D92AL

April 2019

Hello, I'm ST47. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Greeks in Albania seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ST47 (talk) 21:50, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello. I am referring to the official statistics of the Republic of Albania, as well as to another reliable resource by an international minority protection organization. --D92AL (talk) 23:44, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Greeks in Albania. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. ST47 (talk) 22:55, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello. I genuinely do not understand what you mean by "your own point of view". I am referring to the official statistics of the Republic of Albania, as well as to another reliable resource by an international minority protection organization. It seems that you are the one trying to enforce their own point of view in the article. --D92AL (talk) 23:44, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Greeks in Albania shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

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. ST47 (talk) 23:24, 4 April 2019 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:D92AL reported by User:Dr.K. (Result: ). Thank you. Dr. K. 04:31, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Block

You've been blocked from editing for 72 hours due to edit warring. When the block expires, please bring your concerns to article talk page/s. El_C 09:49, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

April 2019

Your recent editing history at Greeks in Albania shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

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. INeedSupport ^:3 14:08, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. INeedSupport ^:3 14:34, 9 April 2019 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:D92AL reported by User:Dr.K. (Result: ). Thank you. Dr. K. 14:57, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Risking another block

Hello D92AL, it looks as though you aren't paying attention. Did you create this account on 4 April solely for the purpose of edit warring on Greeks in Albania? You don't appear to be working in good faith, so the next admin may decide to issue an indefinite block from Wikipedia. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 15:18, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

April 2019

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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.

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 ~~~~}}.  Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:40, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

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).

D92AL (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Hello. I haven't been online and I just read your messages. I created this account because I would like to contribute also to other articles. I haven't found the right time in the past days. I do believe that I am working in good faith! This is an article about the Greek minority in Albania, and in my edited text I included official statistics by the Government of Albania as well as estimations by international organizations. In an article about the Greek minority in Albania, you cannot only include claims made by Greek organizations. If you want to be neutral and if you want to work in good faith, you have to include the official statistics (!) of the state on which we are writing this article (in this case: Albania) and by various international organizations (!) and foreign scholars (!). Do you understand my point? I am not the one making the edit war, but other contributors here who revert my edits and block me only because I put official statistics and estimations which belong in this article! D92AL (talk) 13:16, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You don't seem to understand WP:EW. You claim you aren't the one edit warring, but you clearly are. It's not relevant whether or not you think your edits are correct. Yamla (talk) 13:18, 10 April 2019 (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.

So, if people here revert my edits because they are not interested in an objective and neutral article, and I am being blocked after explaining them why we need those statistics I put there, then I just get blocket for writing the truth? Wow! There are like several people here who do not want my edits and I have to confront all of them, that's why I had to edit over and over again. --D92AL (talk) 13:28, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

WP:EW explains all of this. Please read it. You will also want to read WP:CONSENSUS. --Yamla (talk) 13:56, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Do you understand that someone reverts my edits here without even making a good point why my edit was not good - according to their opinion? Do you understand that my edits were reverted without giving any argument why my edit shouldn't have taken place? Someone just logs in, reverts my edit without any argument (!) - without writing any short summary for the reason why they revert, and then blocks me! And yes, I have read those parts you recommend me to read! And based on that, I think that my behaviour has been correct! --D92AL (talk) 14:03, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for letting us know. As you were clearly violating WP:EW, I have extended your block indefinitely to prevent you from engaging in further edit wars. Any admin is free to unblock you if you clearly demonstrate an understanding of WP:EW and WP:CONSENSUS, explain why your existing edits were inappropriate, and explain how you'll avoid violating these in the future. --Yamla (talk) 14:07, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

You are violating every rule: the rule of neutrality, the rule of working in good faith, the rule of editing with good arguments, the rule of having a consensus, the rules of how an encyclopedia works. False information is presented in the article! I have checked the sources in the introductory part and they do NOT contain the information as it is presented in this version of the article right now. --D92AL (talk) 14:13, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

My edits were appropriate as they contained important information by the government of Albania and international organizations! These are important sources. My edits were deleted without giving any proper explanation and justification. --D92AL (talk) 14:18, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

You were blocked for edit warring, and that is prohibited even if you are right about the content. That's what you need to address if you want to be unblocked, not argue about how right you were. You were blocked not because of the content you were trying to add, but for how you went about trying to add it. Admins have no power to judge who is right about the content dispute itself - you need to take that to a talk page discussion and seek consensus. You said above, "There are like several people here who do not want my edits and I have to confront all of them, that's why I had to edit over and over again." - No, that is why you have to start a talk page discussion and seek consensus (see WP:Consensus). Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:30, 10 April 2019 (UTC)