User talk:Vladimir Hunter

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome Vladimir Hunter!

Hello Vladimir Hunter. Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions!

I'm Jauerback, one of the other editors here, and I hope you decide to stay and help contribute to this amazing repository of knowledge.

Some pages of helpful information to get you started:   Introduction to Wikipedia   The five pillars of Wikipedia   Editing tutorial   How to edit a page   Simplified Manual of Style   The basics of Wikicode   How to develop an article   How to create an article   Help pages   What Wikipedia is not

Some common sense Dos and Don'ts:   Do be bold   Do assume good faith   Do be civil   Do keep cool!   Do maintain a neutral point of view   Don't spam   Don't infringe copyright   Don't edit where you have a conflict of interest   Don't commit vandalism   Don't get blocked

If you need further help, you can:   Ask a question

or you can:   Get help at the Teahouse

or even:   Ask an experienced editor to "adopt" you

Alternatively, leave me a message at my talk page or type {{Help me}} here on your talk page and someone will try to help.

There are many ways you can contribute to Wikipedia. Here are a few ideas:   Fight vandalism   Be a WikiFairy or a WikiGnome   Help contribute to articles   Perform maintenance tasks

Become a member of a project that interests you   Help design new templates   Subscribe and contribute to The Signpost   Translate articles from Wikipedias in other languages

To get some practice editing you can use a sandbox. You can create your own personal sandbox for use any time. It's perfect for working on bigger projects. Then for easy access in the future, you can put {{My sandbox}} on your user page. By the way, seeing as you haven't created a user page yet, simply click here to start it.

Please remember to:

• Always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes ~~~~ at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to your talk page, and a timestamp.
• Leave descriptive edit summaries for your edits. Doing so helps other editors understand what changes you have made and why you made them.
  

The best way to learn about something is to experience it. Explore, learn, contribute, and don't forget to have some fun!

• Español
• Deutsch
• Français
• Italiano
• עברית
• Русский
• 日本語
• Polski
• فارسی

Sincerely, Jauerback^dude?/_dude. (Leave me a message) 01:37, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

March 2024

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Hazelwood East High School. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. AlphaBetaGamma (talk) 01:44, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Rusty4321. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, List of Generation Z slang, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Rusty4321 ^{talk contribs} 20:06, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contribution(s). However, as a general rule, while user talk pages permit a small degree of generalisation, other talk pages such as Talk:2024 Crocus City Hall attack are strictly for discussing improvements to their associated main pages, and many of them have special instructions on the top. They are not a general discussion forum about the article's topic or any other topic. If you have questions or ideas and are not sure where to post them, consider asking at the Teahouse. Thanks. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 00:03, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Talk:Crocus City Hall attack, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Wikipedia is not a venue to promote your own theories that are not found in reliable sources, regardless of whether they are true. (t · c) buidhe 05:27, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

I had Suggested an improvement in the talk page. I did not force it in thr main page and I don't understand why you are accusing me of doing so Vladimir Hunter (talk) 22:16, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, 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.

Additionally, you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.

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.

This relates to your claim here. Fences&Windows 13:12, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

April 2024

Please refrain from using talk pages such as Talk:Leo Frank for general discussion of this or other topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways, based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines; they are not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See the talk page guidelines for more information. Thank you. Acroterion (talk) 23:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

That was my intention. I was questioning an aspect of the page and it would obviously draw people in to discuss with me or explain the what and why Vladimir Hunter (talk) 23:27, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

See WP:NOTFORUM. Talkpages are for specific, sourced,actionable proposals for article improvement, not a general discussion or debate concerning the topic. Acroterion (talk) 23:32, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, that's exactly what I did. I pointed out a problem to spark discussion on why it's okay or how to improve it. Vladimir Hunter (talk) 00:38, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

”Specific, sourced, actionable proposals.” Not “spark discussion.” Acroterion (talk) 05:20, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

@Acroterion It's not the first time this editor has done this. Doug Weller talk 09:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

If you are refering to a talk page topic I made in reference to the indiscriminate bombing of Gaza by europeans, I was able to rewrite it to satisfy your demands without including a single source. All I did was question an existing source. Vladimir Hunter (talk) 17:41, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Okay. I'll come back with "Specific" sources to mirror my statements when I find them Vladimir Hunter (talk) 17:37, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Despite Acroterion messages (also cc Doug Weller, you just started this discussion: Talk:Helldivers 2#Hate to sound obnixious buuuuutt.... This game released at the same time Israel began indiscriminately bombing Gaza and we are seeing alot of reality in fiction. One of the main planets is called "Cyberstan" and the corpses of the Bugs are harvested for some compound calle 710 ("Oil" flipped upside down). Helldivers 2 was released in February this year. The conflict of the Israel–Hamas war started in October. Video games are in development for a long time. Helldivers 2#Development and release states development started in December 2020. So that would be your own interpretation. If Helldivers 2 is satire on imperialism, what does "Cyberstan" and 710 have to do with Israel's actions in Gaza? This seems very odd to me. The problem is I can't find any news articles or sources directly addressing any of these things. They exist but I'm having a hard time finding them, I'll come back here when I get time to find them and we can talk about where this information should fit in the article. So you can't find the sources but they exist? How do you know these sources exist if you can't find them at all? Next time, maybe find the sources first. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 23:00, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

...

