Espor

Espor, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Espor! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Please join other people who edit Wikipedia at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space on Wikipedia where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. We hope to see you there! Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your friendly neighborhood HostBot (talk) 04:33, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

In response to your feedback

The section is under active political propaganda.If Wiki adminsitration won't change it then should be better leave only sport, movie, music and natural science section.

Ancient (talk) 16:30, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

 

Edit war

What you are doing is a demonstration of disruptive editing. I seriously suggest you to use the talk page if you have any arguments in favour of your edits, and it is highly advisable to respond to this recommendation. - ☣Tourbillon ^A ? 12:06, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

3RR

Your recent editing history at Bulgaria shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—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—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Canterbury Tail talk 12:53, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Personal attacks

With regards to this edit. Hello, I'm Canterbury Tail. I noticed that you made a comment that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia needs people like you and me to collaborate, so it’s one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Canterbury Tail talk 15:49, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 16:24, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Bulgaria Infobox dispute

Hi Espor,

T0 give you a brief history, I've submitted Request for Mediation, which of course Tourbillion didn't want to join, recently I've submitted a note to the DRN and again the other side ignored it. So, he/she is not really interested in this being resolved, as he/she realizes he has no reputable sources to present, just his/her opinion.

Their tactic is to involve you in an endless discussion on the talk page, without presenting any reputable sources. It is a mistake however to engage in edit war, as edit war results in the page being blocked and a block placed on the users who edit war. So, keep calm and rest assured this incorrect info will not remain. It is just such a gross misrepresentation of reality that there are enough editors who will revert it. Keep in mind 3 reverts will result in a warning and a 4th in you being blocked. Ximhua (talk) 18:54, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Espor,

You almost got me worried there with the suggestion to remove the historical text in the article, you were joking right? Ximhua (talk) 02:03, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ximhua,

I wanted to expose the true intentions of Turbalan. Of course I do not want to delete the history section. This is going nowhere, did you see the sources of Turbalan which supposedly support his version??? He uses a folklore dance book to prove that Bulgaria was founded in 1878! Moreover all of the links he gives, if you read a little further you will find the date 681 as well. So he quotes whatever he needs and skips everything else, lol. So far his only argument is that the Third Bulgarian state is a distinct entity from the previous empires. And he doesn't blink even when we expose his gross hypocrisy-Germany, Iran, Serbia, Chech Republic, etc, for all them you can make similar arguments but he doesn't care. He only wants to deprive Bulgaria from its founding year. Espor (talk) 11:10, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Espor, Yup, that is his desire. He has no sources, and is is quite funny to even argue that 681, 632, 1185 are not related to Bulgaria in principle. It is sad, that Wikipedia doesn't have an editorial board with expert historians, as this would've been quite an easy thing to put to bed. Oh well, the more active knowledgeable editors contributing, the better. Ximhua (talk) 15:08, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Personal attacks and accusations against other editors

Concerning this edit. I have already warned you not to make personal attacks against other users, and now you are going around on Wikipedia calling him a liar. This is your final warning. Please stop concentrating on other editors and concentrate instead on improving articles and taking part in constructive conversation. Trying to go behind other editors backs to ask that they are banned, and outright calling them liars is not what Wikipedia is for and will be met with a permanent block from the project if you continue. I understand you are frustrated with the Bulgaria article, but this approach isn't how you resolve issues on Wikipedia. Please note that every editor on Wikipedia, apart from Administrators (incidentally Tourbillon isn't an Administrator on the English language Wikipedia) is blocked from editing the Bulgaria article at the moment, not just yourself. Canterbury Tail talk 23:31, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Reported

You have been reported at the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard. See WP:AE#Espor. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:54, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for disruptive editing, particularly for attacking your opponents in a content dispute. 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 appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Note to any reviewing admins: I have not invoked AE rules in this case because no warning expressly mentioning discretionary sanctions had been given. But I urge you to read the AE report leading to the block before making any unblock decisions. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 14:35, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Warning: Discretionary sanctions for all Balkans-related articles

File:Yes

The Arbitration Committee has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions (information on which is at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions) on any editor who is active on pages broadly related to the Balkans. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, satisfy any standard of behavior, or follow any normal editorial process. If you continue to misconduct yourself on pages relating to this topic, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or an article ban. The Committee's full decision can be read at the "Final decision" section of the decision page.

Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions, with the appropriate sections of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures, and with the case decision page before making any further edits to the pages in question. This notice is given by an uninvolved administrator and will be logged on the case decision, pursuant to the conditions of the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions system.

I have not placed your current block under discretionary sanctions since you had not been expressly warned about them, but know that any future misbehaviour in this topic will likely result in blocks under the sanctions, which are particularly difficult to overturn. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 14:43, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Espor, Tourbillion is planning to impose his POV on the dates again, we have to remain vigilant. I'll be checking this daily in perpetuity. Please, do the same. Ximhua (talk) 14:40, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Banning attempt

Hi Espor,

Just wanted to let you know that there is an attempt to ban me, initiated by Fut. Perf.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Statement_by_Ximhua

Ximhua (talk) 01:45, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

September 2012

Welcome to Wikpedia! Although everyone is welcomed here, please, do not remove reliable sources or information from articles, as you did to Bulgars. Your edits appear to be unconstructive and have been reverted or removed. If you believe the information you removed was incorrect, please cite reliable references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 16:32, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Well that is precisely what I did, I updated the information and presented reliable sources in the bibliography. Didn't you see them. Anyway, I started a discussion on the talk page. Espor (talk) 20:43, 14 September 2012 (UTC)