December 2014
You are suspected of sock puppetry, 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/Lindi29. Thank you. Vanjagenije (talk) 12:32, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
 * @Vanjagenije. Your imagination didn't get you very far did it! --Let&#39;s keep it neutral (talk) 10:01, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Haha, it wasn't me who accused you of socpuppetry. It was . I just left you a message to let you know. Vanjagenije (talk) 10:25, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, you or Anastan, didn't get very far. It has long expired so I don't have to defend myself on the accusation. --Let&#39;s keep it neutral (talk) 10:28, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
 * You lied. You were/are a sockpuppet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.169.37.15 (talk) 21:32, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes but the bottom line is that I am not banned and that I am fully reformed from the previous disruption I caused everyone. Sinbad Barron (talk) 14:24, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Notice
Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:25, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

I also remind you that Kosovo is under a strictly enforced 1-revert restriction, which you have just broken. I recommend you self-revert before somebody gets around to blocking you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:30, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Done. --Let&#39;s keep it neutral (talk) 13:30, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Recent problematic editing
Hi

You can't just go on erasing sourced properly written parts, just because you disagree with what has been said.

For example, the deletion of criticism against Tim Judah and Noel Malcolm which you did. Wikipedia articles are subject to NPOV principles, they can include both positive and negative criticism from notable people and organizations.

There are other problematic edits in your recent history as well, such as the deletion of text that clarifies the contested status of Kosovo (which is the actual situation today) here and here. And then there's this entry, which was originally added by a random IP user and isn't reflected in the source.

I hope that you can understand how this isn't a constructive way of editing at all. - Anonimski (talk) 13:06, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
 * On this occasion, although I consider there have been considerable attempts to give undue weight to criticism of particular authors, Anonmski is correct on this occasion. The source is RS. Whether the continued inclusion of only negative reviews is WP:UNDUE is a separate matter. I think I might bring them both up to GA with the full range of positive and negative reviews of their books, that may help to re-balance the articles, and dissuade the POV warriors on both sides. Also, be careful with these articles, they are covered by ARBMAC, and you will quickly get burned if you continue in this vein. Regards, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 13:48, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay okay we'll discuss. --Let&#39;s keep it neutral (talk) 13:49, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

One more thing, can you have a look at my post about one of your edits? Link: Talk:Propaganda_during_the_Yugoslav_Wars. - Anonimski (talk) 15:46, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Serbia#Albania borders Serbia
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Serbia. Thanks. Vanjagenije (talk) 16:00, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Waste of time when you & co have made up your minds that Kosovo will continue to be treated as a place in Serbia just like Belgrade. --Let&#39;s keep it neutral (talk) 13:39, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

RE: My attempt to return

 * A short topic ban? How about an indefinite topic ban, as the above linked WP:SPI suggests that things will end badly if you start editing those topics again.OhNo itsJamie Talk 14:42, 14 August 2015 (UTC)


 * I understand it's been a long time, I understand that the standard offer has been extended to you and that you've waited the six months as you've been told to. Therefore, I will unblock you without any further issue if you agree to abide by the following ban:  is indefinitely topic banned from making any edit about, and from editing any page relating to the Balkans, broadly construed. If and when the community can trust you to edit in that area, the ban may be rescinded upon review at WP:AE. S warm   ♠  03:45, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Having given your proposal due consideration, I have decided to accept the terms of the unblock by avoiding any edits on Balkan articles, and not mentioning the subject on other articles, and not talking about the Balkans to other editors, and giving no hints as to my ideas for how the articles should be. Obviously Kosovo and Albania current affairs and history are the area that I am most knowledgable and where I have I read the most. In time ofcourse I will be asking for the topic ban to be reviewed but for now I would like to demonstrate my good faith and good ability by editing on non-Balkan subjects. Thankyou Swarm. Let&#39;s keep it neutral (talk) 12:46, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Cool. Happy to hear it! I think you've made a good choice. I will unblock you right now, and let me be the first to welcome you back! S warm   ♠  21:11, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Talkback
S warm  ♠  18:01, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Costume in Gjakova


The article Costume in Gjakova has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * This article is a copy-paste from Culture of Gjakova. It was created in October 2014, while the original edit was made in March 2014.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on |the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Z oupan 07:33, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Sand kicked
Any reason you couldn't take it with me first? It was a content fork. Btw, what was the political motive behind the deletion, please explain?--Z oupan 10:47, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I have to be careful what I discuss with who. I am topic banned. Now my home page claims I created a nonexistent page so I have to edit it. Sinbad Barron (talk) 10:51, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Why, are you monitored? It's not a big deal, you could just edit it to "Culture of Gjakova". You might want to add that your previous account was so you are properly credited.--Z oupan  11:38, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Sinbad Barron
Admitted.--Z oupan 12:39, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * But Zoupan what does it take to get it through to you people that I am not hiding this??? I am proud of that account and the others I created. They were never truly understood properly that there is good faith in me as an editor, always was. I want to show that I obey concensus and that I can edit maturely but I cannot do this is the place have my strongest knowledge. Sinbad Barron (talk) 12:49, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * As you already were offered the Standard offer, and was unblocked on the premise that Let's keep it neutral is indefinitely topic banned from making any edit about, and from editing any page relating to the Balkans, broadly construed. This means, as you already know, that all of this past disruptive behaviour has to stop. Continue editing non-Balkans articles, perhaps create or edit articles to GA-status? You must have some other interest you would pursue on WP? In time, you could request a lift to your topic ban.--Z oupan 13:16, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thankyou but I do know the conditions. Sinbad Barron (talk) 13:33, 29 February 2016 (UTC)