Jump to content

User talk:Globallycz

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

[edit]
Hello, Globallycz!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips
  • Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
  • It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
  • If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
  • Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
  • When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
  • If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
  • Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Armand Duplantis

[edit]

I have asked an administrator to review your conduct in continually reverting the page ahead of consensus being achieved on the Talk page Billsmith60 (talk) 17:33, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. —asparagusus (interaction) sprouts! 17:43, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I dont think I was the first one who claimed GOAT status for Mondo. There wasn’t any discussion when changes were made by those who disagreed. And this is the same for your approach to removing the diamond lrague title. It has been there for a long time even before I started my first edit and uou had it removed without discussion too. I am not trying to accuse anyone..jist stating facts and defending myself. Globallycz (talk) 17:50, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just to add. Being new when I first started, I was not fully aware there is this channel for discussion at Talk. But when I become aware, I have tried to engage in discussion but there is no acceptance or acknowledgement to what I put forth. Even when I told you that almost all diamond league winners have listed DL title in their wikipedia pages, there is zero acknowledgement. Globallycz (talk) 17:55, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good Faith

[edit]

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. Editors are expected to treat each other with respect and civility. On this encyclopedia project, editors assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not appear to do at Talk:Armand Duplantis. Here is Wikipedia's welcome page, and it is hoped that you will assume the good faith of other editors and continue to help us improve Wikipedia! Thank you very much! Brocade River Poems (She/They) 04:57, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I do not agree. You have to review the entire issue in perspective and not just conversation at Talk:Armand Duplantis. I do not wish to explain further until you are aware of the entire series of exchange. Globallycz (talk) 09:08, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

[edit]

Hello, I'm Synorem. I noticed that in this edit to Armand Duplantis, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Synorem (talk) 18:22, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am relatively new. The removal was accidental when I tried to add content regarding origin of nickname for Duplantis. Thanks for restoring almost all the deleted content. Globallycz (talk) 19:16, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Control copyright icon Hello Globallycz! Your additions to World Athletics Awards have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, it's important to understand and adhere to guidelines about using information from sources to prevent copyright and plagiarism issues. Here are the key points:

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices. Persistent failure to comply may result in being blocked from editing. If you have any questions or need further clarification, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. -- Diannaa (talk) 20:35, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you throwing so much rules at me? I am just trying to contribute to the wikipedia page to keep it updated. Did anyone raise an issue other than yourself? Sorry i am afraid I will disregard your inputs. Too much details. You are like lecturing others.
If this us your way, nobody will want to conteibute anymore. Globallycz (talk) 17:13, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:55, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 2024

[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm JacktheBrown. I noticed that you recently removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. JacktheBrown (talk) 10:30, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i would suggest you take a wholistic view of how i usually justify my edits. Otherwise it is jus nitpicking base on narrow view. I wont respond further to such allegation. Globallycz (talk) 11:28, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No seriously. People edit is their own right. If people or editors are already done or editing their own because of right or wrong, then you should respect. You got typos. If you still disagree, just quit already or take it up with the admins and editors. You only new to editing for a few months. 122.11.212.233 (talk) 16:20, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, you joined in this conservation without stating your issue. That is not xourteous. Of cz, i understand why you are riding on this topic. You deleted ages without reasons. That was the basis for revision. Again, i wont respond further. By the way, i thanked those who spotted typos. But for those, who doesnt justify significant deletion or who edit unreasonably, i would not respect. Globallycz (talk) 01:18, 17 December 2024 (UTC

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.122.11.212.156 (talk) 04:57, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at List of major crimes in Singapore (2020–present). 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 believe that 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 ~~~~}}.  The Bushranger One ping only 08:37, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Frankly, i rather get blocked for 24 hours rather than go through dispute resolution steps proposed above. When dealing with a difficult editor, it will be hard to get the point across. In the end, the quality of the page suffers if one is too nice. For difficult editor, they wont listen. This is how I feel. Thanks Globallycz (talk) 09:08, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, well, those steps are not optional. The next block, should you likewise decide you'd rather be blocked than be civil, will be longer. Ravenswing 09:25, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, of course.
But I feel we shouldnt assume people are uncivil or label them as uncivil just because they dont follow established rules here. This is something I dont like about some WP editors especially those that throw rules out.
Not every editor is familiar with the resolution steps or has the time or energy to follow through. For me, it is fine to be blocked. I rather take that route. For me, not all dispute arbitration by Admin is fair here. For Admin, they dont really care who was the perpetuator. To Admin, as long as anyone breaks 3RR, they will be penalised.
The forturate thing is most editors are reasonable. But there will always be one or two tbat are difficult to deal with. It is not every day, we meet one that remove significant content without reason. Just look at how impolite the other party for my case is when he reverted the changes unwillingly. Globallycz (talk) 10:16, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Frankly if you admin people are more informed or less lazy, you will check the edits by IP user 122.11.212.233 and notice most of his edits were reverted by others due to vandalism. This is partly why I dont have any kind of respect to the check and balance system in WP. Globallycz (talk) 10:38, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. The Bushranger One ping only 23:10, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am highlighting a problem here but instead of looking into the edit content by IP user, you choose to issue warnings. That is disappointing. WP Admin should refrain from threathening editors. Globallycz (talk) 01:15, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. Enough. Stop commenting on other users. Meters (talk) 23:36, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have specifically commented on the disruptive content by IP user 122.11.212.233 at WP Admin Noticeboard/Incidents. If I am eventually blocked indef, it will be miscarriage of justice.

Globallycz (talk) 01:23, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have continued to call the IP "irrational", and you have continued to call admins and other users "lazy". That is unacceptable. Stop commenting on other users. Stop bludgeoning the ANI page. You were both blocked for edit warring. Multiple editors have responded in the thread and iti s clear you are not going to get the IP blocked, you have been pointed to WP:DROPTHESTICK, you have been warned for personal attacks, and someone has called for you to be indef'ed. Take the hint while you still can. Meters (talk) 01:41, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. This is your final warning - drop the stick and stop referring to other editors as "lazy" or "irrational" or your next block will be immediate and indefinite. - The Bushranger One ping only 01:45, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Yaroslava Mahuchikh, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Paris Olympics. 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) 19:56, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

May 2025

[edit]

Stop icon Your recent editing history at Yaroslava Mahuchikh 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; read about 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Amigao (talk) 20:51, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon

Hello Globallycz. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Yaroslava Mahuchikh, gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Globallycz. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Globallycz|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. Amigao (talk) 20:58, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon

As previously advised, your edits, such as the edit you made to Yaroslava Mahuchikh, give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:Globallycz, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Globallycz|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. Amigao (talk) 16:35, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Globallycz&oldid=1290871185"