User talk:Cezarika f.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Regarding edits to Daco-Romanian

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Cezarika f.! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule \bangelfire\.com\/, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links guidelines for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! AntiSpamBot 18:54, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] November 2007

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Moldova. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. -- Dekisugi (talk) 18:48, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

this -- Dekisugi (talk) 18:52, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Why did you redirect it? -- Dekisugi (talk) 18:54, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Where did I redirect it? ---- Cezarika f. (talk) 18:56, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

Account blocked for 24h for rvert war in Moldova article. `'Míkka>t 23:08, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did to Moldovans, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Will (talk) 15:38, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Putting an ethnicity in quote marks is sure to flare up emotions. The article actually discusses whether or not they are seperate from Romanians, and I don't think it needs any more commentary. Will (talk) 15:44, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Look, I don't care if you speak the ancient language of the Martians and Jovians and see no difference between those two. I know POV trolling when I see it. I'm not going to believe you seeing as you just got blocked for 3RR on the same subject, and I don't think a pair of parentheses counts as a source that negates an entire article. Will (talk) 15:48, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
LOOK WILL, 23 millions Romanians don't agree with you. Is that enough now? Trolling is from you when you try to impose something which is not natural.

Mulţam'--Cezarika f. (talk) 15:49, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

And 62 million people voted George Bush in. Doesn't mean he's popular. Will (talk) 15:52, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Those 23 millions Romanians are far more important than your opionion on the subject, we do speak here about Romanians don't we? Mulţam'--Cezarika f. (talk) 15:53, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Numbers of opinion do not make an established fact. Will (talk) 15:56, 19 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Unblock

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "I have been blocked by the user Mkkai, an admin too involved in the dispute. He blocked me before. This time he blocked two users. The other user is now unblocked by the same reason: "an admin too involved in the dispute". See user:Nergaal. If anybody blocks me should be somebody who did not show lack of impartiallity in my case. Please review my talk page and the edit history on the article Moldova for more details. Thank you."

Decline reason: "The edit history on Moldova confirms that you are in violation of 3RR on that article. — FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:39, 20 November 2007 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.