User talk:Russianvodka

Saudi Arabia

Please examine the changes caused by this edit. The changes were made from a broken proxy, resulting in malformed text. If you wish to change the article, then don't undo, change the text instead. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 21:24, 27 November 2017 (UTC) Thanks zzuuzz I edited it instead Russianvodka (talk) 21:59, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Welcome, and a note.

Hello, Russianvodka, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!

As you've mentioned that you are a new editor here, I thought I should give you a heads up about a rule that often trips up new editors, the three-revert rule. You will want to read WP:3RR. --joe decker^talk 00:38, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

November 2017

Hello, I'm DeniedClub. I noticed that you recently removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary (which I appreciate you doing this on the LGBT Rights in India article). If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. When you want to change an article's content that has been the accepted version for more than a couple weeks, you need to discuss your intended actions before you make the edit. DeniedClub^{❯❯❯ talk?} 01:13, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

By the way, you seem like a cool person who is just trying to help, and anyone who contributes in good faith is awesome in my book. We just have to take our time and discuss things, especially on controversial topics. I hope you don't take my reverts as an attempt to silence you. I would very much like to have a dialogue in the talk pages of these articles where we can gather consensus and come up with a compromise. I don't want any of this to discourage you from future editing either, it is appreciated that you're even here to help. DeniedClub^{❯❯❯ talk?} 01:28, 28 November 2017 (UTC) Thanks I appreciate it Russianvodka (talk) 01:51, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}.  NeilN ^{talk to me} 02:25, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

That block was unnecessary, by the time you showed up user:DeniedClub and I had discussed the edits and I had already agreed to leave the info about the one same sex marriage that illegally occurred in India. I was editing in good faith to try to get info behind why DeniedClub did the edit which is how I got to understand what the reasoning behind his changes were. I also am not a sock puppet and you had no proof of that so that false accusation is unacceptable. Also, I am new here and I believe you might want to look again at WP:AGF and WP:Civil as well as WP:NPA. Cheers. Russianvodka (talk) 19:53, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Recent report to WP:AIV

I have removed your recent report to WP:AIV. This is clearly a content dispute and not obvious vandalism. Sasquatch t|c 20:36, 5 December 2017 (UTC) Even though it was an obvious violation of the three revert rule?Russianvodka (talk) 20:40, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

this is your last warning, dont add false information --Mojackjutaily (talk) 08:34, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

No this is your last warning stop blanking info you don't like. Every edit I've done had sources where are yours?08:40, 6 December 2017 (UTC)08:40, 6 December 2017 (UTC)~~

December 2017

Hello, I'm Greyjoy. I noticed that you recently removed content from Homosexuality in India without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Greyjoy ^talk 09:10, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Unacceptable edit summary

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Homosexuality in India has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. Please be aware specifically that it is disruptive, and disrespectful to other users, to describe edits made in good faith as vandalism, as you did here. You also should be cautious not to ebngage in edit warring. Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 04:00, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Whether another user's edit is valuable and done in good faith or if it was done in a disrespectful and disruptive way is in the eye of the beholder. To one editor it seemed like a good edit but to some could be seen as adding back low quality sources in a malicious spamfest. People are free to have opinions, freedom of speech. Russianvodka (talk) 04:10, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

People are free to have opinions, yes. Nevertheless, Wikipedia users are expected to assume good faith. Accusing another user of vandalism is making an extremely serious accusation. Wikipedia is not a democracy and makes no guarantee of freedom of speech. Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 09:00, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Russianvodka, given the above, why did you again violate WP:AGF in an edit summary here? Three different editors have now reverted your edits to Homosexuality in India (four including myself) and yet you have not tried to discuss your suggested edits on the article talk page, but keep reverting back citing "vandalism" (despite having been told what the issues are: primarily removal of sourced content and problems with neutrality). --bonadea contributions talk 09:40, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Because now you and your ips are removed sourced material which is a textbook example of vandalism. Now see the compromise edit made and talk about it here before revertingRussianvodka (talk) 10:00, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

December 2017

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Anti-LGBT rhetoric, 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 the sandbox for that. You seem to be on a bit of a deletion spree on a number of related articles. I have noticed several content deletions that would need to be supported by consensus - this includes category deletions. Please discuss on the talk page of each article before you remove content in this manner. Thank you. bonadea contributions talk 09:13, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Consider Bonadea's note a final warning. Any more disruptive editing or inappropriate edit summaries will result in another block. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:34, 10 December 2017 (UTC)