User talk:OspreyPL

Welcome to Wikipedia
Mushroom (Talk) 15:41, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Kadencje
W infoboxie? Druga powinna sie zmiescic, dodaj w tej samej lini... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 21:09, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Moim zdaniem wyglada ok, ale badz lysy i ulepsz infobox jak mozesz :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 21:44, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

January 2012
I noticed that you have posted comments in a language other than English. When on the English-language Wikipedia, please always use English, no matter to whom you address your comments. This is so that comments may be comprehensible to the community at large. If the use of another language is unavoidable, please provide a translation of the comments. For more details, see Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. Thank you. Abhijay (☎ Talk) (✐ Deeds) 12:13, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Maciej Łopiński, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kontakt (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) 11:21, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Jerzy Żyżyński


The article Jerzy Żyżyński has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい ) 23:38, 16 July 2012 (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) 14:01, 24 November 2015 (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) 14:08, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

December 2020
Hello, I'm ThadeusOfNazereth. I noticed that you recently removed content from Crime in China without adequately 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; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page.   ThadeusOfNazerethTalk to Me! 23:41, 9 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Whoops, didn't see that you're an established editor or I wouldn't have templated you - I reverted your edit because you removed the criticism of the report, which looks like it would violate WP:NPOV. If you have an explanation, just let me know and feel free to redo your edit. ThadeusOfNazerethTalk to Me! 23:42, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Repeated unexplained deletion of content
Hi. I'm SiberianCat. I notice you have deleted part of the content from the page on Tommy_Suharto. Specifically, you deleted this text: "Tommy sought to appeal to nostalgia for his father's presidency,(ref redacted here) criticizing President Joko Widodo's infrastructure development policy, saying it had caused Indonesia's foreign debt to rise to $340 billion, compared to $54 billion when Suharto was president.(ref redacted here)" You have deleted this without any explanation and without addressing the matter on the article's Talk Page. Could you please offer a valid explanation for your deletion of the text? Thank you. SiberianCat (talk) 08:29, 18 March 2022 (UTC)


 * His views on President Jokowi presidency, climate change, Paris Hilton drinking habits or anything are irrelevant. Please stop this edit war. Otherwise I will have to contact one of administrators to block you. OspreyPL 12:33, 18 March 2022 (UTC) OspreyPL 12:33, 18 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi, thanks for your response. The content which you claim to be irrelevant is not the subject's views on the president. It is about the subject's effort to raise his own political popularity by appealing to nostalgia for the time of his father's rule, by means of criticizing the incumbent president. This has been documented by reputable media sources and is referenced in the text. I'd be grateful if you could please explain how you feel this irrelevant (without trying to tie it to a non sequitur such as Paris Hilton's drinking habits). Thank you. SiberianCat (talk) 14:58, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Saying that he tried to use nostalgia of good old times of his father rule to win an election would suffice. There is no need of explaining his personal views on infrastructure as he is a disgraced murdered and has not much influence. OspreyPL 15:17, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your prompt and civil reply. I do appreciate it. I notice another user has deleted the mention of nostalgia, claiming it comes from a non-neutral and unreliable source (a news article by Reuters) - and that you have therefore deleted the remaining part of the sentence. There are many reliable news sources about the subject's effort to appeal to nostalgia. I disagree that I am explaining the subject's personal views on infrastructure - what I did was give an example of his effort to appeal to nostalgia by criticizing the incumbent's spending (and debt level) on infrastructure. Merely stating that "he attempted to appeal to nostalgia" without providing any evidence or an example - diminishes the credibility of the information. I disagree that a politician's status as having been convicted of murder by proxy should render information about their political platform irrelevant. I also respectfully disagree that the subject "has not much influence". It takes considerable influence to have a jail term substantially reduced. There are also much more recent legal cases that indicate influence. Anyway, I'll move this discussion to the article's talk page. Again, thanks for your civility and explaining your view. SiberianCat (talk) 16:20, 18 March 2022 (UTC)


 * He has as much as of influence as a mafia boss can have. He can threaten and buy votes for sure. He only got 2%. His party is a fringe movement based purely on a little money he still has and nostalgia of illiterate population that votes for him. Writing down his views on Wikipedia is a bit too much in my opinion. He has no influence on policy of Indonesian state whatsoever. OspreyPL 16:34, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you again for a prompt and kind reply, and for explaining your feelings on this matter. I disagree that he has "little money". He is ranked number 56 on Forbes' 2021 list of the wealthiest Indonesians. I also think that describing his voters as "illiterate" is unfair, as Indonesia's illiteracy rate is 1.7% and those who voted for his party were not necessarily uneducated. I do understand your viewpoint that his views on politics should not be included on Wikipedia; however, I feel that neutrality is essential, so content should not be expunged merely because of any personal dislike of a subject. SiberianCat (talk) 16:59, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Your removal of 38 edits with the explanation "vandalism"
Could you please explain your revert of 38 edits. I provided an edit summary for each one. Each edit was done in good faith and in line with my understanding of wikipedia policy and conventions. Your single revert with the comment "revert Vandalism" is not appropriate. If it was done in error, that is fine - please just correct it, and no hard feelings. :) regards, --Merbabu (talk) 01:00, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

March 2022
Your recent editing history 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. JarrahTree 01:19, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

May 2024
Your recent editing history at Duolingo 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; read about 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. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 20:54, 1 May 2024 (UTC)


 * I have been on wikipedia more than 10 years, have editor rights on Polish one, but this will be my last edit. sorry, but that editor is just publishing bullshit. This is my last post / edit wikipedia as I see it's just place full of idiots. OspreyPL (talk) 21:19, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
 * That's up to you and I am sorry you wish to leave. The warning was to alert you that you had made 3 reverts within 24 hours and any more could have led to a block. I did have a check of your edit history before leaving the template as I would not generally use a template for established users. You only have 500 or so edits here, which is why I felt it necessary to alert you, but I was, of course, unaware of you experience elsewhere. Should you change your mind and wish to discuss the matter, the talk page is the place for it. Thanks. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 22:34, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I simply don't have time to argue with such people... OspreyPL (talk) 23:16, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Okay, if you don't have time to discuss a contested edit on the talk page, then yes, you don't have time for Wikipedia. I hope you can find your way back here when your life is less busy. Take care. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 06:50, 2 May 2024 (UTC)