User talk:QuaestorGaius

August 2019
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like you to assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not do on User talk:Favonian. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 16:15, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Παλάτι του Πορφυρογέννητου


Hello, QuaestorGaius. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Παλάτι του Πορφυρογέννητου".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:17, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

March 2021
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

Specifically WP:MILMOS, we don't use "Decisive" in infoboxes. FDW777 (talk) 15:22, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Discussion Recreate Greece
Howdy - I noticed that some of your changes within the Recreate Greece article are unconstructive and might result in suspensions due to Vandalism. Can you have a look at the discussion page of the article to explain your edits? Thank you.

I would say that your changes are totally unconstructive and could as well be considered distortion of sources which are heavily biased and untrustworthy to begin with. QuaestorGaius (talk) 15:08, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

I just cited five more external sources in English - mostly reports and journal articles that explain the ideological position of the party. You can't keep undoing this without explaining why they are biased. Mightberightorwrong (talk) 15:10, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

You just cited NGO reports that claim everyone slightly on the right of the far left as being far-right. There is no credibility in those reports. Plus if one of those mentions simply a the name of a party leader that simply cannot be used to characterize the party as a whole. That’s the definitipn of source falsification. QuaestorGaius (talk) 15:12, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

You have erased six sources for being distorted? That's preposterous. Sorry, but I will report you for vandalism. Mightberightorwrong (talk) 15:19, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

You purposefully violated wki policy on neutrality by using heavy political accusations at the very beginning of the article as well as using sources that did not mention the party at all. No wonder most of them are found behind paywalls. Provide specific quotations that back the claims concerning the party itself and then we may see who is the vandal. QuaestorGaius (talk) 15:26, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

June 2021
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose their editing privileges on that page. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 15:39, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 15:41, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on others again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people.  Acroterion   (talk)   17:38, 27 June 2021 (UTC)