User talk:Aetolia

Hello, I'm Adakiko. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Lake Gistova, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Adakiko (talk) 10:04, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

If you checked very precise you could see there are sources of Lake Gistova's position. All the footnotes in Greek or in English describe its location. While on the Albanian geographical position claim there are not. If you still have doubts here are some map engines (1). Even on the Albanian language Wikipedia site they have made recently new edits on this matter reversing reality with fantasy.

Thank you for your attention. Facts are sacred comments are free. If you still are not satisfied with these explanations I am looking forward to provide more links and info on this matter.

1) https://wego.here.com/?map=40.36444,20.79245,18.42 see also, https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/40.364265/20.789668&layers=P Aetolia (talk) 18:19, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Your recent edits to Lake Gistova could give Wikipedia contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Wikipedia itself. Please note that making such threats on Wikipedia is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a dispute with the content of any page on Wikipedia, please follow the proper channels for dispute resolution. Please be sure to comment on content, not contributors, and where possible make specific suggestions for changes supported by reliable independent sources and focusing especially on verifiable errors of fact. Thank you. DACartman (talk) 17:31, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Hi - just a heads up that legal threats are against the rules of wikipedia, and it's something that can get you blocked very quickly. There's a guideline article about why here - please don't do that!

Regarding your edits on Lake Gistova - I have chatted to the editor who was undoing your changes and they've stopped now, because you were removing unsourced content (which is often the right thing to do). Next time however, please don't edit war by repeatedly reverting something, there's other ways of dealing with this. The best thing to do is discuss on the talk page of the article instead. BugGhost 🦗👻 18:03, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Lake Gistova. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Aydoh8^[contribs] 03:09, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

I have facts not comments and I am willing to back my changes in the article that is corrupted. The map showing Lake gistova or Drakolimni in Greek is wrong. Lake Gistova is located in Greece not Albania. Google map has revised the map last 2 months two times. I correct revisionism. As I security analyst I don't like when people try to claim something that is not theirs and I am looking to send more from satellite sites info/images and when needed. Aetolia (talk) 03:35, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

You have recently edited a page related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief 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.

Ktrimi991 (talk) 18:57, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Lake Gistova. 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:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. 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. Daniel Case (talk) 05:28, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Greetings Daniel, I am a geopolitical/Intel analyst and not someone that uses as a hobby Wikipedia or as a mean to express their extreme nationalist tendencies or alter geographical realities.

Lake Gistova is part of the Republic of Greece, and someone is changing nonstop the international frontiers either in Wikipedia or in the satellite apps thus placing the glacier lake either as part of Albania or currently splitting it 50 -50 between Greece and Albania? Changing borders lacks legality especially for a European Union member.

So, Daniel in other words you are telling me to talk/discuss to whom or about what? International frontiers and topographical places are facts not opinions or views to discuss. The issue started last year by having Lake Gistova totally separated from Greece at first or currently having it evenly dividing it among those two nations? The Greek authorities are working with Google map that has goofed up royally. This is not a joke neither an opinionated matter. The victim does not talk with the perpetrator? As we know the holocaust is a fact and not a matter to be revised according with a fascist minority? nor the Armenian genocide going to be altered as a fact because someone is sensitive? The sun rises from the East and sets from the West. Facts cannot be altered or discussed in order to please both sides. Lastly enjoy the European Satellite engine (1) that no one can later if you still have doubts about my answers then take as fact that NO Official Albanian government site mentions or officially declares Lake Gistova as part of Albania until today, apart from certain non-official extreme nationalistic Groups or site blogs. Also here is the official site from the ministry of tourism of Greece and widely known satellite AP and image from NASA. Thank you for your attention.

(PS As you reading this message they have already altered the Lake Gistova article on Wikipedia and I will be changing again in its proper factual manner)

1) https://browser.dataspace.copernicus.eu/?zoom=14&lat=40.36156&lng=20.82682&themeId=MONITORING&visualizationUrl=U2FsdGVkX19i9pZhvxq5oaqEufvt6exQ5Wvl%2Fiav0Txl7609MC%2B2YscyzJWV4XAB8a5OInaU8N%2Fb0V3uEsuO3xr7%2F6pv9x%2BfFLfxCjKeep77onRJnBdPpVd2Bd0Ne8G2&datasetId=S2_L2A_CDAS&demSource3D=%22MAPZEN%22&cloudCoverage=30&dateMode=SINGLE

2) https://firms.modaps.eosdis.nasa.gov/map/#d:today;@20.79,40.36,14.00z Aetolia (talk) 15:35, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Official site from the Republic of Greece ministry of tourism.(1)

