User talk:BlueSisyphus

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Turuncueller. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 13:14, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 2018

Hello, I'm ChamithN. I noticed that you made a change to an article, C++, 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! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ChamithN (talk) 20:07, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

July 2019

Your recent editing history at OpenFOAM 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. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a 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 you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page 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 three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Rockstonetalk to me! 19:34, 8 July 2019 (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. Thank you. Rockstonetalk to me! 19:37, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

July 2019

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at OpenFOAM. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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 ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 20:01, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23:

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

1. I requested temporary protection of the page before the editing war began: http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism 2. I literally begged the other user to use Talk page: http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/User_talk:Dftyapo If you look at the history of OpenFOAM page from 2016, you can observe that the same user had editing war with other users. Yet I have received the same punishment of the other user, which I request to be reviewed. 17 kutalmis bercin (talk) 20:10, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The purpose of blocking is not punishment. It's stopping/preventing disruption. See that which follows.
(revised) I'm sorry, but I cannot unblock you at this time. You have not addressed the reason for your block.

Please see our policy on edit warring. In the event of a content dispute, editors are required to discuss and seek consensus among editors on the relevant talk page. If discussions reach an impasse, editors can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution.

Points to ponder:

Edit warring is wrong even if one is right.

Any arguments in favor of one's preferred version should be made on the relevant talk page and not in an unblock appeal.

Calling attention to the faults of others is never a successful strategy; one must address one's own behavior.

To be unblocked, you must affirm an understanding of all of this, and what not to do, and what to do when in a content dispute. Thanks,

   Dlohcierekim (talk) 20:21, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

PS

In a content dispute, labeling the other user's edits as vandalism is never a good idea. It is obviously not vandalism, so saying it is only casts you in a bad light. Dlohcierekim (talk) 20:45, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23, Dlohcierekim, and Rockstone35: Dear Dlohcierekim, many thanks for the insights. I might have wrongly assumed that making changes without any discussion or consensus despite kind invitations to discussion through Talk page appeared to me somewhat a vandal's behaviour. Yet again I have learned many things, thank you. Please note that this user (deduced from the edit summary) has reverted the changes Rockstone35 with another user-name (to overcome his/her block). 01:34, 9 July 2019‎ Hurthaze talk contribs‎ 26,440 bytes -283‎ Correcting errors as per my previous revert of edit warrior. I wonder if this is allowed. Many thanks for your time. 17kuti (talk) 07:28, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, that's so much better-- you've accused someone of socking((sarcasm)(sigh)-- please provide the link or the name of the article. Dlohcierekim (talk) 08:22, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited OpenFOAM, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page AVS (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:34, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 19

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited OpenFOAM, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Lagrangian and Multiphase (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:20, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited OpenFOAM, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Nuclear and Marine (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:56, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 3

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Diyarbakır Fortress, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Byzantines.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:52, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

July 2021

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at Mesut Özil. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:24, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up discussions regarding this warning, which I deem baseless and try to prove its lack of base: link 17kuti (talk) 23:12, 3 July 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Şanlıurfa Province, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Zaza. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

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 ~~~~}}.

Materialscientist (talk) 16:14, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:OpenFOAM software logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:OpenFOAM software logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 21:17, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:OpenFOAM software logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:OpenFOAM software logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 01:23, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]