Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Battle of Zhovti Vody, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stefan Potocki. 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) 06:08, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Battle of Monastyrysche requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. BangJan1999 20:18, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Battle of Monastyrysche. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it has no sources. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. BangJan1999 22:30, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have done this with Draft:Battle of Radovychi as well. Without reliable, secondary sources, the article can not be accepted. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:23, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

can you please remove that? that’s not a draft that’s a real historical battle, I just can’t understand how to add the links, can you please help? Forward.ops (talk) 21:07, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are many things that are real that never make it to being an actual article. The best place to begin with learning about how to add citations is Wikipedia:Citing sources. Let me know if you need more help. --Hammersoft (talk) 08:13, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have done this with Draft:Struggle of King Danylo against the Golden Horde. Please work on things in draft to develop the article enough to be acceptable in mainspace. This includes adding references to support the article. Also, please be aware this subject is already covered at Daniel_of_Galicia#Mongol_invasion. Barring significant development, there's no reason for a standalone article. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:52, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Hammersoft. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Battle of Hodów have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:21, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please always add page numbers to your references (see WP:CS) or links to web pages that you use as sources. For example, I have problems finding anything about Battle of Radovychi in Grzegorz Motyka. “Ukrainska Partyzantka 1942–1960”. Warsaw, 2006. - I don't know what page this information is on and can't verify it (WP:Verifiability). Hedviberit (talk) 11:16, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Struggle of King Danylo against the Golden Horde. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it has no sources and it needs more sources to establish notability. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Significa liberdade (talk) 15:56, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. This includes creating articles in the mainspace after the article has been moved to the draftspace without making any improvements to the article (such as with Struggle of King Danylo against the Golden Horde). As others have indicated, your articles need to have citations to show notability and verify reliably. Repeatedly moving pages out of the draftspace without making improvements to them may constitute vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox; if you would like to continuing improving your articles, please do so in the draftspace then submit the article for review. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Significa liberdade (talk) 16:06, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may now consider this a Level 3 warning. Once again, you have move the draft to mainspace, but the only reference you provided was to Wikipedia itself, linking the Wayback Machine. I did try and find the article you were attempting to reference, and what I found didn't mention this subject at all. If you persist in adding content to mainspace without providing appropriate sourcing, you may be blocked from editing. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:14, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

bruh, just go and see Mykhailo Hrushevsky, “History of Ukraine-Rus, Volume III. Chapter I. Page. 5.”. Or Михайло Грушевський, «Історична України-Руси, Том ІІІ. Розділ І. Сторінка 5.» Forward.ops (talk) 17:28, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the {{AfC submission/draft}} template to the draft. I strongly suggest you submit the draft for consideration as an article rather than attempting to move it yourself again. As to the single cite you've added, it's behind a paywall. I can't view it. That doesn't make it an invalid cite, but given your track record of citations, it makes it difficult/impossible to verify and remains questionable. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:37, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

so does I suppose to show to you any sources meanwhile I have seen it? The Ukrianian historical Mykhailo Hrushevsky has confirmed what I do in this page in his book “History of Ukraine-Rus” in the Ukrainian language. Just copy the link and search it in Google. Sorry if I do something wrong, but I just want to do a page about this historical moment, cuz there’s no something like that. Forward.ops (talk) 17:41, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is the source. http://litopys.org.ua/hrushrus/iur30105.htm Forward.ops (talk) 17:44, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the link. However, I don't see content in that link that supports your conclusions in the article, even if it were a reliable source (and I'm quite uncertain of that). --Hammersoft (talk) 17:54, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You’re welcome. Honestly, you can be sure. This source is reliable and trustworthy. The Ukrainian historian, writer, politician and statesman wrote his book about the history of Ukraine, and called it, as I said before, "History of Ukraine-Rus", and it is all about Ukrainian history. I just want to make this page so that people can know about this historical period of Ukraine. Then please tell me what you want me to write here and how I should support the sources? I don't know why you can't see it, but I can see everything there perfectly. Then what to do? Please don't block me, I'm just trying to make wikipedia better and contribute here. I'm not doing any vandalism or anything like that, just trying to get more people to know about it. Thank you for understanding. Forward.ops (talk) 18:00, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looking further into this site, it appears it is written by a single person, without editorial overview. This effectively makes it a blog, and not a reliable source. Please see WP:BLOGS. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:57, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But this article was written by only one person, and this site shows texts and sources from the author Hrushevsky’s own book and work. However, this is only a site that documents the recorded words of Mykhailo Hrushevsky, but not his own work in this site. He has already dead and he’s book he write in 1905. Forward.ops (talk) 18:04, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have an another source about that. This is the whole book of Mykhailo Hrushevsky. https://djvu.online/file/uS2JZ7DuTP00v Forward.ops (talk) 18:06, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That it is written by a single person does not mean WP:BLOGS does not apply. Is there an English translation of the book somewhere that I can see? --Hammersoft (talk) 18:07, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

