User talk:Sevt V

Welcome!
Hello, Sevt V, 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:
 * 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

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia.

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 to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!

Reference errors on 20 June
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:28, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
 * On the History of Istanbul page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=667832378 your edit] caused a broken reference name (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F667832378%7CHistory of Istanbul%5D%5D Ask for help])

Lygos
As I understand it, you shouldn't overwrite a disambiguation page by an article (unless you can establish a consensus that there shouldn't be a disambiguation page for the given term, which in this case I, for one, don't accept). A better approach is: This preserves both the disambiguation page itself and its history as a disambiguation page. Anyway, I've carried out these steps so all should now be as it should be. Peter coxhead (talk) 16:24, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Move the disambiguation page to a new title – here the obvious title is Lygos (disambiguation)
 * 2) Now that "Lygos" is not occupied by a disambiguation page, convert it to an article.

Lygos
Hallo Sevt I changed where I could the name Ligos in Lygos. In fact, in the primary and secundary sources (Pliny, Janin) this is the name of the settlement (and phonetically a "y" is not a "i"). You should also move the main article. "Ligos" is WP:OR. Bye Alex2006 (talk) 04:37, 26 June 2015 (UTC)


 * I found it here said to be Ligos with I: https://books.google.com/books?id=KFCqBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA377&dq=founded+istanbul+lygos&hl=en&sa=X&ei=jKyGVdbABKbIyAPvm4LYAw&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=founded%20istanbul%20lygos&f=false
 * This is not a reliable source (and this citation is another proof of it). Read Pliny the Elder, the one who cited it. Alex2006 (talk) 16:35, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

August 2015
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Names of Istanbul. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. 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 engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 19:25, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Constantinople. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, 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 editing privileges. 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 lead to a loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 19:26, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Please discuss at Instanbul
The edit on Constantinople that I added is identical to the one done by to Istanbul. Check this diff of FPaS's edit. Istanbul is an FA article and what is written there also goes for Constantinople. If you have any questions you can take them up on Istanbul's talkpage instead of edit-warring on its satellite articles. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 19:46, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

OK.Sevt V (talk) 19:47, 21 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 19:54, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * You are welcome--Sevt V (talk) 20:06, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Stop
Your behavior at List of oldest continuously inhabited cities is completely unacceptable. Many of the entries are sourced, and you are just removing them out of WP:IDONTLIKEIT. For those that are unsourced, the proper thing to do would be to add a cn tag, not wholesale removal. Stop, or you will be blocked. Athenean (talk) 03:01, 7 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Why somebody should stop removing original research? You are not an administrator and may get yourself blocked for that threat if I report it. Check the few sources. None of the cities is sourced. There are sources for three cities, but one lacks page. The other source about Plovdiv says the following: "When did the earliest inhabitants settle? 4,000 BC ." And that's it, no source describes continuous habitation, which is the subject of the article and is completely different. Well there may be two sourced cities in the whole table without links, I am leaving them because I cannot check them. I am removing the big unsourced part. Do not add cities without providing sources, such senseless war would be childish, would it? Sevt V (talk) 03:16, 7 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Again, if you feel something is original research, you should add a cn tag. That's what they're for.  That way other users can see that a citation is needed and might add one.  If you just remove everything, how are other users supposed to know what is missing?  And not everything is unsourced.  Argos and Athens are impeccably sourced.  Athens might not have a page number given, but that is not a reason for removal.  Plovidv is also solidly sourced. You just didn't read the source properly. And I added sources for some of the others, and will keep adding them as time goes by.  And if you feel you should report me, please do. You might not like the result though. Athenean (talk) 03:30, 7 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I noticed you made sure you removed all the Greek cities, even though most of them are sourced. This makes me think you are motivated by nationalism.  If that is not the case, I ask you re-add them.  If not, I will report you.  Your choice. Athenean (talk) 03:33, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia content must be verified. In which source does it say the date of continuous habitation of Argos, because I can't check it? Is it really so hard to find verifiable sources for Athens and Argos and add them verified? I suggest that's easy. Please, do that!Sevt V (talk) 03:37, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
 * You ask me to re-add original research or otherwise to report me for nationalism? Man, that is weird and strange... I can't leave the cities you are claiming that are sourced, because they are not. And that would be clear for my report and my removal would be justified.
 * I have found sources claiming 5000 years of continuous habitation of Athens, but I am afraid to add them, because you may accuse me of underestimating. So, you find if you can and add them. There are many sources, but they have not been cited to the article.Sevt V (talk) 03:45, 7 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Are you kidding me? The sources are LISTED in the article. Argos, Thebes , Chania .  The source for Athens is not viewable online but that is not a reason for removal, see WP:V.  You should accept it on good faith.  I'm going to give you one last chance to revert youself, and if you don't, the next time you will hear from me is when I report you.  By the way where are you from?  Just curious. Athenean (talk) 03:43, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry, that was a misunderstanding.Sevt V (talk) 03:47, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Athenean (talk) 03:50, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Argos is completely sourced, which I didn't notice. The pages you provided don't state the date of continuous habitation of Thebes and Chania though, do they really?
 * Of course they do. Did you read them? Athenean (talk) 03:57, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks for reminding me of my mistake.Sevt V (talk) 04:03, 7 June 2016 (UTC)