User talk:Alaskapast

July 2023

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Dmitry Bortniansky, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. CurryTime7-24 (talk) 19:57, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for your message and for taking the time to review my edits. I understand that you've found my recent contributions to the Dmytro Bortniansky page to be non-constructive and have subsequently reverted them.

However, I respectfully disagree with this assessment. I believe my edits were made in good faith and added value to the article. Given that Bortniansky was born in the territory of modern Ukraine (though it was part of the Russian Empire at the time of his birth), it is correct to use the Ukrainian transliteration of his name, which was the intention of my edits. I would appreciate it if you could provide specific reasons or arguments as to why you found my contributions non-constructive. This will help me understand your perspective better and ensure that future edits align more closely with the guidelines.

I am familiar with the policies and guidelines, and my intention was not to make test edits but to enhance the information available on the page. I look forward to your response and further discussion on this matter on your talk page. Thank you. Alaskapast (talk) 21:26, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a look at WP:POV, WP:ADVOCACY, and WP:DE for more details. Whether an article subject was born in a territory that ultimately became an unrelated independent country does not necessarily mean they posthumously become a national of it. By your logic, G. W. F. Hegel is not German, but "Russian"; his correct birth name and corresponding transliteration "Гегель" and "Gegel" respectively. This is wrong.

Bortniansky was an important figure in the musical histories of both Russia and the Ukraine, which in the past were closely linked politically and culturally, in spite of contemporary rival nationalisms. Because of that, please seek consensus on his article talk page before attempting any major changes that diminish or augments one nation's connection to his legacy, especially if you seek to remove cited references without explanation, as you did earlier. Also, I strongly suggest that you leave edit summaries explaining what changes were made so as to avoid misunderstandings. Most importantly, please remember that Wikipedia is not a proxy battlefield for competing nationalist beliefs. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 22:59, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, since you say you are familiar with the policies and guidelines, there is consensus on usage of Kiev/Kyiv. Therefore, please do not continue making such changes in historical contexts like this. Mellk (talk) 23:48, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Sviatoslav I. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. CurryTime7-24 (talk) 14:55, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from reverting consctucted edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute cultural appropriation. If you want to discuss historical facts, please go to twitter. Timothy Snyder, a renowned historian and professor at Yale University, refers to the historical state as "Kyivan Rus" in his works. This is in line with the modern Ukrainian spelling and pronunciation, emphasizing the central role of Kyiv (the modern Ukrainian spelling of the city's name) in the state. Thank you. Alaskapast (talk) 15:05, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It seems you have decided to continue to not follow this as evident by this, so of it continues it will likely lead to a block. Mellk (talk) 15:40, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Yuri Shcherbinin, you may be blocked from editing. CurryTime7-24 (talk) 15:59, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Maxim Antonovich. CurryTime7-24 (talk) 21:03, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Mellk (talk) 23:50, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am reverting the bad edits. Ymblanter (talk) 19:01, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is now borderline vandalism[1] Mellk (talk) 19:49, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for commenting my edits. Any constructive feedback? Alaskapast (talk) 19:55, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is not the title of those articles. Mellk (talk) 19:56, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 2023

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. 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 at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ... discospinster _talk 16:38, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been asked repeatedly to not change the spelling of Ukrainian cities in articles about historical events (see WP:KYIV). I am blocking you temporarily since you continue to do so. ... discospinster _talk 16:40, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]