User talk:Born.in.cssr
Welcome!
|
Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Czech Republic into Czechs. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:43, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
November 2017
This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on others again, as you did at User talk:Guto2003 , you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. DMacks (talk) 13:20, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. DMacks (talk) 16:35, 2 November 2017 (UTC)January 2018
Your recent editing history at Czech Republic shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 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.
Note that your edits to User:Concus Cretus are WP:VANDALISM and will equally easily get you blocked. DMacks (talk) 17:23, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
Constructive contributions are appreciated and strongly encouraged, but your recent edit to the userpage of another user may be considered vandalism. Specifically, your edit to User:Concus Cretus may be offensive or unwelcome. In general, it is considered polite to avoid substantially editing others' userpages without their permission. Instead, please bring the matter to their talk page and let them edit their user page themselves if they agree on a need to do so. Please refer to Wikipedia:User page for more information on User page etiquette. Thank you. General Ization Talk 17:34, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did at User talk:Khajidha. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. General Ization Talk 17:38, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
- víš hovno, co sem napsal, pičusy
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. DMacks (talk) 18:35, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
Born.in.cssr (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Notes:
- In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
- Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:
{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=Vyližte si prdel, mamrdi |3 = ~~~~}}
If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.
{{unblock reviewed |1=Vyližte si prdel, mamrdi |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}
If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:
{{unblock reviewed |1=Vyližte si prdel, mamrdi |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}