User talk:TankDude2000

February 2023

Hello, I'm Notcharizard. I noticed that in this edit to 1 December 2013 Euromaidan riots, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 16:41, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Technically, 2 infoboxes wouldn’t be useful for an article. So the removed content must be restored! TankDude2000 (talk) 16:43, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contribution(s). I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, while user talk pages permit a small degree of generalisation, other talk pages such as Talk:Revolution of Dignity are strictly for discussing improvements to their associated main pages, and many of them have special instructions on the top. They are not a general discussion forum about the article's topic or any other topic. If you have questions or ideas and are not sure where to post them, consider asking at the Teahouse. Thanks. Rsk6400 (talk) 07:19, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not move a page to a title that is harder to follow, or move it unilaterally against naming conventions or consensus, as you did to 2014 Hrushevskoho Street riots. This includes making page moves while a discussion remains underway. We have some guidelines to help with deciding what title is best for a subject. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Please take a look at WP:RMUM. Rsk6400 (talk) 12:19, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to move pages to bad titles contrary to naming conventions or consensus, as you did at 2022–2023 Peruvian protests, you may be blocked from editing. ZLEA _T\^C 23:08, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why you guys treating us, new users as dumb people? What’s happening in Peru is unrest! TankDude2000 (talk) 07:31, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't treat you "as dumb people", but reminded you of some WP rules. The most important of those rules is WP:CONSENSUS, which says that we should try to reach a consensus. Therefore I think you should not have renamed the Hrushevskoho page a second time after I reverted your first move. I'd also like to suggest that you explain yourself better in conversations like this one (why should a "colour revolution" not be included in the term "all revolutions" ?). Nobody expects you to know all WP rules right from the beginning (even the most experienced editors don't know all of them), that's why I'd like to suggest you listen to and consider the opinions of your fellow editors. Rsk6400 (talk) 07:58, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But other users who stayed longer on Wikipedia were allowed to make these changes without consensus! That’s discrimination! TankDude2000 (talk) 19:29, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More experienced users are not allowed to make such changes without consensus. If they do, they are being just as disruptive. - ZLEA _T\^C 20:18, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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 Outline of the Russo-Ukrainian War, 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. HappyWith (talk) 15:42, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not move a page to a title that is harder to follow, or move it unilaterally against naming conventions or consensus, as you did to 2023 French pension reform protests. This includes making page moves while a discussion remains underway. We have some guidelines to help with deciding what title is best for a subject. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Your previous move was contested. That means you take it to the talk page for discussion. You do not simply move the page again and hope nobody notices. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:16, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Use the appropriate procedures

Do not move articles without discussion. Use the correct procedures employed at Wikipedia. Read about this at WP:RM. A continuation of your behaviour will result in a report and in your block. Super Ψ Dro 15:45, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I support Super Dromaeosaurus's comment from the bottom of my heart. You already caused a lot of trouble with the page moves I had to repair. Rsk6400 (talk) 15:49, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Um, where? TankDude2000 (talk) 16:16, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. Superdromaeosaurus. We meet again! TankDude2000 (talk) 16:16, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, for some whatever dumb reason, you guys like to demonize me and look only at the “bad” things I do on Wikipedia, but you still bother to look at the good things I’ve done on wikipedia! I guess that’s how you treat new users! TankDude2000 (talk) 16:38, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, @Rsk6400 hates me for no reason! TankDude2000 (talk) 16:38, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Have you considered that maybe the reason everyone is saying you are wrong is because you are doing things wrong? - ZLEA _T\^C 18:51, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but no one focuses on the things I do not do wrong on wikipedia! TankDude2000 (talk) 18:54, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A mistake is a mistake, no matter how many good edits you make or how experienced you are. A good editor learns from their mistakes and strives to do better. Rsk6400 doesn't hate you, nor does anyone else who criticizes your mistakes. They're just pointing out mistakes in the hope that you will learn from them and not repeat them. - ZLEA _T\^C 20:28, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ZLEA is right about my attitude towards you, and let me add that I make mistakes, too. Rsk6400 (talk) 05:55, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

… and that I learned a lot from other editors. Rsk6400 (talk) 08:34, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

True. TankDude2000 (talk) 17:43, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

April 2023

Hello, I'm TylerBurden. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Finland, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. TylerBurden (talk) 06:23, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to move pages to bad titles contrary to naming conventions or consensus, you may be blocked from editing. Shadow4dark (talk) 13:25, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about? TankDude2000 (talk) 14:09, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You ignoring talk page consensus on Iraq war pages and moved them Shadow4dark (talk) 14:13, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, k. TankDude2000 (talk) 14:16, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into War in Donbas. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:06, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ukrainian Crisis, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. You can't just blank AFDs you don't like. You have to actually engage with the editor community and argue your case in the AFD. HappyWith (talk) 19:25, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No personal attacks

Please don't make comments like this. While the IP you were replying to was being disingenuous, we should never resort to personal attacks or incivility. Please see WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL for more. — Czello 19:20, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you older users are allowed to make personal attacks… TankDude2000 (talk) 07:02, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No one is permitted to make personal attacks. — Czello 07:49, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No one makes personal attacks here, we're trying to build an encyclopedia, not argue with people. Oaktree b (talk) 03:04, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Move warring

Stop move warring without consensus - it constitutes edit warring. I know you're unhappy with the naming of certain articles, but you're obligated to get consensus on talk pages first for such a big move. — Czello ^(music) 08:40, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'll add onto this that I noticed you moved 2011 Syrian Revolution and Yemeni Revolution in order to justify a move of Revolution of Dignity. This is borderline gaming the system, and you're beginning to enter WP:TE territory. Please do not unilaterally move any more articles without seeking consensus first. As for the Ukrainian article - it's been debated to death by this point and is unlikely to change, so I'd advise against raising new move requests. — Czello ^(music) 09:01, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is just too strict. Does a fun version of Wikipedia exist? TankDude2000 (talk) 09:39, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's always Uncyclopedia — Czello ^(music) 09:50, 16 April 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.

_signed,Rosguill ^talk 17:22, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

April 2023

I reverted your undiscussed move at Soviet occupation of Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina. Do not move pages without discussion. This is your last warning. The next time I will report you to WP:ANI. Super Ψ Dro 08:58, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits while logged out. Please be mindful not to perform controversial edits while logged out, or your account risks being blocked from editing. Please consider reading up on Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts before editing further. Additionally, making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. Stylez995 (talk) 11:12, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Czello ^(music) 20:01, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@TankDude2000: Wikipedia requires collaboration. You must stop irritating people. That means you have to discuss proposals in advance and wait for consensus before continuing with changes that others have objected to. Advice about how to proceed might be available at WP:Teahouse. I will block you indefinitely if there is any further disruption. Johnuniq (talk) 11:25, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, I’ll surrender! TankDude2000 (talk) 15:53, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

April 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 16:10, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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).

TankDude2000 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I do understand that I made disruptive edits and I deeply apologise for this. As you know, I’m a new Wikipedia user, and I’m not really used to this rules. I declare that my edits weren’t intentionally made to hurt Wikipedia. However, you should also take in count that I made some good edits and even participated in a “page moving discussion”, as in the 2023 Sudan conflict page. You could check the archive of the talk page if you want. I want to redeem myself and actually continue to make good edits and establishing an consensus. Thanks for reading this! TankDude2000 (talk) 16:26, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You disregarded so many warning and ignored advice from established editors. Now you expect us to trust you that you understand the rules. No, we simply can't trust you. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:40, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.