User talk:Shotlandiya

Welcome to Wikipedia!!!

Hello Shotlandiya! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! -- Kukini 17:45, 1 August 2006 (UTC) Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects Getting your info out there Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy Getting more Wikipedia rules Policy Library Getting Help New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions Getting along Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Wikipedians Conflict resolution Getting technical Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

Edit Summary Request

I have noted that you often edit without an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This is considered an important guideline in Wikipedia. Even a short summary is better than no summary. An edit summary is even more important if you delete any text; otherwise, people may think you're being sneaky or even vandalizing. Also, mentioning one change but not another one can be misleading to someone who finds the other one more important; add "and misc." to cover the other change(s). Thanks! -- Kukini 17:45, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello!

Hello, Shotlandiya. I see, you are online. Please, leave here a short message, and type four tildes after it. Let is see, hoe does it work. dima 10:32, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Does this work? Shotlandiya 13:28, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Shotlandiya! Very good. I finished with Vladimir Bukovsky. Did you see the movies I cited? Do you like the correction of the confusion with the passport? Type your comments at the Talk:Vladimir Bukovsky, and let us think if we can even improve it.dima 15:26, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

August 2007

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Garry Kasparov. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. Kerotan^{Leave Me a Message} Have a nice day :) 13:15, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Can anyone explain why this account has been blocked? From what I can understand, my IP address has been blocked from editing as it is a shared address for the House of Commons, but I thought having my own Wikipedia username got around this problem. I certainly don't want to have to open a new account as I've made quite a few edits on this one and would like to carry on. Can anyone help?

Decline reason:

Most likely, you've been hit by an autoblock. Someone else using an account from the same address has been blocked and so all users are temporarily blocked. This happens automatically and is because vandals regularly use alternate accounts to continue editing. Please follow these instructions so we can lift the autoblock. — Yamla (talk) 16:11, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

---

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.

WP:OR edit warring - Scottish mafia

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. --Mais oui! (talk) 13:30, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

from Edward Lucas

I don't want my wikipedia entry to become part of an edit war. And I am grateful for your instant second thoughts about the insulting remark that you briefly posted about my father. But it seems to me unfair that you have inserted a "criticism" section without a "praise". I am more than happy for readers to know that the exile and many other people detest what I write. But shouldn't they also know that the book has been praised by Richard Pipes, Mart Laar, Vladimir Bukovsky, Oleg Gordievsky, Robert Gellately and others? Surely the point of a wikipedia article is that it should be balanced? Edwardlucas (talk) 09:12, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

One small point. Isn't the Exile article footnoted here by Alexander Zaitchik not by Mark Ames as stated? They actually reviewed the book twice, once without having read it (which is the review cited here) and then in another review http://www.exile.ru/articles/detail.php?ARTICLE_ID=17180&IBLOCK_ID=35&phrase_id=11576 which was by Zaitchik AND Ames 194.129.60.10 (talk) 09:10, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Research Centre Free Europe

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Research Centre Free Europe, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. B. Wolterding (talk) 12:38, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Edward Lucas

Hello Shotlandiya. I'm growing concerned over your attempts to link Lucas to this La Russophobe blog in his article. So he links to the blog from his, and his work has been cited as an inspiration for the blog. That is hardly the most notable aspect of Lucas' life, but its not a huge problem to document that since it is cited. However, this is a BLP, note particularly Wikipedia:BLP#Criticism and praise, "Content should be sourced to reliable sources and should be about the subject of the article specifically. Beware of claims that rely on guilt by association."

However heinous you may fiend the La Russophobe blog, it is not appropriate to document its transgressions on Lucas' bio. In noting his (tenuous) links to the site, then criticizing it we are implying guilt by association. The critical content you are adding is clearly not about the subject of the article specifically. If La Russophobe is notable, then you can write about it here, but please don't use Lucas' bio as a coatrack to hang an expose of Russia's critics. Rockpocket 22:13, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

3RR

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Historical Truth Commission. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Peltimikko (talk) 19:07, 31 May 2009 (UTC)