http://hrushevsky.nbuv.gov.ua/cgi-bin/hrushevsky/person.exe?&I21DBN=ELIB&P21DBN=ELIB&S21STN=1&S21REF=10&S21FMT=elib_all&C21COM=S&S21CNR=20&S21P01=0&S21P02=0&S21P03=ID=&S21STR=0001724 Forward.ops (talk) 18:14, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That appears to be an executable file. I won't be downloading it. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:25, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Then what’s you’re gonna do with my page? Can I post it? Forward.ops (talk) 18:29, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As I noted before, I strongly suggest you use the "submit the draft for review!" button on the draft. Personally, I wouldn't submit it. A single source that is self published isn't going to cut it. The draft will very likely not be accepted. If you move it to mainspace directly again, it's likely another administrator may not take kindly to it. Submit the draft, but I would find better sources first. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:33, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't finished the page yet, I will add other reliable sources and will finish the page with the better sources. Forward.ops (talk) 18:38, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also please see WP:KIEV/WP:KYIV. Mellk (talk) 14:10, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see you continued to ignore this[1][2] and along with your other POV edits, if you continue with this I will request a topic ban. Mellk (talk) 23:28, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bro, common, I don’t have time to end this page, I don’t to end this page anymore, let it’s just be there and that’s all. I want to make wikipedia way better and to be people would know the truth better, please do not ban me because I just want to help. Forward.ops (talk) 05:50, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Hammersoft in this case it is a safe link to click. No idea about their architecture now but probably that site originally was hosted on a Windows server and so it literally ran that executable file to handle the request (the "cgi-bin" part also implies that). I haven't read the source closely but it does mention both King Danylo and a Horde. Hope this helps. Skynxnex (talk) 13:01, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will never go to a link that is an executable. I appreciate your assertion that it is safe, but I still won't do it. If a website can't provide content without it being an executable, it's all the more reason not to go to it. It's seriously bad practice. Regardless, it's one source, and likely not a strong one. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:27, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

About which page did you talk about ? Forward.ops (talk) 14:43, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited First Winter Campaign, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page South Russia.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Battle of Yankivtsi. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources and Although I do not speak Polish or Ukrainian, I have been unable to find anything that even looks like a source discussion such a battle in WWII, so please add references/citations before moving back to article space.. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Skynxnex (talk) 12:44, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will add everything I’ve just doing this page for too long. Forward.ops (talk) 12:54, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'd suggest in the future drafting articles either in the WP:DRAFT space or in your own user space, WP:USERDRAFT, before moving them to the main article space so they can have sourcing and such. Skynxnex (talk) 13:03, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kyiv Uprising (1018) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kyiv Uprising (1018) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Marcelus (talk) 15:35, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently edited a page related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an 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 special powers 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 practice;
• 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 {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Mellk (talk) 23:28, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do any of these IPs also belong to you? [3][4] Mellk (talk) 01:42, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Forward.ops; you are under NO obligation to disclose your IP address. Whether those IP addresses were used by you or not, I strongly suggest you do not confirm or deny their accuracy. As to the edits themselves, if you are in fact using IP addresses or other usernames to engage in sockpuppetry, please be aware that such actions are direct against our sockpuppetry policy. If you are doing it, it is likely you will eventually be discovered. If that happens, your time here on Wikipedia will likely be over. --Hammersoft (talk) 00:51, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t get what you mean. Forward.ops (talk) 08:20, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Battle of Yankivtsi is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Yankivtsi until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Marcelus (talk) 19:44, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Battle of Britain, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. See MOS:DATERANGE. Binksternet (talk) 20:37, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are still making edits against consensus despite multiple warnings already. This is disruptive editing. I am not going to give any more warnings. One more such instance and this will likely lead to a block or topic ban (assuming I will not submit a report now). Mellk (talk) 14:41, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

