User talk:Gorgon Slayer

March 2022

I did in fact review the reference links for Lyudmila Pavlichenko - there is one not very credible source that calls into question her sniper count. All other sources that make reference to her count cite them as fact, and in the National World War II Museum cites her 309 tally as confirmed as recently as March 2021.

Of the six sources linked that mention her tally NONE of them call into question the veracity of the count.

Source 12. Mankiller….”Pavlichenko fought for over two and a half months near Odessa and recorded 187 kills. When the enemy gained control of Odessa, the Soviet Independent Maritime Army was pulled out and sent to Sevastopol on the Crimean Peninsula. In the fierce fighting, Pavlichenko was wounded by a mortar blast in June 1942. At this time, her score stood at 309.”

Source 8. Eleanor Roosevelt…”She also happened to be the most successful and feared female sniper in history, with 309 confirmed kills to her credit—the majority German soldiers.”

Source 6. Soviet ‘girl sniper’….”The 26-year-old Red Army lieutenant was already the deadliest female sharpshooter in history. Her audacious attacks killed 309 Nazis.”

Source 5. Lady Death… “As a member of the Soviet Army during World War II, she killed 309 Nazis, earning the sobriquet “Lady Death.””

Source 2. Meet the worlds…”but within a year, she had become one of the best snipers of all time, credited with 309 confirmed kills, 36 of which were German snipers.”

Source 19. “cited by the Southern Red Army Council for killing 257 German soldiers [total confirmed "kills" during WWII: 309]” — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:21D0:83B0:600F:80E7:53C1:8BDC (talk) 01:53, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Valenciano. I noticed that you removed topically-relevant content from Dog meat. However, Wikipedia is not censored. Please do not remove or censor information that directly relates to the subject of the article. If the content in question involves images, you have the option to configure Wikipedia to hide images that you may find offensive. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Valenciano (talk) 08:35, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is going to encourage illegal activities in majority countries where it is not legal . And if wikipedia is not censored , then let Me Add human Meat pictures in Human cannibalism page . I guess you are going to get offended that time . Because of basic ethics , we should not put any uncensored images on Wikipedia . Saiful Trismegistus (talk) 09:42, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Cat meat, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Adakiko (talk) 09:57, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia MUST NOT promote activities that's ILLEGAL IN MOST OF THE COUNTRIES regardless of it's policies . Saiful Trismegistus (talk) 10:16, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Dog meat, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. SunDawn talk 10:19, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Cat meat, you may be blocked from editing. Removal of content without proper explanation, why cat meat are not consumed regularly in some countries are not discussed on the talk page. SunDawn talk 10:24, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am still not getting how you are mixing your opinion with reality. And for your information, I am repeating it again. The very sources that you are referring to as fact is self-contradictory. National world war 2 museum along with all the other articles and magazine has copy pasted the same invalid information over and over again. And the sources that I have mentioned is not only reliable, but the historian has accumalated logic, authentic information and history unlike those articles.

" submachine gunners covering him. In reality, enemy snipers tended to take up positions in conventional trenches, or slightly ahead, never behind.

    The spontaneous decision to take a German sniper prisoner also looks rather strange - the initial task of our fighters, of course, should have been to destroy him.

    The interrogation of the German in the neutral zone seems doubtful, and especially the proceedings with his absolutely fantastic sniper score. And the fact that a German sniper trained in shooting at prisoners in a death camp looks like the height of absurdity and cynicism. This is just a conscious monstrous lie, concocted for propaganda purposes ...

    In general, I personally do not understand why our most respected sniper needed to lie like that? Why did she need to replace real historical facts with delusional fantasies? In the end, this is unacceptable, and humanly not decent! After all, the speeches of the famous sniper were listened to by many millions of people who sincerely believed absolutely everything that the Hero of the Soviet Union said.

    I think that historical truth is categorically needed! It gives you the opportunity to honestly look into the eyes of your history and yourself, the current one. Lies are the opposite. Those who lie about the past can hide the truth about the present. But strength is in truth, as one of our cult characters remarked wonderfully ... " Gorgon Slayer (talk) 07:14, 18 December 2022 (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. MarshallKe (talk) 19:16, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Saiful Trismegistus. You've been warned for edit warring at Cat meat and Dog meat. You may be blocked if you revert either of these articles again without first getting a consensus in your favor on the article talk page. Details of the warning are at the noticeboard complaint. EdJohnston (talk) 19:47, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for contacting . But I am speaking Objectively with providing Authentic Source which is Equivalent to getting a consensus . Saiful Trismegistus (talk) 19:11, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. 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 ~~~~}}.

You are blocked since you have continued to make reverts at Cat meat at 19:05 on March 10 after being warned to stop. Your confidence that you are 'speaking objectively' does not excuse you from getting consensus, which clearly you don't have. EdJohnston (talk) 19:21, 10 March 2022 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Gorgon_Slayer reported by User:JeffUK (Result: ). Thank you. JeffUK (talk) 11:20, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Brandmeister^talk 15:20, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Daniel Camargo Barbosa, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. GabberFlasted (talk) 15:22, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Brandmeister You think your opinion matters, offspring of a bitch? You should go and drink cyanide. Gorgon Slayer (talk) 17:06, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Block upgraded to indefinite, with talk page access revoked

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for harassment and threats of violence against other users. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then submit a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. Jayron 32 17:12, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]