User talk:Berehinia/Archive 1

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Berehinia, 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:

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.

Archives

Archive 1

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 ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:10, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem on Koledari[edit]

Song lyrics are typically copyright, so we're not allowed to include them. Sorry, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:10, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That was a folk song, there's no copyright on it.Berehinia (talk) 17:57, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 2019[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Koledari has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Koledari was changed by Berehinia (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.868045 on 2019-06-29T02:20:07+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 02:20, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

July 2019[edit]

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Shen Yun. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Tsu *miki*⧸ 🌉 05:48, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Shen Yun, you may be blocked from editing. Tsu *miki*⧸ 🌉 02:43, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nice intimidation attempt from an actual disruptive editor Tsumikiria

April 2020[edit]

Hello. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Misinformation related to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic. Please be aware that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reverts on a single page within a 24 hour period. Rather than reverting edits, please consider using the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. The dispute resolution processes may also help. Excessive reverting may result in a loss of editing privileges.

At the moment of this message, you are unilaterally reverting against the consensus of four separate editors. --Cold Season (talk) 03:41, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

A community discussion has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).
The specific details of these sanctions are described here.

Broadly, general sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

--Cold Season (talk) 04:07, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank for the heads up Cold Season. I'm now well aware of the 3 revert rule and have engaged in a Talk page discussion instead.

Important Notice[edit]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in Falun Gong. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 11:41, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 2020[edit]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or inappropriately sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Shen Yun. Doug Weller talk 11:43, 18 May 2020 (UTC) Twinkle didn't apply the template it told me it was applying, fixing that. Doug Weller talk 14:55, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Doug Weller The material was sourced, in fact had multiple sources.

I use Twinkle. What I see in the tool is ";{uw-unsourced4}}: Addition of unsourced or improperly cited material", and as you say, that isn't what the warning looks like when it's added by Twinkle. I'll take that up with the owner. Doug Weller talk 11:45, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You need to get consensus at the talk page[edit]

I see you've got quite a few warnings - if you continue to get them, you'll end up with a block or topic ban. Not from me as I've reverted you. Doug Weller talk 11:44, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Doug Weller Thanks for the suggestion. I'll do exactly that. Overall though I'm disappointed that a large proportion of this community isn't very supportive or helpful to newer users who are still learning.

You were warned about Shen Yun 10 months ago. Here's two useful tips - @ does nothing, you need something like {{ping|Berehinia}} - done correctly in one signed post. Do anything wrong and it doesn't work. Please sign using 4 tildes, eg ~~~~, and learn to WP:INDENT. That's three tips. Lol, I misspelled your username at Talk:Shen Yun and failed to ping you! You get notified if that happens.

Here's another one - you've made a lot of posts pro-Falun Gong and anti the Chinese government. You'd be wise to find other things to edit. The sanctions posted above have put in place for good reasons. Doug Weller talk 08:22, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tips. However I don't agree with your categorization or even the appropriateness of such recommendation, especially since I already edit a variety of topics. I've done about 5 edits on a couple of pages related to Falun Gong in the last month. User:Bloodofox has made upward of 50! in the last month and yet he didn't receive warnings.

Also, why were the sanctions put in place for Falun Gong related pages? Berehinia (talk) 05:44, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've self-alerted to all topic areas under discretionary sanctions, most of which I don't edit. What the alert says is that you have shown an interest, which is clearly true. Bloodfox got the DS alert same as you, and unlike you there was an attempt to get him blocked or banned from the topic area. I don't quite understand why you are asking me about why the FG related pages came under sanctions as there's an obvious link explaining why in the alert. I was elected to the Arbitration Committee quite a while after the problems so I've got no inside or any other sort of specific knowledge, but my guess is that a lot of FG supporters were trying to influence the articles. You'll know more than I do if you read up on it. It will surely have been the same sort of problems but on a larger scale that led to the main FG article being given extra protection this week. Doug Weller talk 08:56, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: Hope the pinging works this time.

Ban warnings- I understand the generic blanket sanctions notice. My concern is with regards to the additional ones you provided.

Firstly you referred to a 10 month old warning. Have you looked into the disruptive user who gave that warning and why?

You gave me a ban warning on 18 May 2020 for adding unsourced material, which is not true. I'd like to have that rectified/retracted please.