About which edits does you talking about Forward.ops (talk) 15:33, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What’s the problem with that mine edit about the Kyiv offensive (1920)??? What’s wrong with that? Again I “did something wrong”? What’s the point to doing that when moderators always thought that’s it’s not real or something, that’s real and confirmed. Just look at the Ukrainian Wikipedia about that, you don’t even looking your other Wikipedia’s in other languages? So what’s the problem and how’s that “disruptive edit”? Forward.ops (talk) 15:35, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to move the article, you have the option of WP:RM. Otherwise repeatedly changing the name that does not correspond to the title is disruptive. Mellk (talk) 16:47, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But Kyiv is called Kyiv, what is it now, what was it then. That is, the name "Kyiv offensive (1920)" does not destroy anything and is appropriate, because it is a Ukrainian city and the capital of Ukraine, which is spelled exactly that way. I only change mistakes. Forward.ops (talk) 17:53, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The title is Kiev offensive (1920). From what I can see there have been recent RMs with consensus for this title. Again, if you wish to move the page, the option is WP:RM. You were also told about WP:KIEV. This is a collaborative project so consensus is a core policy. See WP:HERE. Mellk (talk) 17:59, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Can I change the Battle of Zhvanets into the Siege of Zhvanets? Because the sources is saying that it was a siege. Can I? Forward.ops (talk) 18:18, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Forward.ops! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Battle of Bila Tserkva (1651) several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Battle of Bila Tserkva (1651), please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Shadow311 (talk) 16:52, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. The Battle of Bila Tserkva (1651) was a victory for Cossacks and Tatars, and I am forced to constantly change the article so that many more people will learn the truth. An unknown user keeps changing my edits which drives me nuts. I can't understand why you don't write to him and explain that you shouldn't do that? As you can see, I work on Wikipedia all the time and I really enjoy it, every day. Can you leave my edit as it was originally? Forward.ops (talk) 17:02, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I can see that you're making quite a few changes to the infoboxes in battle-related articles as of late. Let me ask - why are you changing the header image_size to 290 instead of 300, which is usually the standard? Also, please note, other articles should only be wikipinked to once, or twice if you include the lede section; in your recent changes over at the Battle of Tryškiai, you have made up to 4(!) wikilinks to Charles XII of Sweden in the lede - it should only be once, and then another time in the main body of the article. Otherwise, keep up the good editing. Imonoz (talk) 14:52, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For me it’s just look good and better. Btw thanks Forward.ops (talk) 15:59, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I removed your overuse of wikilinks in two of your latest edited articles, and I also reverted your changes done to the image size - this is because 300 is standard. All the best. Imonoz (talk) 02:32, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

1. If possible try to combine your edits. At the moment, you are making a lot of small edits in quick succession. This makes the edit history of the article very fragmented. Try to make as many changes as possible with one edit, so that your single edits are bigger.

2 I noticed that a big part of your edits is adding wikilinks and capital letters. As a general rule of thumb, not every occurrence of a term needs to be linked. Two are usually sufficient: in the lead and in the main body of the article. As for capital letters, read MOS:CAPS.

