User talk:Edifice70

September 2020

Hello, I'm Austronesier. An edit that you recently made to Eastern Hunter-Gatherer seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want to practice editing, please use your sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Austronesier (talk) 17:18, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Recent edits

Please stop making edits on Kiev/Kyiv like these, this is not a typo as you have stated in your edit summaries. The article name is clearly not what you changed it to and a consensus on the naming (where "Kiev" remains in historical topics) was already established here. Thanks. Mellk (talk) 04:50, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

March 2022

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Rurik dynasty. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Please refer to the previous RfC result here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kyiv/Archive_9#RfC:_Kyiv/Kiev_in_other_articles), which clearly notes that for historical topics "Kiev" should be utilised. VickKiang (talk) 01:52, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Rurik dynasty, you may be blocked from editing. VickKiang (talk) 01:56, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use edit summaries that are misleading, intentionally or not, as you did at Sviatopolk I of Kiev, you may be blocked from editing. Sumanuil 21:59, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Informational notice

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 the Balkans or Eastern Europe. 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.

--K.e.coffman (talk) 17:27, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:48, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

February 2023

You were already told multiple times before to not continue with edits such as this. Mellk (talk) 14:26, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Edifice70. Thank you. Mellk (talk) 03:36, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

February 2023

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

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

You have been editing against the consensus established at WP:KIEV, and you have been lying in edit summaries, and you have failed to discuss and collaborate with your fellow editors. Cullen328 (talk) 03:51, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Request to Unblock/Respecting and Sensitive to Convention Moving Forward

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Edifice70 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I was unaware of the convention to leave the spelling of “Kyiv” as “Kiev” for all topics relating to the city prior to August 24, 1991. I called changing “Kiev” to “Kyiv” a “typo” because that’s the best description I could come up with that seemed legitimate. I have no intention to be disruptive or not collaborate with other contributors, and I’m completely fine with the convention now that I’m aware of it’s establishment. I was a little unclear on what would be appropriate or not, but I am clear now. I’d like to be unblocked, because I feel like I have a lot to offer to Wikipedia, in the way of fixing errors I come across. This error on my part will not repeat itself, and I have no intention of being disruptive or controversial in my entries. I was a history major in college, and I have a wide range of interests, not just limited to this particular topic I’m very sensitive to following the rules, and I’m happy to do so now, and into the future, and to stay as neutral, factual, and scholarly as I can be. Thank you for your consideration. I’m sorry for having seemed disruptive or non collaborative in changing Kiev to Kyiv whenever I saw it. I thought it would be ok, but understand now it is not. Because I go down historical rabbit holes, I was coming across Kiev a lot for a while, and was changing it every time I saw it. I had no intention of being dishonest. I will also keep and eye out to collaborate and be inclusive on any other spelling conventions and realize there are many opinions and outlooks and I’m interested in them all. Sorry for the unintentional inconvenience! Edifice70 (talk) 05:25, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Accept reason:

I will remove the block based on your comments here. Good luck. 331dot (talk) 16:20, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Cullen328 This sounds pretty good to me, but if there's anything I've overlooked, please tell me. 331dot (talk) 09:25, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

I will also be mindful not to erase and replace spellings of personal names and locations using modern day spellings for historical people and places. Instead, leave the original “as is”, or, if appropriate, collaboratively add a alternative modern convention spelling, but clearly referenced and in a cooperative and transparent way. I will not attempt to alter “Kiev” to “Kyiv” pre 8/24/91, and I’m not out trying to find this spelling in any way, I’ve just been running across it, but will no longer replace, add, or alter that spelling as it was the common historical usage. Edifice70 (talk) 13:44, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm just waiting for comment from the blocking admin. 331dot (talk) 13:58, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

331dot, given the assurances that the editor has offered above, I have no objection to unblocking. Cullen328 (talk) 15:26, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! I’ll be sure to be mindful, respectful, accurate, and within acceptable usage and practice moving forward. I really appreciate the unblocking and am thankful. Edifice70 (talk) 22:03, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I will be mindful, careful, and respectful moving forward. Edifice70 (talk) 22:10, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:59, 28 November 2023 (UTC)