Archive 1 : Archive 2 : Archive 3

Feel free to leave me a message.

When you reverted LiphradicusEpicus because of the edit war, you also removed content that was merged from the treaty page discussed on Talk:Treaty on the Adoption of the Republic of Crimea to Russia. Do you agree that the closer had consensus to merge the content and that the content had been merged properly? If so, could you restore the content on the accession page and add a {{copied}} hatnote to Talk:Accession of Crimea to the Russian Federation, then redirect the talkpage for the treaty? If not, could you explain why and add your voice to the discussion on the treaty page and revert the redirect? Thank you, TeleComNasSprVen (talk • contribs) 07:25, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've only been concerned about the article insofar as to see that merge process is followed. But thank you for instating it anyway, TeleComNasSprVen (talk • contribs) 15:08, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral position

Please let me express Jewish neutrality in this question, it is very important for me. If you know history you will probably understand why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by John wilson swe (talk • contribs) 20:02, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

John W. Can't you just help me editing the text so it becomes less "Anti US", that was not my intention I just copied some text from the sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by John wilson swe (talk • contribs) 20:34, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Japanese archipelago may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Japanese archipelago, although Japan renounced its claim to the island in the 20th century.<ref>{{"The Chautauquan", Volume 42, [http://books.google.com/books?id=DX0AAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA6&lpg=PA6#

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 06:46, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is likely.
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/LibDutch

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/XxReflectionxX

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/ChronicalUsual/Archive

IPinvestigates (talk) 22:31, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to open one concerning Minohaha, (from the page Talk:2013 Egyptian coup d'état), until I read your comment and found that this was already going on. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Minohaha Thank you for helping to keep Wikipedia an honest encyclopedia! -- Kndimov (talk) 20:44, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to trouble you. Please can you find a citation to back your POV on dates regarding the Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation.--Toddy1 (talk) 19:32, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are repeatedly undoing edits without providing any additional information or references to reliable information. Simply destroying other peoples' work is not serving the community or helping people understand what actually happened. Provide some information proving your point of view without pushing it. Blanket unsupported statements such as "staging military intervention" only misleads the reader.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Barbecue in the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mustard. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:21, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just letting you know it appears an edit conflict resulted in you deleting a comment here, which I've now restored. Thanks, Stickee (talk) 03:54, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Caliphate, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Second city and 2014 Northern Iraq offensive. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:59, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You deleted valuable information about the open letter to Angela Merkel without discussion. Since there is an edit war both at this page and at Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity I ask for an outside view at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Politics, government, and law. I guess it's best if we find uninvolved users who decide without previous bad feelings. Galant Khan (talk) 23:25, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding page move proposal, can you say "withdraw" in Talk:Russian invasion of Ukraine (2014)#Move request: Russia during the war in Donbass, so I can close it for you? Consensus in Talk:2014 Russian military intervention in Ukraine#Suggested merge says merge. --George Ho (talk) 07:26, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Hey there, I meant to give this to you a long time ago, for all your hard work on a wide-ranging variety of articles covering current events in the Middle East, North Africa and Europe, even in some pretty trying situations here on wikipedia. Kudos :) Yalens (talk) 20:07, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A belligerent (lat. bellum gerere, "to wage war") is an individual, group, country, or other entity that acts in a hostile manner, such as engaging in combat. Belligerent comes from Latin, literally meaning "one who wages war".[1] Unlike the use of belligerent as an adjective to mean aggressive, its use as a noun does not necessarily imply that a belligerent country is an aggressor. Sarvagyana guru

1. Engaged in warfare, warring.
2. Eager to go to war, warlike.
3. Of or pertaining to war.
4. (By extension) Aggressively hostile, eager to fight.
5. Acting violently towards others.

Sarvagyana guru (talk) 04:19, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. realized you were not notified, the discussion and issue is taking a turn for a larger scale issue. Anyways its getting late here and I may not have time to respond to the discussion there. Thanks. --Acetotyce (talk) 02:30, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are currently being discussed here: [1]. DocumentError (talk) 03:55, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't ping me on any matters related to this whole ISIL business. I've had enough of the subject matter, it has given me a headache, I've taken all the articles off my watch-list, and I'm done with them for good. I thought Ukraine-related articles were bad, but this is a higher plane of absurdity. Regardless, I'm not much interested in the matter anyway, as I don't quite like Near Eastern history. My specialties are in Central Europe and East Asia, so I think I'm going to go back to those topics and stay there. Enjoy traipsing through the mire, praise God. Better you than me, I suppose. Not sure how I even got into those articles in the first place. Regardless, I don't want to see anything more about them pop into my notifications, if you please. RGloucester — ☎ 01:31, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]