User talk:Delbatros

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Delbatros, 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! Randykitty (talk) 12:58, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, I want to create an article, but it has been saved as a draft. Can you help me?

The name of a football club has changed in recent months. I wanted to move the page to a new name, but when I couldn't, I wanted to create a new page by redirecting and transfer the information to the new page. Delbatros^talk 13:05, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

About Mersin İdman Yurdu[edit]

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Mersin İdman Yurdu a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Mersin Talim Yurdu. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Storchy (talk) 05:21, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The name of a football club has changed in recent months. I wanted to move the page to a new name, but when I couldn't, I wanted to create a new page by redirecting and transfer the information to the new page. Since the page belongs to the Turkish football club, I am doing this according to the information in Turkish Wikipedia. Can you help me? Delbatros^Talk 05:42, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

esenlikler[edit]

tr viki'de son değişikliklerde dolaşırken bazı olmamış maddelere denk geldim. sizi de şurda gördüğüm için yazayım diye düşündüm.

https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mehmet_K%C3%BCr%C5%9Fad_YILMAZ

https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nahit_Ergene_Ortaokulu

https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zirkan_a%C5%9Fireti

bunlara hızlı sil etiketi koyar mısınız? ----modern_primat ඞඞඞ ^TALK 22:04, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Mersin Talim Yurdu[edit]

Hello, Delbatros. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Mersin Talim Yurdu, 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) 18:01, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Mersin Talim Yurdu[edit]

Hello, Delbatros. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Mersin Talim Yurdu".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Hey man im josh (talk) 17:33, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history 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. 105.8.2.55 (talk) 11:57, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop now! The revision you reverted contains copyright, why do you still insist on adding it back to the article? Delbatros^Talk 13:13, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey man im josh, Please help me, There is a persistent copyright violation in the Karşıyaka S.K. article, please intervene. Delbatros^Talk 13:17, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zzuuzz, thank you so much. Please do not allow copyrighted images to be added to articles. Delbatros^Talk 13:43, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have not answered the questions below. Please answer below. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 13:45, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright?[edit]

OK, what's the problem?[1] File:KSK logo.png and File:Karşıyaka Spor Kulübü (logo).png, what's the difference? What is your copyright problem? -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 13:43, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is he's an idiot and he has no idea (if he can say "son of a bitch" without repercussion, I can say idiot). And if you're protecting the article, at least revert it to stable. 102.182.46.145 (talk) 13:48, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone calls anyone else an idiot or son of a bitch they're going to get blocked without any further warning, so we're clear. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 13:50, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You call me idiot and make me angry. Anyway, instead of causing a war, why didn't you send a message and tell me that you were trying to bring back the copyright violating image? Why do you continue to vandalize with different IP numbers? Delbatros^Talk 13:59, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is not allowed to upload copyrighted visual materials on Commons and there is already a logo available here. It is not nice to try to upload it in a way that will damage the article by violating the copyright rule. Delbatros^Talk 13:51, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The copyright rules allow something called c:Commons:Licensing#Simple_design, and we could always claim fair use, so the logo is allowed, but the thing I don't understand is why are you inserting an almost identical image? There has been a logo on that page for years. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 14:06, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot write in the article, can you write please? The club's president has recently changed. Name of the new president: İlker Mehmet Ergüllü

Reference: [2], [3] Delbatros^Talk 14:09, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're on the verge of being blocked for edit-warring, and abuse, and you don't seem to get it. You really need to stick to the point. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 14:11, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Zzuuzz You won't get good answers to any of your questions. I told you, he has no idea. Battleground mentality and lack of competence is all he is. And you're giving him the impression that he won a war here right now and he's having an orgasm over it. He thinks he's the best warrior in the wikiworld, and he defeated his enemy with 22 reverts and he got no repercussions for it, and it's even protected with his desired version, so warring like crazy with 20+ edits for 2 hours must be the correct thing to do. 197.184.161.74 (talk) 14:28, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please answer the question I asked and stop causing tension. You're the one who caused the war, not me. Delbatros^Talk 14:34, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Look, I have been trying to bring back the logo that has been around for years, in accordance with the rules. An anonymous user tried to vandalize add an image uploaded to commons that causes copyright violation to the article. I am doing the right thing.

