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. If you have questions, please request help at the Teahouse.  // Timothy :: talk  04:25, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ottoman Muslim genocide during the Balkan Wars, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ottoman Muslim genocide during the Balkan Wars until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Massacres of Turks and Muslims during the Russo-Turkish War. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 06:55, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How can I get my article to be accepted faster? Thanks SamuelLion1877 (talk) 09:54, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, SamuelLion1877, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia. Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 04:47, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is my first ever Wikipedia account, I think maybe this message is from a bot and is a mistake? SamuelLion1877 (talk) 04:51, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Khirurg (talk) 18:54, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing certain areas of Wikipedia for a period of 48 hours for WP:3RR violation. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think 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 ~~~~)).  Ponyo^{bons mots} 00:08, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello SamuelLion1877! Your additions to Ustaše 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, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 00:17, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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:SamuelLion1877 reported by User:Khirurg (Result: ). Thank you. Khirurg (talk) 04:59, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To enforce an arbitration decision, and for edit warring on the page First Balkan War, you have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for a period of 1 week. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: ((unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~)). If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page. 

Daniel Case (talk) 04:20, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

---

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think 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 ~~~~)).

Yamla (talk) 11:28, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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).

SamuelLion1877 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Unjust, unfair, mistake, not notified or warned of any wrongdoing whatsoever prior to block SamuelLion1877 (talk) 05:30, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Having blocked you before and made it ArbCom-appealable, I am disappointed but not surprised to see that your takeaway from the experience was to go back, Jack, and do it again ... Wheel turnin' round and round, you went back, Jack, and did it again. Your prior blocks—yes, blocks, plural—should really have been all the notification you needed. But apparently not, it seems.

If, as the saying goes, the real question isn't whether you should be unblocked but whether you should be asking yourself if you feel lucky, well, the answer is yes, you should, because Yamla, with a generosity I would not have shown, made this a regular administrative action rather than a CTOPS one, so that you can make these requests rather than have to go to ArbCom. Although perhaps unfortunately for you, it means you then get treated to me writing declines like this. — Daniel Case (talk) 07:50, 1 December 2023 (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.

Ok, and this explains how I engaged in disruptive editing how? Lol

I never at any point made “disruptive editing” this is an absolutely ridiculous and nonsensical block. In fact, I was attempting to stop what I sincerely believe was disruptive editing from other users. I have never had any intention on Wikipedia other than to improve the site and raise awareness about topics and issues that are lesser-well known in many parts of the world, and always do my absolute best to ensure I am using not just as many sources as possible, but the most reliable and steadfast ones.

In my most recent edits at [Russo Turkish (1877-78)], I reverted twice in an over 24 hour period, and as soon as I was aware of an impending edit war, I ceased my reverting and took the issue to the talk page, where the other user “Jingiby” proved to be unresponsive and unwilling to cooperate or seek consensus, and seemed to not have a strong grasp of English, which of course is not a problem, but I deserve to be blocked for that?

Moreover, no warning or notice of any kind was given to me whatsoever to indicate that I was doing anything wrong, and I was simply blocked for a month with no explanation or prior warning/notice other than “disruptive editing”.

Kindly, I am asking for the sake of the pages I cover, and for my good intent to undo this unjust, unfair, and uncalled for block. SamuelLion1877 (talk) 05:30, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think 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 ~~~~)).  Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 20:36, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, SamuelLion1877. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Massacres of Turks and Muslims during the Russo-Turkish War, 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) 09:05, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]