User talk:Woxic1589#top

File:Nuvola apps important.svg Please stop your disruptive editing, like you have did in the following articles [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Ledra_Palace&diff=prev&oldid=1284496302 1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ottoman_invasion_of_western_Georgia_(1703)&diff=prev&oldid=1284943594 2] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2020_Balyun_airstrikes&diff=prev&oldid=1284144732 3] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2020_Balyun_airstrikes&diff=prev&oldid=1284144853 4] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Operation_Spring_Shield&diff=prev&oldid=1282751668 5] If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Mr.User200 (talk) 02:51, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

:Sorry but where and how exactly did I ‘’vandalize’’ these articles? At the page of the Battle of Ledra Palace I corrected the result as nowhere did it mention or point out to a ‘’Greek’’ victory, but rather that the area became a part of the UN buffer zone. The entire page of the 2020 Balyun airstrikes is full with mistakes, wrong sources and numbers. If people don’t agree with my edits they are obviously always welcome to discuss this at the talk pages. Woxic1589 (talk) 09:25, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

File:Information orange.svg Please do not remove information from articles. Wikipedia is not censored, and content is not removed on the sole grounds of perceived offensiveness. Please discuss this issue on the article's talk page to reach consensus rather than continuing to remove the disputed material. If the content in question involves images, you also have the option to configure Wikipedia to hide the images that you may find offensive. Thank you. Shadow4dark (talk) 20:41, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

File:Information orange.svg Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at :Persecution of Muslims during the Ottoman contraction. 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. Thank you. – Demetrios1993 (talk) 13:30, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

:Hi, on the page of the Aegean dispute the source (https://www.reuters.com/article/greece-turkey-warships-idUSL8N2FG22E/) didn’t mention any damage on the Turkish ship. Maybe additional sources should be added then. Will discuss the other one on the talk page then. Woxic1589 (talk) 14:04, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

:Ah ok I get blocked for literally trying to to save a page from a user who keeps reverting back edits back to back without even using the talk page while I clearly asked for it. I understand it now, thanks. Woxic1589 (talk) 18:43, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

:Ahahaha, you can’t make this up. I get blocked but the user I reported doesn’t? Calling someone a Kurdish TikTok troll is acceptable now on Wikipedia? Reverting back edits of mine while I clearly asked the user to use the talk page gets me banned? Okay, I guess thats how Wikipedia works nowadays. Woxic1589 (talk) 18:47, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

::I don't think you've actually read my comment at ANI correctly. Ectnoel1 was absolutely wrong to call you a Kurdish Tiktok vandal, and if you hadn't responded by calling them a pro-Assyrian vandal they would probably be blocked at the moment. You continued to edit war not once but twice against two different editors, after I had responded to your ANI thread to tell you in no uncertain terms that you and the other editor were both out of line and needed to stop edit warring immediately. Cool off, review the edit warring policy and come back when you're ready to follow them. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:49, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Don’t worry, I’m not planning to edit much more than this. Just trying to correct a page thats being misused by a group of users (possibly using multiple accounts considering another RV with the same reason). He also called someone else to be a sort of a tiktok troll here https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Assyrian_rebellion&diff=prev&oldid=1287868534 but nothing seems to be have done to him since then. Not sure how Wikipedia is gonna stay a safe place when users are allowed to behave like that. Me calling the user a pro-Assyrian was wrong indeed but a response to their disruptive behavior against anything that seems to be ‘’Kurdish’’. Will wait till mine block is gone and use the talk page. But if the other user doesn’t respond again (on the article page) then I assume he will get blocked instead of me, right? Woxic1589 (talk) 18:56, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

::::Just to be entirely clear: nobody is blocked because of civility. Both of you were uncivil to each other. Both of you have been admonished for it. Blocks are preventitive, not punitive, and as you are both now aware (and, presumably, acknowledge) that you were uncivil to each other, and thus will presumably avoid doing so again in the future accordingly, there's nothing to prevent there. You're blocked because you edit-warred, and continued to edit-war, after being warned about edit-warring. If, following your block, you intiate a discussion, and the other editor doesn't respond and continues editing anyway, additional sanctions may then be considered. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:53, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::While you two still keep telling me that, the same user is using a second account to revert back my edit again, see Termen28. Isn’t the use of multiple accounts considered disruptive behavior? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Assyrian_rebellion&diff=prev&oldid=1289483735 Why is he not getting blocked but I do? Woxic1589 (talk) 23:24, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

{{ivmbox | image = Commons-emblem-notice.svg |imagesize=50px | bg = #E5F8FF | text = You have recently edited a page related to the topics of Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed, 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 an expanded level of powers and discretion 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 practices;
• 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 {{tl|Ctopics/aware}} template.