1) https://www.visitgreece.gr/inspirations/dragon-lakes/ Aetolia (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule. 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 believe that 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 ~~~~}}.  Daniel Case (talk) 17:30, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

This is not a reason to be blocked when it is properly explained who is doing what without evidence and when one is providing facts to defend his case. If that is the case then Wikipedia is an engine that is allowing anyone without proper reference to write whatever he or she wants without factual verification. Looking for an explanation when common sense and facts are altered for a three revert rule that can be bend for anyone's desire without facts or official topographical evidence. Aetolia (talk) 17:54, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

I take what you are saying then, is that you'll keep doing this when the block lifts because you are RIGHT. In which case we will block you again—definitely for longer, perhaps just from that page, perhaps from the entire site.

You might want to, when you resume discussion on talk, find a way to bring more people into the discussion to look at the sources you're offering. Perhaps the relevant project talk pages (all of them) would be a good place to post some notice.

(I have noticed, that since you've been blocked, the article's lede now describes the lake as "near the Greek-Albanian border" rather than on it. Maybe that works best for now?) Daniel Case (talk) 20:51, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Your wall o' text above misses the point of the warning, as many such exercises do.

You have not been blocked for what you're trying to say, but how. The three-revert rule is as close to a bright-line rule as any policy we have. With only a few exceptions, you cannot violate it without consequences. In this case, since you were alerted to contentious topics recently, I have made the first block for this double the usual length. As you were advised, you must get consensus on the talk page, and respect the status quo in the meantime. Daniel Case (talk) 17:30, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Consensus of what, when the sun rises from the East and sets from the West it is a fact. The location of Lake Gistova is in Greece and that is not an opinion but a fact. Niagara falls is located in New York state and not in China. So then I can alter the evidence and claim that as well? Are you serious. An opinion or a philosophy that is a matter of discussion. Not international borders or topography. Facts are sacred comments are free. Aetolia (talk) 17:59, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

As is said very conspicuously in our edit-warring policy: "An editor who repeatedly restores their preferred version is edit warring, regardless of whether those edits are justifiable. Claiming 'My edits were right, so it wasn't edit warring' is not a valid defense." I would commend much more of that page to your attention, specifically WP:AVOIDEDITWAR. In addition I recommend WP:WIN: "Wikipedia is not about winning. It is not a battleground, and disputes over content or behavior are not meant to be 'won'. They are meant to be resolved per consensus."

As for your examples, yes, we do have essays discussing that point. See in particular WP:NOTBLUE: "When a statement that you feel to be obvious is challenged, try to think of a person (such as a person in a foreign country) to whom the statement might not be obvious, or a situation in which your obvious statement might be wrong." and WP:POPE (timely, no?). Lastly, this dispute and your participation in it have echoes of WP:NAT to me.

That latter point makes it especially important that we follow Wikipedia conduct rules here. In an area of the world where due to many past wars national boundaries have always been very fluid, where ethnic and national passions run high on all sides, it is imperative that we strictly enforce our conduct policies so that editors of opposing perspectives nevertheless find it in themselves to work together collegially.

Now, I grant that where Google Maps shows the border cannot be taken as authoritative and dispositive of the issue. I know that myself from many uses where a national border is, at that scale, depicted inaccurately, often when it follows a stream, with clunkier line segments rather than the really fine almost fractal curves needed.

But by the same token I'm not taking what the Greek Ministry of Tourism says as authoritative or dispositive either. Is mapping and surveying one of its responsibilities? I didn't think so. As we say over here about the fact that the US military has an internal postal system, I trust it to deliver mail on time about as much as I trust the Postal Service to stage an air raid. (And frankly it's in the ministry of tourism's interest to promote anything with a plausible Greek connection. I'm sure the Albanian Ministry of Tourism's website promotes the lake as one of that country's charms, if it promotes it at all.

I also looked at the photos available of the lake through Google Street View, both taken with drones at some height. No signs of border demarcation or delineation are visible in those images, at least not to me. So we can't tell from that.

So, to me, this suggests that what we really need is an article on the Albania–Greece border. Doing the research might unearth some sources that could more definitely answer this question. I'd consider most reliable a survey done by both countries that resulted in a legal document describing the border in terms of metes and bounds with results agreed by them.

