User talk:89.128.236.143

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome to Wikipedia![edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, such as the one you made to Pirog. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see:

You are welcome to continue editing without logging in, but you may want to consider creating an account. Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits such as the ability to create articles. For a full outline and explanation of the benefits that come with creating an account, please see this page. If you edit without a username, your IP address (89.128.236.143) is used to identify you instead.

In any case, I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your comments on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on this page. Again, welcome!

P.S. I was interested to see that it is also a traditional Swedish food. I really wasn't aware of that! Iryna Harpy (talk) 03:38, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

pierogi[edit]

Please cease your unsourced reversions at the article pierogi. You will be reported and can be blocked for edit warring if you continue. μηδείς (talk) 22:59, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Stop icon

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Your recent edits[edit]

Information icon Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

  1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
  2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (Insert-signature.png or Button sig.png) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 05:56, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at Visa policy in the European Union. Your edits have been reverted or removed.

Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in your being blocked from editing. --Twofortnights (talk) 12:20, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Ok, disruptive editing... WHERE? WHEN? HOW?--89.128.236.143 (talk) 17:45, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Your recent edits[edit]

Information icon Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

  1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
  2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (Insert-signature.png or Button sig.png) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 18:38, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Graphics Lab/Map workshop request[edit]

Hi. You might want to consider reformatting your recent request at the Graphics Lab. -- Trevj (talk · contribs) 09:10, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

I don't know how to do it, I think, but you are welcome to help yourself to that. Can you make maps? :D
I've had a quick go at tidying the request - just follow the format of others on the page. As for making maps, yes I probably could make them but no I'm not geared up in terms of software. That's why I recently placed a request there myself! Cheers. -- Trevj (talk · contribs) 09:00, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

January 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Central Europe may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 06:44, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Central Europe may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • File:Central Europe (Brockhaus).PNG|Middle Europe (Brockhaus Enzyklopädie, 1998))

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:43, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

IMF advanced economies 2008.svg[edit]

Ok, mostre a fonte que afirma que União Europeia é sinônimo de economia desenvolvida? Li o relatório do Fundo Monetário Internacional e não havia menção sobre a elevação da Letônia ao posto de economia/nação desenvolvida. Hallel (talk) 03:35, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Eu non falo portugués, pero un pouco galego. Ben: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/faq.htm
"Reclasificación ocorre cando un gran evento como a unión ca zona euro ten lugar". Estonia foi considerada economía avanzada tras adaptación do Eur (http://www.google.com/ url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&cad=rja&ved=0CFIQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.oenb.at%2Fdms%2Foenb%2FPublikationen%2FVolkswirtschaft%2FWorkshops%2F2012%2FWorkshop-No.-17%2Fchapters%2F03_bakker_tcm16-245373.pdf&ei=h_rTUqqyNZT20gXcm4C4BA&usg=AFQjCNHmr3rX2e9r5PUTBlqe-SUbhu5izg&sig2=B9QPy9VKcFXQ6swD6ZGJOw&bvm=bv.59026428,d.d2k).

Você poderia ter escrito em inglês, pois que eu leio sem dificuldades. No entanto recuso-me a escrever em inglês por motivos pessoais. Se quiser, podes continuar a escrever galego... entendo perfeitamente.

Ainda sobre a Letônia: não necessariamente ela será classificada como nação/economia desenvolvida ao ingressar na Zona do Euro. Quer um exemplo? A Grécia foi admitida na União Europeia sem no entanto ter preenchido todos os critérios de uma nação ou economia desenvolvida. Admite-se que somente na década de 1990 a Grécia tenha chegado ao "padrão europeu".

No caso da Letônia estou me baseando no WEO 2013 (até porque o de 2014 ainda não foi publicado), onde no relatório não há menção da Letônia como economia/nação desenvolvida, mas sim "em desenvolvimento". Veja você mesmo nas páginas 48 e 121 do relatório do Fundo Monetário Internacional.

As duas fontes que me apresentou também não fazem menção á graduação da Letônia. Uma relata os desafios que o governo da Letônia terá que enfrentar para adequar sua economia aos padrões fiscais da Zona do Euro, e a outra fonte faz menção ao fato do relatório do FMI/IMF utilizar dados e metodologias da União Europeia para auferir o grau de desenvolvimento econômico do bloco. Boas contribuições! Hallel (talk) 16:52, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Podese comprendido. Letonia xuntouse ca zona euro 13 días atrás...--89.128.236.143 (talk) 23:01, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

PISA 2012[edit]

Just to let you know that I left the Polish entry per your edit, but have left tags (which will better explain why I simply removed it in the first instance).

