User talk:KHMELNYTSKYIA

You have very nice English. No worries.

Ukraine is the only country that does not recognise the Carpatho-Rusyns as a separate nation, and, is such, not accurate to site biased Ukrainian sources that you do, even when Vasil Strenk's Petition of Citizenship itself states that he is Carpatho-Rusyn. I will kindly ask you to stop going around to Michael Strank and other various Carpatho-Rusyn Wikipedia pages and vandalising them. Please give the Carpatho-Rusyn nation the same respect they give the Ukrainian nation for their want and being of cultural, linguistical, and politcal independence from the Russian nation. Thank you, have a nice day, and слава Україні.

Crude edit summary?

Hello, KHMELNYTSKYIA. Could you please explain what you meant by this edit summary. While I understand that English is not your first language, and that it may not have been your intention to be so crude in this edit summary, I find it a little difficult to understand how you could use such language so erroneously. What is it that you were trying to tell them? In all honesty, it reads as a personal attack against the editor you reverted and is unacceptable. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:49, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Page Move Discussion

There is a Page move discussion going on for Rajneesh. Would you be interested in participating? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Rajneesh#Requested_move_11_June_2018 Accesscrawl (talk) 08:26, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely. I am actively working primarily on Ukrainian topics.--KHMELNYTSKYIA (talk) 08:31, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DS alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have recently shown interest in Eastern Europe. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect: any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or any page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

--Ymblanter (talk) 10:19, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dobrovskii

I reverted you because Dobrovskii was not a UPA solder before he had been captured by Germans. Your edit breaks a chronology of events and implies that he was both red Army and UPA solder, and then he was captured. You also have to keep it mind that there is no agreement about his participation in UPA. I would say, only some Ukrainian sources say that, other sources disagree. therefore, this statement does not belong to the lead.--Paul Siebert (talk) 19:03, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

One more comment (a general one). Please, keep in mind that Ukrainian authors writing about Ukraine (as well as Russian authors writing about Russia) should not be trusted, unless they are being widely cited in the West (not criticized). Thus, Viatrovich has virtually no publications in the Western journals, he is not cited, and he should not be considered as a reliable source. If you want to be neutral, please, rely upon Western sources on on the Ukrainian authors recognised in the West. Of course, that is important when we a writing about sensitive and politicized issues, such as country's history. --Paul Siebert (talk) 19:50, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vladimir Borovikovsky

As I wrote in my edit summary Ukraine didn't exist during Borovikovsky's time, making your link (" ... painter of [[Ukraine|Ukrainian]] origin") blatant POV. And even linking to Ukrainians would have been wrong, since the endonym used then was still Ruthenians. So do not make edits like that. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 16:09, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24h for edit-warring, POV pushing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. User:Ymblanter (talk) 00:08, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We had enough warnings, time for blocks has come--Ymblanter (talk) 16:12, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas.W I find your edits weird. First of all, Encyclopædia Britannica considers Vladimir Borovikovsky as Russian artist of Ukrainian background. Borovikovsky lived in Ukraine until he was 31 years old. The Tretyakov Gallery, Moscow (even a Russian source) writes about his father as a Ukrainian. Susan Jaques in own book also describes him as Ukrainian portraitist. So, Ukrainian origin is indisputable.--KHMELNYTSKYIA (talk) 16:48, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ukraine didn't exist during Borovikovsky's lifetime, so he couldn't possibly have been from that country, as the link in your edits claimed, and the people who became Ukrainians saw themselves as Ruthenians back then, and we don't change that retroactively. I have also reverted your undiscussed POV move of "Adam Kisiel" to "Adam Kysil", since the only naming discussion on the talk page, from 2015, was against moving the article. Moves like that could easily get you blocked again, if you do more of them... - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 16:56, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas.W He was born in Cossack Hetmanate, Ukrainian autonomy state, which existed from 1648 to 1782. I don't see sources that call him as Rusyn (Ruthenian). Russians called themselves "Velikorossy" at the time, but that doesn't change anything.--KHMELNYTSKYIA (talk) 17:07, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The formal name was the "Zaporizhian Host", and it was a semi-autonomous state that most definitely wasn't a "Ukrainian autonomous state", since the Ukraine didn't exist, instead it, during its short existence, in whole or in part was a subordinate to (as a province, a vassal state, or "under the protection of") the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Ottoman Empire and/or the Tsardom of Russia. So why did you claim he was Ukrainian, and link that to the modern country of Ukraine? - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 17:29, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I use that definition that uses Encyclopædia Britannica. My or your original research doesn't matter. According to Paul Robert Magocsi, there was Ukrainian autonomy (book, p. 277) within Russian Empire.--KHMELNYTSKYIA (talk) 17:54, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not under the name "Ukraine" (most of modern Ukraine was part of the Kiev Governorate, the Southwestern Krai etc, and the name Ukraine was, AFAIK, not officially used until 1918...), and the link should most definitely not point to the modern-day country of Ukraine... - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 18:43, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. It is necessary to note about Ukrainian origin without any references to name "Ukraine".--KHMELNYTSKYIA (talk) 18:53, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas.W Michelangelo, Caravaggio, Masaccio, Benozzo Gozzoli not Italian painters, Italy did not exist. And I didn't know. Thank you very much. :)--Zubryckiy (talk) 22:51, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AE request