See, right after I posted that, I looked through the page and realized one of the already existing sources on the Helldivers 2 page did already mention the game dabbled in satrical depictions of facism. It goes into detail actually. (https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/helldivers-2-fascism-satire-debate-rcna140653)

You ask me how could I possibly know the game is actually satire if there are no "Reliable sources" saying such. I assure you that (1) I play the game (2) I live on this planet, (3) I see the same type of propoganda spewed in my country everyday, (4) I've had this exact propoganda levied against my ethnicity for centuries and (5) according to this websites own rules, as I have read hours ago, Wikipedia prioritizes verifibility over the truth, its own words. The lack of "Relieible sources" in this website's standards in and of itself is not proof of absence. It is not even absence. I understand deleting an edit made without sources but why badger me for daring to propose a change at all?

The game, as well as the first game, chooses to parody and satarize facism through allegories of imperialistic wars waged by Europeans and the USA against countries in the middle east. I'm not so stupid to think they knowingly dropped this game months after europeans began their latest landgrab and propoganda train without a hint of irony. But it's siginfigant, and I stated my intent to, in addition to stating the obvious, finding sources to this website's standard that reference the connections I chose to use as examples (Not edit requests, examples) or at least half of it.

If I didn't know any better I'd say you're just offended by those examples moreso than any actual rule violation. I've noticed that as a running theme among users on this website since I made the mistake of trying to contribute to current events. Do you have any actual authority here or is this "Despite previous warnings" talk just hot air?

I've never even seen you before. What brought you to me of all people? Not liking your energy. Vladimir Hunter (talk) 06:02, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't believe I am getting through to you. You are evading the question and are ranting about politics. I am going to remove your comment on Helldivers 2's talk page. Pinging @Acroterion: and @Doug Weller: again. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 06:41, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Yup. Looks like I was right in that you were just here to heckle me. Not discuss anything with me Vladimir Hunter (talk) 15:51, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to. Wikipedia is not a place for anyone to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 16:34, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Cap.

I hope hemorrhaging new users with your pride and bullshit makes you feel better, white boy. Vladimir Hunter (talk) 22:13, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

I left you two messages. You were told by several people to stop your inappropriate political rants. And now, racist remarks. Acroterion, time to remove talk page access? soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 04:40, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

No activity since the block, and, unless you object, I was inclined to leave their parting shot there so it's abundantly clear why they're indeffed. If they come back with abuse, I'll remove talkpage access. Acroterion (talk) 12:27, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

You are violating the restrictions you are under for all pages broadly construed related to the Arab-Israeli conflict

@Acroterion: on this page and the pages discussed above. Doug Weller talk 13:25, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

@Vladimir Hunter Note that includes this page. Doug Weller talk 13:25, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

I don’t recall ever being placed on a restriction. And why would a restriction apply to how I responded to false assertions made by random users on my own talk page? That sounds ridiculous Vladimir Hunter (talk) 15:58, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Now I have to wonder if you are competent enough to edit. What part of " you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic." don't you understand? And you cannot discuss the topic area anywhere although you can make formal requests on talk pages. No more warnings, you should be clear by now. Doug Weller talk 16:02, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

A formal request is exactly what I did, but fine, can tell when I’m not wanted. So unlike you I’ll be blunt on what I’m really thinking.

Clearly you chose to come here to heckle me for daring to have any empathy in the first place. I was hoping you were just doing your job but looks like you were also sitting and waiting for an excuse to badger me, over a so called technicality video game article. Why do you or @Soetermans: expect to be able to come here and insult me without me being offended by that? You should have heard the “Glass house” analogy” by now. Then to run off and cry foul to your friends and fellow moderators about how you totally didn’t come here with bad energy but somehow at the same time the other guy deserved your bad energy.

”you can’t discuss the topic” tell that to the other guy and then tell me how I’m supposed to respond to mentions of a “Topic” they chose to make on my own talk page rather than the public one.

“You are incompetent” sounds like a laced version of “Im not sure if you agree with me and my worldview, I just might block you permanently next time” so I’m chances are you’re borderline retarded.

I won’t be coming back. I can promise you that. I’ll even delete and throw away my password to this account. Whether or not you ban me won’t matter, but if it makes you feel better 🤷🏿‍♂️ Vladimir Hunter (talk) 16:25, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Fine. I didn't say you were incompetent, just wondered why you didn't understand what seems clear to me. You started a discussion, a formal request would be "change x to y because". And no one stops you from saying to someone I can't discuss that, or even asking them not to post to your talk page. But that's all moot now, your decision might save a lot of bother. Doug Weller talk 16:43, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

It does.

I've seen users get clamped down even harder when they dared to ask anyone to stop talking on their talk page so we both know that's bullshit.

This comes off as me trying to get the last word but really I'm just here to remove my email and disable email notifications. Vladimir Hunter (talk) 22:12, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

April 2024

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}.  Acroterion (talk) 15:49, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

This is a regular administrative action dealing with abuse of talkpages for forum chat. Additional sanctions may be imposed if you do that again, and arbitration sanctions may be imposed if you violate the arbitration restrictions that have been repeatedly explained to you concerning the Arab-Israeli conflict. Acroterion (talk) 16:05, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

It was explained to me exactly once immediately before this ban, but I’m leaving this website anyway. Please refer to my reply to Doug above. Vladimir Hunter (talk) 16:26, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

It was explained to you three days ago. This retort [1] is unacceptable under any circumstances. You're indefinitely blocked. Acroterion (talk) 00:29, 22 April 2024 (UTC)