User talk:Miacek

This user has a zero tolerance policy towards trolls on Wikipedia.

3RR at Party for Freedom

Your recent editing history at Party for Freedom shows that you are in danger of breaking the three-revert rule, or that you may have already broken it. 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. Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a block.

If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. 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. You may still be blocked for edit warring even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly.

At least I give an explanation for my reverts. Do you revert according to your moods now?

Edit warring =

Your recent editing history at David Horowitz Freedom Center 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. // Liftarn (talk)

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. Thank you.

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rename done

Hi, the rename was all done and the silly mistake I made was fixed by Cyberpower678 (Thank you, CP!). You can now start editing as if nothing happened. — regards, Revi 15:53, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Quick suggestion: for experienced users, I suggest making a doppleganger account for old username, since I've seen at least 10 people's old username registered and subsequently abused for vandalism. — regards, Revi 15:55, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. I'll log in with the old account, change a password so that it's really strong and save it somewhere.Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 16:01, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was a bit of a mess, but I think I got all of the pages in the correct spots. If something is out of place, let me know.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 16:04, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK!Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 16:05, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Case of the Anti-Soviet "Bloc of Rightists and Trotskyites", you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nail (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Premature

I do wish you hadn't rushed ahead. My time is very limited this week, as I alluded to in my most recent comment, and I need to go through a couple dozen articles (and translate several of them). When I've done that and have found what I'm looking for, I will definitely support changing the title, and I'll probably be in a stronger position to get behind a specific alternative with a compelling rationale. At it stands now, I'm inclined to !vote to keep the existing title, but I didn't want to do that without explaining. Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 15:28, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I won't propose any formal name change until the end of the week (at least). That's because I'm gonna have a wikibreak from tomorrow until Saturday (real life demands its own share).Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 15:33, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. I hope by sometime this weekend I can finish going through the sources again. I read every single source cited in the article, but that was last year and I need to refresh my memory. Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 15:38, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of For Family and Tradition

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on For Family and Tradition requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. –Ammarpad (talk) 09:02, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wut?

The user has added new content in the middle of already cited material without providing any new references. MilborneOne (talk) 18:40, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 2

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Constitutional Democratic Party (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to National Salvation Front

Edgar Savisaar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Evacuation

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All content requires reliable sources

Please do not add or change content, as you did at John Birch Society, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. 32.218.40.151 (talk) 01:36, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

CPC TP

In light of our recent encounters on the edit-warring admin noticeboard concerning a certain editor, your comments to the discussion that's under the "Socialism authoritarianism political position" section of the article mentioned above would be welcomed. Wingwraith (talk) 22:08, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Lisette Kampus

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Lisette Kampus requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, a group of people, an individual animal, an organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content, or an organized event, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. KnowledgeChuck (talk) 16:31, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This wikipedia has gone crazy.Miacek (talk) 16:36, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Uwe Backes

The article Uwe Backes has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Damselfly7 (talk) 17:03, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]