I submitted the arbitration enforcement request, as promised: Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#KHMELNYTSKYIA--Ymblanter (talk) 09:53, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction

The following sanction now applies to you:

KHMELNYTSKYIA is topic banned from Ukraine, broadly construed

You have been sanctioned per this Arbitration Enforcement request

This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Eastern Europe#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:27, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

October 2019

To enforce an arbitration decision and for topic ban violations on the page Dmitry Bortniansky, you have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:18, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

ANI topic

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Topic ban violation by KHMELNYTSKYIA, though you will probably be blocked before you have a chance to explain yourself there.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:38, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

October 2019

To enforce an arbitration decision you have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page. – bradv🍁 19:46, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Khmenlytsyia, Just writing to you about the Cossacks English wikipedia page. I have attempted to make corroborated edits in which the origins of the Cossacks are stated as being formed within the contemproary boundaries of Ukraine. As well as this I have provided numerous citations by esteemed, well respected authors, academics, historians describing the Zaporizhian Cosscks as Ukrainian. Yet, unfortunately there are some on the page that are intent on removing, mitigating and undermining any Ukrainian claim to Cossackdom. This has ranged from reverting edits of the origins of the Cossacks to simply wiping general information under the Zaporizhian Cossacks as it doesnt fit the agenda or mentions Ukraine. Irionically, the Kuban Cossacks who were forcefully deported from Ukraine, who were linguistically Ukrainian, and who initiated attempts to unite with Ukraine in the 20th century have been deemed "Russian Cossacks" yet strangely this doesnt seem to bother those who have a problem with my edits. Likewise the Don Cossacks who refuted a Russian identity, instead saw themselves as a seperate sub-ethnos and even fought the tsar are also deemed "Russian Cossacks" and placed at the top of the section. As Kuban Cossacks are undoubtedly far more Ukrainian than they are Russian and the Siberian Cossacks, Yaik and Eastern Cosscka are far more Tatar/Mongolic than Russian, the page would obviously be following the formula of modern state boundaires, whereby whatever hosts were formed in what is now Russia are now deemed Russian Cossacks. Upon attempting to do the same with Zaporizhian Cosasacks the revert was swifly undone, very clear was it going on. Would be great if you could review the corroborated edits I have attempted to make in the past as well as the ongoing discussion on the talk page. Would grealy appreicate any support and look further to further collaboration on Wikipedia.DanielLerish (talk) 11:23, 10 February 2020 (UTC)DanielLerish[reply]

ANI notifiction

Here we go again: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#KHMELNYTSKYIA and topic ban violation--Ymblanter (talk) 12:22, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As you have demonstrated a complete refusal to abide by your topic ban, I have now blocked you indefinitely. WP:GAB explains how to contest this block. You'll need to account for your chronic violations of your ban, though. --Yamla (talk) 13:33, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]