3. When it comes to the beginning of articles about battles, we do not separate the first sentence with a period. The correct form is: The Battle of Berestechko was a battle of the Khmelnytsky Uprising. And not as you wrote: The Battle of Berestechko. Was a battle of the Khmelnytsky Uprising. Can I ask you to undo this change and others like it?

Also, please consider whether the original version of the incipit was better: The Battle of Berestechko (Polish: Bitwa pod Beresteczkiem; Ukrainian: Берестецька битва, Битва під Берестечком) was fought between the Zaporozhian Cossacks, led by Hetman Bohdan Khmelnytsky, aided by their Crimean Tatar allies, and a Polish army under King John II Casimir. It says a lot more than just "was a battle of the Khmelnytsky Uprising", do you see that?

Cheers and enjoy editing. Marcelus (talk) 22:39, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

1. Alright.

2. Alright.

3. I’ve trying to do doing all of edits the same with the same writing in all of them to look similar and perfect. I just like that. What’s wrong with mine “The Battle of Berestechko. Was a battle of the Khmelnytsky Uprising.”? I like how it looks like and for me it’s look way better than what was before “The Battle of Berestechko (Polish: Bitwa pod Beresteczkiem; Ukrainian: Берестецька битва, Битва під Берестечком) was fought between the Zaporozhian Cossacks, led by Hetman Bohdan Khmelnytsky, aided by their Crimean Tatar allies, and a Polish army under King John II Casimir.” And I just watch the other text which I has been written on the down list of the edit. Forward.ops (talk) 22:49, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ad3: Well first of all starting a sentence with "Was a..." is improper in regards to English grammar. It also goes against Wikipedias rules and guidlines. You can read more about the lead section and the first sentence here: MOS:LEADSENTENCE.

I also noticed that you add a lot of characters in the infobox. You even wrote: "I've just found a new characters which was in this battle and changing it again and again". Are you sure that each of them was an army commander? Marcelus (talk) 23:16, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I’ve just finding a new information about the battle and including the characters which was the commanders of the battle and was during that battle. I added them all from their own and personal information in the Ukrainian Wikipedia. Forward.ops (talk) 23:18, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's not how we do it in English Wikipedia. First of all for every information you need to provide reliable sources with a footnote. You cannot just simply copy-pasted something from Ukrainian Wikipedia. Secondly infobox should include only commander and leaders, not every participant. For example persons such as Marek Sobieski or Hieronim Radziejowski were just participants, not commanders. Polish army was commanded on the right wing by Stanisław Lanckoroński, in the center by Jan Kazimierz, and on the left wing by Field Hetman Marcin Kalinowski, actually Jeremi Wiśniowiecki. That's all. Marcelus (talk) 23:31, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well. Let it be how it is, I’ve really working very hard on all of these edits about the battles of the Khmelnytsky Uprising during the whole day and I really like to do it all the day. Forward.ops (talk) 23:35, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but it can't stay that way. Wikipedia articles needs to be based on sources, if you don't make this changes I will have to take it to the broader forum. Marcelus (talk) 08:05, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So what you want me to do? Forward.ops (talk) 08:32, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Revert your changes according to the WP:MOS. Also remove added commanders if they weren't in fact commanders. Marcelus (talk) 09:04, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please explain first? Just say which reverts I’ll do it. Forward.ops (talk) 09:55, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Revert your changes to the first sentence of every article where you used period, please. Marcelus (talk) 10:16, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean change from “Was a battle of the Khmelnytsky Uprising” to “Was fought between the Zaporozhian Cossacks, led by Hetman Bohdan Khmelnytsky, aided by their Crimean Tatar allies, and a Polish army under King John II Casimir”? Forward.ops (talk) 10:23, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, because the first sentence needs to be desrciptive Marcelus (talk) 10:24, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I will. But can I make some a little bit other stuff but with the same meaning? It would looks similar. Also I’ve changed the commanders of the Battle of Berestechko and the Battle of Batih, is it correct for now? Forward.ops (talk) 10:25, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like it, but remember each time you make a change or add new information you need to provide a source. Marcelus (talk) 10:30, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All of them I’ve got from the Ukrainian Wikipedia “Битва під Берестечком” and “Битва під Батогом”. Also it’s saying that they were a commanders of the Zaporozhian Cossacks and Crimean Tatars with the Crown Army forces, so they can be there as a commanders. Thank you. Forward.ops (talk) 10:32, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Forward.ops please also change:

