User talk:Aleksandartasic2828

December 2023

Hello, I'm AntiDionysius. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Niš have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. AntiDionysius (talk) 21:36, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is an article about Niš, it has nothing with Albania. Source for this text is not representative. Also I found the same text, which starts with ...It is generally assumed that name Štip has proto-Albanic origin? Every city in the Balkans with š has albanian origin? My action was not destructive, if someone wants to write about Albania, do that in page about Albania. Not about my city. Aleksandartasic2828 (talk) 22:30, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was an explanation of the linguistic origin of the name of the city; it was plainly relevant to the article. AntiDionysius (talk) 22:35, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See, say Dublin#Etymology (explaining the name's origins in Viking languages, even though it's in Ireland) or Muscle_Shoals,_Alabama#Etymology, or Beijing#Etymology, Vienna#Etymology (explaining the name's origin in Italian, even though it's in Austria), or Trieste#Names_and_etymology (explaining the name's origins in Celtic languages, even though it's in Italy) etc etc etc. AntiDionysius (talk) 22:39, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Name Niš is turkish version of Naissus. Albanians have nothing with Naissus and Roman empire. Source is problem. Nationalistic text in wikipedia should not be allowed. Aleksandartasic2828 (talk) 22:46, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you have evidence for your claim, you are welcome to add a portion saying "other scholars argue the name is Turkish in origin...", with the source cited. AntiDionysius (talk) 22:48, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your live goal is to write about Albania on page about Serbian city. Awesome! Contribute about something interesting. Should I write about Skadar as Serbian city? Maybe I should? Same source quality like yours... Aleksandartasic2828 (talk) 22:55, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a credible academic source arguing that the name of the city of Shkodër comes from Serbian or Proto-South-Slavic or something, that would be an interesting addition to Shkodër#Name for sure. AntiDionysius (talk) 22:58, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Academic source means nothing. If I follow your logic, Šešelj has phd, so he is credible? Ok... Aleksandartasic2828 (talk) 23:18, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say that. AntiDionysius (talk) 23:38, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Niš. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you.Jingiby (talk) 13:29, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Sokobanja, 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. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:38, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Šta sam dodao bez relevantnog izvora, samo da izmenio malo i sredio prikaz i dopunio da članak o gradu gde sam živeo 15 godina izgleda bolje? Ti iz Niša znaš bolje o Sokobanji? Sumnjam. Šta konkretno nije u redu? Aleksandartasic2828 (talk) 23:42, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Stvarno sramota šta si napisao, ispada da ne znaš da postoje 3 vrste voda u Banjama. Hipertermalne, hometermalne i hipotermalne. Dodaću taj deo teksta, ali nije uredu da sve brišeš. Zaista... Aleksandartasic2828 (talk) 23:46, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In Wikipedia, every content should be WP:verifiable in the WP:reliable sources that are WP:cited in the article. The burden of providing a source is on the user who adds content. That is how Wikipedia functions. By the way, in English Wikipedia, users communicate in English language. And, also, I am not from Niš. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:56, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, if I missed something you can add, not delete something that is true. That is something that is generally known, hot waters above 38 and colded springs bellow 34. Aleksandartasic2828 (talk) 00:02, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Your recent editing history at Niš shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then 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 being blocked from editing—especially as the page in question is currently under restrictions from the Arbitration Committee, if you violate the one-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than one revert on a single page with active Arbitration Committee restrictions 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 one-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the one-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

The article "Niš" is within the scope of the "Eastern Europe or the Balkans" contentious topic, and the one-revert-rule applies to this article. You have already broken this rule, but maybe you will not be blocked. But if you break it again you will almost certainly be blocked. This is a friendly and collegial warning. Think for a while before you respond. You do not have to write anything in response.—Alalch E. 20:43, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Albanian editors are deleting noncontroversal content, also they deleted sentence that Albanian user added (as a consensus). I respect opinion of others but at least keep sentence from Albanian user (the only one who respects that there are other opinions. I do not delete anything that others did so be respectful please. Aleksandartasic2828 (talk) 23:13, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. However, please do not use unreliable sources such as blogs, your own website, websites and publications with a poor reputation for checking the facts or with no editorial oversight, expressing views that are widely acknowledged as extremist, that are promotional in nature, or that rely heavily on rumors and personal opinions, as one of Wikipedia's core policies is that contributions must be verifiable through reliable sources, preferably using inline citations. If you require further assistance, please look at Help:Menu/Editing Wikipedia, or ask at the Teahouse. Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 03:51, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable source is definitely this scientific paper from phd professor. If you do not like it, that is something else. https://www.nisandbyzantium.org.rs/doc/zbornik/Pdf-I/Aleksandar%20Loma.pdf Other source is interview of other phd professor which is reliable source (newspapers are not tabloid or something like that). It can be also removed, but it is here to show reaction to Albanian activists on Wikipedia who are promoting THEIR version of history. Interesting that an article about serbian city which has nothing with Albania and has no Albanian history is so important for this group of people. Of course, I am for consensus, keep that fake history, but add truth. THERE IS OBVIOUSLY NO CONSENSUS . Acatsc2828 (talk) 09:20, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Aleksandartasic2828 reported by User:Ktrimi991 (Result: ). Thank you. Ktrimi991 (talk) 11:09, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 14:02, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely, some people from that albanian project got triggered when someone mentioned that there are other opinions from scholars?

I did not break any rule actually, I do not get why wikipedia is promoting albanian extremism and nationalism? Definitely, they have a lot of problem in their state, interesting that they are so focused on page about Serbian city history. We should respect others, and Wikipedia should promote peace Acatsc2828 (talk) 23:43, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Acatsc2828 (talk) 23:53, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]