User talk:Spotted springer7

Welcome!

Hello, Spotted springer7, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! HiLo48 (talk) 09:35, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Important notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Cambial — foliar❧ 09:37, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Ziyavudin Magomedov

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Ziyavudin Magomedov, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 11:48, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Ziyavudin Magomedov

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Ziyavudin Magomedov, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 13:53, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Ziyavudin Magomedov

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Ziyavudin Magomedov, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 13:42, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Ziyavudin Magomedov

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Ziyavudin Magomedov, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 16:48, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 2025

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Ziyavudin Magomedov. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. The edit war at this article has been going on for over nine months. It is beyond time for you to engage in discussion at the article's talk page. I strongly recommend that you do not revert the article again, at least not until a consensus has been reached through discussion at the article's talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 12:22, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The edit war at this article has been going on for over nine months. It is beyond time for you to engage in discussion at the article's talk page. I strongly recommend that you do not revert the article again, at least not until a consensus has been reached through discussion at the article's talk page.

Hi C.Fred.

I believe that you are wrong to say other version of the Ziyavudin Magomedov article is "closer to the status quo", and that any close reading will demonstrate that but I appreciate this is not the place to discuss the specifics of the article.

I just wanted to say there has in fact been significant discussion on the Talk Page for over a year (see the archive) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ziyavudin_Magomedov&oldid=1265968153 - some bits are admittedly less useful than others and the conversation has become very esoteric/off topic.That is the point I was making in my last edit explanation. I have made mutiple attempts at Dispute Resolution but no admin wished to get involved. It would be great for an experienced third-party admin to help Odlanier2024 and I reach a consensus on the page and I have said so mutiple times on the Talk Page and when making edits (including today).

Are you able to assist with this, or suggest how I can proceed under Wikipedia's rules, because thus far nobody has wanted to weigh in. Thank you. Spotted springer7 (talk) 12:45, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds like you need a third opinion. —C.Fred (talk) 17:02, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Third Opinion request declined for Ziyavudin Magomedov page

Hi @Danbloch

Not sure this is the right place to say this, but you declined my recent request for a third opinion on the page of Ziyavudin Magomedov (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Third_opinion&oldid=1279966878) - suggesting it would be "a change to the recommended format & instead to discuss on the Talk Page".

Thanks for letting me know, and for weighing in. But I'd really appreciate it if a more experienced editor like you could weight in on the dispute.

We have in fact already discussed the matter extensively on the Talk Page (see the archive - https://w.wiki/DP3X) & despite appearances, not all of the discussion has been futile. Significant parts, even most, of Odlanier2024's points have been settled or integrated into both versions of the article. On the remaining disputed points which I outlined in the live Talk Page, there is clearly no consensus (see the final few posts and edit history).

You can see the advice of another admin in the post above, suggesting I therefore seek a third-opinion. That's why I posted it there yesterday. So my question is what are the next steps - it seems difficult to get admins/editors to engage? I'm aware of the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard, but admins there too has not wanted to get involved in the past.

I understand that the subject matter is a little esoteric but really, I think it just needs someone to help offer or help build a consensus on the central dispute which hinges on bias/due weight/relevance of sections.

Any advice would be appreciated.

SpottedSpringer7 Spotted springer7 (talk) 10:38, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please accept my apology. I was working on a small screen, and all I saw was the first part of your edit, adding "More on the Talk Page" to the example entry. I didn't mean to revert your request. I've put it back. Dan Bloch (talk) 18:36, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No worries - appreciate it! Spotted springer7 (talk) 09:47, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]