Branflakes452701

July 2017

Please do not add or change content, as you did at United Russia, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:41, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Communist Party of the Russian Federation. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:42, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Republican Bicentennial Vanguard. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:43, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Russian presidential election, 2018

Please stop adding Putin to the infobox until his candidacy is confirmed. You have been reverted several times already, so if you do it again, I'm afraid I will be blocking your account from editing. Thanks, Number 57 14:25, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Also, please stop adding unreferenced political positions and ideologies to articles. Thanks, Number 57 16:17, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Next time you add an unsourced ideology or position to a political party article, you will be blocked. You have had enough warnings. Number 57 18:51, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

July 2017

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Communist Party of the Russian Federation. Mélencron (talk) 17:20, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 36 hours for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:12, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Mz7 (talk) 21:09, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

• Your changes to the "ideologies" of parties are problematic because you do not cite reliable sources when you update them. Before you edit again, please read Help:Referencing for beginners, which is a guide that shows you how to cite sources. Since you have continued to make the same kind of edits that led to your first block without stopping to change your behavior, you have been blocked again. When the block expires, if you continue to make unsourced changes, your next block will be longer. You've said before that you use the parties' official websites to verify your claims. However, you need to cite the exact URL of a page that explicitly confirms that the party claims itself to fall under a particular ideology.
  Oftentimes, the sources will not explicitly say that it is under a particular ideology, but we as Wikipedia editors may believe or conclude that it is due to its activities and its other statements – unfortunately, this falls contrary to Wikipedia's no original research policy. We must rely on sources that explicitly make a conclusion. It is inappropriate for an encyclopedia to synthesize sources and create a conclusion of its own. For a recent example, although the Communist Party of the Russian Federation makes statements that promote Stalin's rule, you haven't cited a source that explicitly confirms that either itself or reliable observers have stated that it falls under "Stalinism" as an ideology. You need to cite such a source. Failure to do so is a great way for the encyclopedia to become less verifiable and lead to errors over time. Mz7 (talk) 21:24, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Worker's Party of Korea. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:52, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Citing Wikipedia

Please don't cite Wikipedia articles as sources; per WP:CIRCULAR, "[c]ontent from a Wikipedia article is not considered reliable unless it is backed up by citing reliable sources" – the latter link is also worth a glance. Mélencron (talk) 21:53, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Please read what I linked. You shouldn't cite other Wikipedia articles as sources or use Google to find a source words "communism", "capitalism", and "Russia" in the same sentence without mentioning anything related to the party. Mélencron (talk) 01:50, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

July 2017

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Russian Party of Pensioners for Justice. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Revolvy.com is not a reliable source. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:31, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at A Just Russia. Please don't add anything else until you understand WP:RS. I know you want to help but you're not helping by doing this. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:49, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for persistently making disruptive edits, particularly with regards to adding unsourced material. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:46, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

October 2017

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  TonyBallioni (talk) 13:27, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

If you make an unblock request, I will copy it to WP:AN as this will need wider discussion. You will need to explain why you socked, why you are stopping and make commitments as to your future behaviour. Aside from the socking, you also repeatedly engaged in edit warring, so I would suggest you voluntarily commit to 0RR (i.e. you are not allowed to revert other editors and you have to take any disagreement to talk). This would give an indication that you are serious about reforming. Number 57 22:11, 16 June 2020 (UTC)