You reverted my Shen Yun edit, explaining that the sources being used are misrepresented. I wasn't adding anything new, just reinstating the material and the quotes that were there. Shortly before me User:Bloodofox added what can be categorized as WP:OR clearly misrepresenting sources but you haven't reverted him. Nor have you provided him with a ban warning. Why is that? Will you revert his edit?

Falun Gong DS. Looks like falun gong topic was in arbitration back in 2007 and primarily revolved around 2 anti-falun gong editors who ended up being banned. One of them was engaging in promoting a viewpoint consistent with his outside activism in “exposing” Falun Gong. Read more here.

If you would sign your edits the ping would work. Please sign them. Yes, I looked at the editor, I don't see any problems on their talk page or last archive. I've explained the 18th May warning above and will ask the tool owner to fix it. As I recall, you used sources that made it look as though the sources had nothing negative to say. I didn't give you a ban warning. I'm not paying that much attention to the article but I did notice that you used an unacceptable Falun Gong source today, which is why I'm here. It matters not at all that the case arose out of the activities of anti-FG editors. Sanctions always cover all editors. Doug Weller talk 11:53, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller:

Ban warning:I’m referring to this one: " You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Shen Yun. Doug Weller talk 11:43, 18 May 2020 (UTC)" It says I added unsourced material, which is false. The source misrepresentation concern we resolved amicably, and I appreciate you explaining what that meant. So, if we’re on the same page and this is the warning you’ve asked to get fixed, that’s great. I appreciate that.

I’m still unclear though as to why you haven’t also reverted User:Bloodofox or provided him with the same ban warning due to him engaging in source misrepresentation and quote manipulation around the same time I was editing those pages.

And with the regards to User:Tsumikiria. Being a pretty new editor back then I didn’t understand too much but I’m pretty sure I didn’t break any rules. I’m surprised that you didn’t notice that the editor reverted my edits on Shen Yun twice without an explanation or discussion but did leave a couple of warnings that I perceived as pretty threatening.

Recent Shen Yun Edit:You mentioned I used an unacceptable Falun Gong source. It was reverted it but as far as I know the only source that is related to Falun Gong in some way and is listed as non WP:RS is the Epoch Times.

Neutrality concern:You’ve referenced the discretionary sanctions related to Falun Gong which you are the one currently enforcing from what I can tell. However, you were acting with an erroneous assumption that sanctions are in place due to “FG supporters were trying to influence the articles” when it was actually anti Falun Gong editors promoting their views. Given you’ve reached out directly to User:Bloodofox and User:Gurnardmexico66 to make them aware of the Falun Gong topic and are actively involved in the Falun Gong, The Epoch Times, and Shen Yun Fringe Theories discussion, I hope that as a respected member of this community who is in the position of power here you can maintain a neutral attitude on this subject. And also I hope third time's a charm for the notifications :) Berehinia (talk) 04:26, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're still confusing WP:BLOCKs and WP:BANs. Any other concerns you have can be taken to the talk page or if not resolved there to WP:RSN, WP:NPOV etc. I looked at the log of the FG case and the last time editors were banned was a dispute between editors being disruptive on both sides of the issue. When I look at your source[1] it's celebrating FG with a photo of a rally saying "More than 8,000 Falun Gong practitioners gathered near the United Nations in New York to support 200 million Chinese people to withdraw from the CCP"" and I stand by my notification. I've a huge workload and rarely get around to my own editing. Doug Weller talk 08:55, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: For clarity's sake could you please confirm whether you are removing the erroneous WP:BLOCK warning from my talk page? Just to be clear I'm referring to this one: "You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Shen Yun".

You said you were elected into the arbitration committee “quite a while after the problems”. As a member of an arbitration committee don’t you have an ethical obligation to make informed decisions on the topics you may be involved in arbitrating/sanctioning? Have you not examined the locus of the 2007 dispute?

Are you enforcing prohibition of what you perceive as Falun Gong related sources from being used as references across Wikipedia? Berehinia (talk) 19:50, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You still don't seem to understand that it was Twinkle that left out "inappropriately sourced" - as a courtesy - although I've already made it clear, I'll change that.