The entire entry is a terrible mess and written in virtually incomprehensible English. It's poorly cited and I really couldn't be bothered trying to work it out as I'd rather be researching why Australia has slipped down in ranking. To be honest, I really couldn't be bothered spending time on something I'm not interested in when I have a huge backlog of articles I need to get on with.

If you wish, feel free to tidy up the entry. If not, I'll probably return to it at some time in the future and remove it unless it's been reworked well enough for me to understand what I am copyediting. Cheers! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:46, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

So why don't you rewrite it?--89.128.236.143 (talk) 11:24, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
In the first instance, I had already explained why I was not motivated to rewrite it. Now that I'm aware of your being related to a network of WP:SOCK accounts for a number 'contributors' who have been severely disruptive to my work, and the work of many other good faith and productive Wikipedians, I will be removing the entry (initiated by Fənɛ́tɪks.fərɛvər), full stop. The entire entry is incomprehensible. I cannot copyedit something I cannot decipher, nor will I be manipulated into creating an entry on behalf of POV contributors.
This is not an entry but bizarre ramblings. If a contributor wishes to add a reasonably formed entry for Poland at some point, they are welcome to do so. In the meantime, I can't allow this mess to remain in an otherwise well presented article. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 22:18, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, but I admitted I use an address as well as account, and by doing so, I proved not to use sock-poppets, because when you admit it, it is acceptable. There are sources provided, so why can't you just use them. I know they are in Polish, so please ask an editor who speaks Polish to help, or simply use Google Translate. Full stop.--89.128.236.143 (talk) 23:32, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
See WP:NOTCOMPULSORY. I am not under any obligation to you or anyone else. If I tell you that I can't even decipher the points being made, I mean it. All I can make of it is is some sort of weird, POV schlock which doesn't inform anyone of anything in particular (including anyone who would normally make an effort to copyedit it, such as myself) other than the Polish ratings, which are already listed, having gone up with no significant analysis as to why. Generalised statements by members of the government don't add anything other than a political press opp. to promote their own suppositions which don't enhance any information relevant to the article. As you can see, I have read the Polish articles.
Assertions regarding 'international press coverage' was demonstrably blown out of proportion to the point of it being evident that the author was attempting to blow Poland's trumpet rather than add qualitative content.
Don't waste my time any further. If you are prepared to create an informative entry for Poland, please do so... but don't demand that others do the work for you. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:39, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

89.128.236.143 (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)


Request reason:

Shared IP. Falsely accused of suck-poppetry on my main account Phonetics forever

Decline reason:

It may well be a shared IP, but this edit shows clearly that it's being used to evade the block on Fənɛ́tɪks.fərɛvər (talk · contribs), imposed as a consequence of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rejedef. Favonian (talk) 11:50, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first and then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page for as long as you are blocked.

File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

89.128.236.143 (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)


Request reason:

My account, phonetics forever, is not a suck-poppet of Rejedef. This is an arbitrary block

Decline reason:

Checkuser confirmed abuser of multiple accounts. only (talk) 13:45, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first and then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page for as long as you are blocked.

File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

89.128.236.143 (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)


Request reason:

I insist my accounts are not suck-poppets of Rejedef. the guidelines say: "Wikipedia admins can never be absolutely sure about sockpuppetry, and the most abusive users can be very devious in attempting to evade detection. If you are improperly blocked for sockpuppetry, you should realize that it may not always be easy or even possible to correct the situation." Please remove the block. None of my edits has been disruptive.

Decline reason:

The checkuser report shows that you are using at least three named accounts as well as this IP, which you are using to evade your block. Please make any further requests at your primary account. --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 16:49, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first and then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page for as long as you are blocked.

File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

89.128.236.143 (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)


Request reason:

Sock-poppetry is when you do not admit to using two accounts. I did it, when I was asked about it. I don't understand why I was blocked at all. None of my edits has been disruptive or vandalisms. If anything, please see the article about Viviane Reding, where I actually reverted a vandalism

Decline reason:

"Don't play games with me, Your Highness. You're not on any mercy mission this time." Let's not split hairs here about what you admitted to. The point is what you did do. Partial admissions are not going to get you unblocked. Since this is your fourth declined unblock in a day and you have already been asked to use your primary account, I will make it easier for you and us by revoking your access to this page ("You are a member of the Rebel Alliance and a traitor. TAKE HER AWAY!!Daniel Case (talk) 00:40, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first and then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page for as long as you are blocked.

Octagon delete.svg
This blocked user (block log | active blocks | autoblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs | abuse log) has had their talk page access revoked because an administrator has identified this user's talkpage edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive. If you would like to make further requests, you may contact the Arbitration Committee at arbcom-appeals-en@lists.wikimedia.org. Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.