The Battle of Bila Tserkva (Ukrainian: Битва під Білою Церквою, Polish: Bitwa pod Białą Cerkwią: 23–25 September 1651). Was fought between the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth’s forces against the Zaporozhian Cossacks and Crimean Tatars as a part of the Khmelnytsky Uprising.

to:

The Battle of Bila Tserkva (Ukrainian: Битва під Білою Церквою, Polish: Bitwa pod Białą Cerkwią: 23–25 September 1651) was fought between the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth’s forces against the Zaporozhian Cossacks and Crimean Tatars as a part of the Khmelnytsky Uprising.

The name of the battle shouldn't be a separate sentence. Marcelus (talk) 10:59, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem. Forward.ops (talk) 11:00, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And also I’m so sorry for making so many small edits I’ve just finding a new information about the characters and other stuff of some pages and adding it and when I’m leaving a page for sometime to find the other information, the page can reactive and remove all of my work which I have done before so that’s why I’m doing these small edits to be all of it would be saved. Forward.ops (talk) 23:16, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:38, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You've been constantly changing the Result in the Battle of Bila Tserkva (1651) saying that it was "Cossack victory" if you think so then i suggest citing a source. Olek Novy (talk) 12:53, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Battle of Bila Tserkva (1651) was a tactical and strategic Cossack-Tatar victory. Your source is false, it doesn’t know the truth and the reality which was back then. The flanks of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth were cracking from the brutal attacks of the Cossacks and Tatars, there were desertions among the German mercenaries and the contract with them was ending, as Mikołaj Potocki himself claims, and Janusz Radziwiłł was even ready to flee the battlefield, because he did not know what was on the borders of Lithuania. Forward.ops (talk) 13:10, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find anything about a strategic Cossack-Tatar victory nor in Polish or Ukrainian sources, can you send me your source? Olek Novy (talk) 19:14, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain your edit here — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olek Novy (talk • contribs) 10:23, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is hilarious 37.47.173.38 (talk) 18:48, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How’d you think dude? The history, first time hearing of that ? Look in which moment you mean. Forward.ops (talk) 21:36, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of things: First, "was a fought" is wrong; "was fought" is right; "fought" is part or past-perfect of "fight". Maybe you meant "was a fight", but "was fought" is still better. Second, in "the siege of X", siege is almost always lowercase in sources, so we do that. See book search. Dicklyon (talk) 17:59, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure why they reverted you after you explained how this is not grammatically correct. Mellk (talk) 20:45, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since they decided to revert this again without providing a reason or responding here (alongside the previous low-quality edits), I will just let administrators deal with them instead. Mellk (talk) 23:48, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you finally say to the guy who’s changing mine edits to stop doing that? He’s embarrassing idiot who’s just being offended and changing it for no reason. Ban him Forward.ops (talk) 09:52, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How is it embarrassing to change a couple of words? and how can you be offended by that? lol. Olek Novy (talk) 10:37, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bro mad. Forward.ops (talk) 15:58, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest looking at Wikipedia:Civility Olek Novy (talk) 16:24, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Forward.ops. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Battle of Monastyrysche, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 23:06, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Forward.ops. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Struggle of King Danylo against the Golden Horde, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:05, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I've stoped working on that page already, you can close it. Forward.ops (talk) 15:57, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Forward.ops. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Battle of Monastyrysche".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:30, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Olek Novy (talk) 18:19, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]