This is the logo I'm trying to bring back:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Kar%C5%9F%C4%B1yaka_Spor_Kul%C3%BCb%C3%BC_(logo).png

An anonymous vandal user tried to add: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:KSK_logo.png

Now I ask you: Is the revision that I have been trying to bring back to the article for years more accurate? Or is the revision that includes the copyrighted image that the anonymous user tried to add by vandalism more accurate?

In fact, the logo was uploaded to en:wiki in accordance with the rules in 2021, and there is no copyright problem, but why would the image uploaded to commons be added to the article in a way that would cause a copyright problem?

It was deleted again from commons in the past due to copyright reasons. Delbatros^Talk 14:30, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Someone tried to update the logo to the current one the club uses. There's no copyright difference between the two, and it's not removed from Commons, instead of edit warring here, try to remove it from Commons first if you can. You have no idea what you're doing, and nothing justifies 22 reverts and all the things you've done in just a few hours. You just need to "win a war", that's all you think about. 41.150.252.84 (talk) 14:47, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to agree with the IP user. There's no meaningful differences between these logos in terms of copyright, which makes the copyright claim spurious. You should resolve the deletion process at commons first. Edit-warring like that is out of order, and will get you blocked. Even after the protection expires, even if you're reverted. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 14:54, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zzuuzz, The nomination for deletion in the Commons will be concluded on the same grounds. The anonymous user's incessant vandalism is completely damaging to the article and a waste of users' time. I'm trying to prevent and stop vandalism. I made a long statement, I think I did the right thing. I think that I will not be blocked or victimized because I am trying to stop and prevent vandalism. Because according to the rules, the necessary intervention against vandalism does not require any obstacle, and since I am trying to stop the vandalism, logically I should not be blocked. Delbatros^Talk 15:22, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have failed to demonstrate how this was vandalism. If it was a doctored image, or the wrong image, or even if there was a meaningful difference for the purposes of copyright, then you could argue that. But this is not vandalism. It's edit-warring, and that's you've been doing. Going forward you need to not do that. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 15:29, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In the past, it was deleted from commons due to copyright reasons and it was re-uploaded in the same way. There is no explanation for the vandalism you did. You are the one who started a war by vandalizing instead of talking about the issue. Do not think that you can escape the damage you caused with different IP numbers. I told you to stop and you didn't stop, even though I replied to you in the message thread above, you did not respond. First, explain the damage you caused, and I made my comment on the subject with a long explanation. You are just trying to create tension and cover up your vandalism. Delbatros^Talk 15:01, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Updating an image is not vandalism. Updating an image is usually considered a good thing. Where is the evidence it was previously deleted due to copyright? And I ask again, why is the image you restored so different that it follows different rules? -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 15:14, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please review the revisions here.

An attempt was made to add visual here: [4]

Here, the revision was removed for the same reason: [5]

I have been interested in this article for a long time and I have patrol rights on tr:wiki. It has been withdrawn due to copyright reasons. Wait, I will bring you 2 users and let them make the necessary explanation. I'm not doing anything wrong, you can confirm that. Delbatros^Talk 15:35, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You will need to explain why you think File:Karşıyaka Spor Kulübü (logo).png is so different, when it is more or less identical. Either both of these are public domain due to their simplicity, or neither of them are public domain. If both are available then we could use either of the images. If neither is free then we could use a fair use rationale, and retain the apparently updated File:KSK logo.png through a local upload. However arguing that one is a copyright violation and the other isn't doesn't make any sense. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 16:02, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop this anonymous vandalism, this is getting very annoying. >:(

