Carlo0

Welcome!

Hi, Carlo0. Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our intro page contains a lot of helpful material for new users—please check it out! If you need help, visit Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or . Vanjagenije (talk) 20:49, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

A page you started (List of inventions from Macedonia) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating List of inventions from Macedonia, Carlo0!

Wikipedia editor Prof tpms just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

The list looks inconclusive for such a great country like Macedonia.

To reply, leave a comment on Prof tpms's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Prof TPMS (talk) 10:20, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

July 2017

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Serbs, 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. Dr. K. 02:18, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Croats. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Dr. K. 02:23, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Byzantine Empire. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:39, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Notice

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding the Balkans, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:40, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

List of Croatian inventions and discoveries

Do not be stupid and rather read reliable sources which are provided next to the inventor. "Irregular shape of the earth" is a discovery and it is descriptive. "Telescope with water" was not patented because it was invented three hundred years before the first patent. And really, you are talking about patent office in the early 18th century? You are constantly adding red links which are aesthetically unpleasant. If you really want to undo something, at least make an effort like I did to find reliable, independent sources. Thank you.--Sheldonium (talk) 16:45, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:17, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

July 2017

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at List of Croatian inventions and discoveries, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. TJH2018talk 17:36, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring, as you did at List of Croatian inventions and discoveries. 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 ~~~~}}.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.  Vanjagenije (talk) 18:18, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

I am simply trying to remove senseless additions by Sheldonium on the article at hand. He states that an irregular shape of the earth is a discovery or invention while providing no other information about it. He doesn't have a single source in English. He edit wars against me to the point that he reverts edits I make to correct simple spelling mistakes such as the word terpene. He has it written as teressenne or something along those lines. I should not be the one blocked. I edited a spelling mistake which he reverted and arrogantly told me to find a source for the spelling mistake

It's not clear if you were blocked for "vandalism" (as "warned" above) or for bright-line 3RR breach, which I'm afraid you had exceeded, and so it's hard to excuse. But I cannot understand why an admin would block you, but give Sheldonium a free pass on their very clear edit-warring. Unimpressive 8-( Andy Dingley (talk) 22:04, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

And why are his edits allowed to remain?? It still says telescope filled with water.. tagged with the article for a telescope, which has no mention of the "water filled" one. It's hard to take the list seriously with those claims. His last edit should be reverted and he should be blocked. Carlo0 (talk) 22:19, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

• Sheldonium is blocked too after a WP:EWN report. @Andy Dingley: You reported Sheldonium at WP:EWN, and he was blocked, I don't understand your disappointment. @Carlo0: It's nice that you want to discuss those edits, bu you should have tried to do that at the article talk page before you started edit warring. What's really disappointing is that the talk page is totally empty, no one even tried to discuss edits. Vanjagenije (talk) 22:26, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
  • @Carlo0: I am willing to unblock you immediately if you promise not to edit List of Croatian inventions and discoveries, but go to the talk page and explain your views, and engage in discussion with other editors. Vanjagenije (talk) 22:29, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

I promise I will refrain from removing or adding items warred over and to instead bring it to the talk page. It was petty behaviour to edit war. No more warring for me but I do wish to get to the bottom of the issue at hand. And I hope to still be able to edit the list aside from the items debated over Carlo0 (talk) 22:44, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

I'm unblocking you. Please, do not edit the list if you think your edit will be contested. If you are not sure, don't edit. Use the talk page instead. Vanjagenije (talk) 22:53, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

@Carlo0: What are you doing? I agreed to unblock you if you don't make controversial edits at List of Croatian inventions and discoveries, but use the talk page instead. And what you're doing? You went to List of Serbian discoveries and inventions and joined edit-warring without discussing. I thing it was mistake unblocking you. Vanjagenije (talk) 09:34, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

I looked in your contributions and noticed half the Serbian list was removed. This is simply another reason the whole inventions lot should be nuked. I'm not engaging in any warring I made a single edit. Thanks

Unblock

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Carlo0 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I have done nothing to imply that I am this sock puppet other than edit inventions. What is the exact reason that I have been blocked other than editing inventions and being Serbian? Please let me know what I did to deserve the block. This is unfair I have been fairly contributing and attempting to come up with solutions through compromise. I have sourced and over sourced and once I provided enough sources and there was no more basis to revert me, you blocked me on accusation that I am someone that meddled with the Serbian inventions category solely because I edited the categories. It is like convicting a murder suspect because he is a man and the murderer was said to be a man. This is ridiculous

Decline reason:

It seems they also found DNA evidence, if we're going to keep with that tired metaphor. You'll need to address that, as it is the explicit reason given for your block. Kuru (talk) 17:28, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Their sole evidence is that I have edits which pertain to Serbian inventions just as the sock I'm accused of being. Beyond that there is nothing and it seems like based on the sockmasters contributions and the contributions by other users which have been reverted are completely different but only pertain to the same culture and topic(science and technology). This simply seems like an easy way for biased users to revert information