The events that led to an Arbitration Committee decision setting sanctions are irrelevant. It's the decisions and modifications that are relevant to imposing any sanctions. And no editor needs to even know these to give someone an alert to anyone showing an interest in the area. ::None of this is rocket science. And life's too short to do everything I'd like to do, so I prioritise - I can't fix everything. Almost forgot, don't bother to ping me, it won't work. Doug Weller talk 14:57, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: History of Ukrainian hryvnia (May 28)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at History of Ukrainian hryvnia instead.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This draft appears to contain details that can be added to the article.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:History of Ukrainian hryvnia and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:History of Ukrainian hryvnia, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 02:40, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Berehinia! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Robert McClenon (talk) 02:40, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Warning re tendentious editing[edit]

Your editing concerning Falun Gong is tendentious. The next time you add material based on a Falun Gong-affiliated source such as tuidang.org, as you did here, or remove sourced content as you did here (you called the removed text original research, but it was well covered in several of the following references), you are likely to be topic banned from Falun Gong-related pages. Bishonen | tålk 19:43, 31 May 2020 (UTC).[reply]

@Bishonen: I strongly disagree with your above claim. Please justify why using a Falun Gong-affiliated source tuidang.org has caused such a drastic response from you in the form of a topic ban warning? And secondly I hope you can review the WP:OR edit you must be referring to more thoroughly. The claim that Shen Yun "company remains an extension of Falun Gong" had no cited reference in the article and thus appears to be a form of opinion by the person who added that in. Berehinia (talk) 20:58, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020[edit]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Shen Yun. Binksternet (talk) 05:29, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Binksternet: Interesting you’d resort to warning me rather then discuss on SY page, especially given you've misrepresented sources and engage in non NPOV editing yourself. Please remove your unsubstantiated warning. Berehinia (talk) 00:10, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This warning was a required step before reporting you to an administrator to be blocked for disruption. I was responding to this series of edits by you which introduced what I called "horrible sourcing". Specifically, you cited a partisan speech in US Congress and an unreliable church blog! You changed text that hewed closely (too closely in fact) to the scholarly source written by Andrew Junker. You attempted to erase the Falun Gong adherents working on Shen Yun events. It was a terribly disruptive edit. Binksternet (talk) 02:20, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Binksternet: Your points are highly subjective and don't comply with wiki policies. And the fact that you are now reporting me without a substantive reason, based on your assumptions and without a discussion is a very hostile act. Berehinia (talk) 22:32, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would not call an act "hostile" if the purpose is the protection of Wikipedia from disruption. Binksternet (talk) 22:51, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you call this protection, then I have to wonder what your motives are in protecting the specific types of information misrepresentation and one-sidedness. Berehinia (talk) 23:06, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Violation of Wikipedia:Harassment[edit]

Because of repeated harassment on my talk page, I am asking you formally: Do not post anything at my talk page. See WP:NOBAN for talk page banning guideline, and Wikipedia:Harassment for the policy you have been violating.

If you think my behavior is a problem for the encyclopedia, take it to WP:ANI or another relevant noticeboard. Binksternet (talk) 05:30, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Berehinia, I see that Binksternet made four specific requests for you to stay off his talk page. If you persist, you will be blocked for harassment. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:44, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The snide invocation of racism here ("Is it something about Asians that makes you uncomfortable?") is enough for a harassment block IMO. But since Cullen has merely warned you, I'll defer to him. Just don't pester Binksternet again. Bishonen | tålk 10:37, 15 October 2020 (UTC).[reply]

I also received one of these "notices", which I take as harassment: [2] :bloodofox: (talk) 21:51, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, Bloodofox. I went to remove it, but since you had left it there, I suppose you prefer it left. Berehinia, don't send nonsensical templates to any constructive editors. It's altogether better not to use templated warnings unless you're talking to a vandal. Bishonen | tålk 22:07, 15 October 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Am I not free to engage in relevant discussions on any page including a user talk page? I'm sorry Binksternet if you misconstrued my humour as offensive. Regardless, source deletions against WP:CONS made by Binksternet and Bloodofox were very disruptive and are a repeating pattern so I had to warn them. User:Cullen328 and User:Bishonen do you also consider the warnings that I have received to be harassment or 'nonsensical'? I'd appreciate some clarity as to what's going on here. Berehinia (talk) 02:46, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:01, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:History of Ukrainian hryvnia[edit]

Hello, Berehinia. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "History of Ukrainian hryvnia".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:56, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]