Considering that my long explanation is now more understandable, I expect you not to allow the copyrighted image added during the deletion candidacy period in the commons to be included in the article. Delbatros^Talk 20:28, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Zzuuzz he continues to edit war, you see the failure to get the point and the competence and disruption issues here? If someone gets away with 20+ reverts in an hour, they will think they are on the right path and continue doing it, just like what is happening here. 102.141.68.251 (talk) 21:04, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The president of the club has changed and what is your aim? While I, who follow this club closely, have added a reference to the fact that the club president has changed, you have no right to take back this correctly added revision. There is no war. I just added a reference information and you still continue your vandalism. Delbatros^Talk 21:08, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delbatros is in a war of change everywhere, including trwiki. For this reason, it was also blocked on trwiki. The ban period should be extended and the message page should be closed. This idiot is tarnishing the name of us Turks. Such people should be blocked from Wikipedia indefinitely. 149.0.154.106 (talk) 23:54, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Amortias The ban needs to be extended, you know this idiot got into World War II. 149.0.154.106 (talk) 23:58, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Referring to anyone as an idiot is unlikely to get me to side with you in any discussion. I'm unwilling to modify the block once its been placed without the need to do so. Show me conclusive proof of block evasion or other negative behaviours after the block and well review. They'll either learn or they wont and will review it from there. Amortias (T)(C) 00:07, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Amortias good morning, first of all, thank you for bringing back the correct revision. An anonymous vandal is trying to cause damage by removing information I added with reference, first he violated the copyright infringement rule and then he started a war. I managed to save the article from the copyright issue, although it was difficult, but hours later the anonymous user started vandalizing again. Now he is insistently trying to remove the information I added as a reference, and the reason why I was blocked was to prevent the damage he had caused to the article. Attempting to remove any information added by reference in a damaging way is considered vandalism. Delbatros^Talk 05:18, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Amortias @331dot @Zzuuzz he's addicted to edit warring, still does it. 85.148.48.112 (talk) 07:48, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am working on a club jersey design and I said that the jersey I added to the page should remain on the page temporarily. What is your problem? Why do you always follow me? Because of you, I constantly have to rely on a manager for every positive contribution. Please stop following me and whoever you are, you should continue your contributions through your own Wikipedia account. I couldn't find any point in being anonymous to avoid an obstacle. Because you know this, you will be blocked every time you make a wrong intervention on your own account. Delbatros^Talk 07:59, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 36 hours for edit warring, as you did at Karşıyaka S.K.. 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 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 ~~~~}}. Amortias (T)(C) 21:56, 16 March 2024 (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).

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

Request reason:

Hello Amortias good morning, first of all, thank you for bringing back the correct revision. An anonymous vandal is trying to cause damage by removing information I added with reference, first he violated the copyright infringement rule and then he started a war. I managed to save the article from the copyright issue, although it was difficult, but hours later the anonymous user started vandalizing again. Now he is insistently trying to remove the information I added as a reference, and the reason why I was blocked was to prevent the damage he had caused to the article. Attempting to remove any information added by reference in a damaging way is considered vandalism. Delbatros^Talk 05:22, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You addressed this comment to the blocking admin, but unblock requests are to ask for a third party to review the block. If you wish to discuss this with the blocking admin, you don't need to make an unblock request. That being said, the edits at issue do not seem to be vandalism, which would mean that edit warring is not acceptable. 331dot (talk) 08:19, 17 March 2024 (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.

Nazillispor moved to draftspace[edit]

Thanks for your contributions to Nazillispor. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. 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. Boleyn (talk) 16:05, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, the club closed 49 years ago. It doesn't have much history and there are no references about it so I can't add it. There is no source on tr:wiki either, I tried to create the page here as it is, but I don't think the page can be in draft form. Delbatros^Talk 17:05, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nazillispor (March 18)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Nazillispor and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KylieTastic (talk) 20:00, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Delbatros! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! KylieTastic (talk) 20:00, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to your Articles for Creation Help Desk question[edit]

Hello, Delbatros! I'm Cremastra. I have replied to your question about a submission at the WikiProject Articles for Creation Help Desk. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 23:55, 19 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. Amortias (T)(C) 08:25, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]