Maybe that's something you'd be interested in devoting your energies to? Daniel Case (talk) 21:43, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

All started with the sudden google map changes. Therefore google street view is not the poper one to mention please. Tge EU Sentinel 2.I gave you the site. Is the official one with the answers. In addition google map has made the mysterious mistaken changes one after the other. First google map gave the area all to Albania and then split it evenly. Have you been in border? All the facts I provided you are legit. But try to be more professional please. Aetolia (talk) 21:55, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Especialy when one gives you facts and the other side does not? As far as Greece it happens to be a nation that is in the EU liable for revisionist policies if acts in a wrong manner. Albania has no posted any official about Lake Gistova. I doubt that you take the facts as I posted seriously. NASA or Sentinel 2 is more than enough. Yet you question me you that alone seems a little bias?? Aetolia (talk) 22:26, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

As noted, I wouldn't take Google seriously for this kind of information so how they had depicted the border before is as irrelevant as where they show it being now. I mention Street View only because the photographic data there is independent of the map and thus the presence of border markers might tell us something more reliable than the satellite image does. But since it does not, those images do not matter.

The NASA image is really useless for this purpose as there is nothing to tell us where NASA got its data on where the border is. And even if it did, I cannot zoom in anywhere near enough to see what you mean, and at the lowest level I can see very few features on the ground are identified. The lake isn't one of them.

I finally got that EU site to work; it does show the lake just inside Greece. However, they state quite clearly that they use OSM, which cannot be considered authoritative since it is like Wikipedia open-content, for their map data. So that cannot be used as a reliable source for the location of the border.

And someone who is blocked for edit warring in a contentious topic is in absolutely no position to tell me to be more professional ... Daniel Case (talk) 02:36, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Aetolia. It has been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week to prevent abuse.

---

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 why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

---

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Izno (talk) 23:36, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

I had not seen this. Aetolia, this is looking even less good for you. Daniel Case (talk) 02:37, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

I dont know what are you talking about please elaborate...are you slandering me? I sense some kind of personal initiative against me here? Aetolia (talk) 02:55, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

Conflict of interest or non-neutrality – Administrators should not normally use their tools in matters in which they are personally involved. Aetolia (talk) 03:13, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

I blocked you for a week, not Daniel Case (incidentally, the line you cite is irrelevant). Izno (talk) 04:02, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

For you not for me, nothing seems to be coincidence ..It's not me therefore I sense something fishy here... Aetolia (talk) 04:21, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

This reply copied a message from me, Daniel and Ktrimi991 from may 1. You might want to fix that to increase readability and ensure what you wanted to write is still correct.

Speederzzz (Talk) (Stalk) 17:56, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for making personal attacks towards other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you believe that 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 ~~~~}}.  Izno (talk) 03:36, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

I accept my blocking for not further explaining the revisionist changes they have infused on the article of Northern Epirus but I have noticed how quickly also how they use phrases out of context. Next time I will use facts documentation and further explanation on this issue according with Wikipedia rules and standards. Therefore, I accept my responsibility. Now lets add my two cents on Lake Gistova's article that someone is continuously vandalizing. AlexBachmann has edited and added a geographical lie on the article about the Lakes of Albania immediately after I was blocked . Lake Gistova is not part of Albania, it is part of the Republic of Greece thus since I accept my blocking and I take responsibility of my actions also I expect you to be fair and revert AlexBachmann additions as well on the article concerning the Lakes of Albania which is clear border revisionism since he added on the Lakes of Albania article that Gistova is being part of the territory of Albania. I expect him to have the same exactly consequences as me as well since he added a Geographic revisionist non real fact and a falsification above all. Check the article of Lake Gistova and acquire all the necessary info and legal international binding artifacts concerning Lake Gistova's geographical position. If this article is not reverted to its original position then I assume that something is fishy here and someone is acting on a bias manner? I am expecting your revert on this matter concerning Lake Gistova's position on the Lakes of Albania article where he added lake Gistova as being parts of Albanian Glacier lakes when the matter was resolved 2 weeks ago with Legal Geographical Albanian Governmental primary sources along with topographical maps from the Albanian and Greek military topographical institutes that show clearly that Lake Gistova is being part of Greece.

I am looking forward for you to check his reverts and a clear solution on this matter as well. Lastly he/she should also be penalized in the same manner for altering articles that concern lake Gistova Geographical position which show that his side is acting in a negative manner thus altering Geographical reality on the ground. What a coincidence how quickly he/she moved immediately after I was blocked? That seems to be an organized matter from my standards and needs further examination? Thank you for your attention. Facts are sacred comments are Free Aetolia (talk) 05:47, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

All the reverts concerning Lake Gistova geographical position or names after my blocking please need to be examined closely. Aetolia (talk) 05:50, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

AlexBachmann is the name used that automatically changed the article of Lakes of Albania and added lake Gistova as being part of Albania. (1) That it is not pure coincidence after I was blocked from my understanding and I would like this to be investigated as well. Ktrimi991 simultaneously as well added the Albanian name of lake Liqeni i Gramozit (2) in a Greek lake and territory after I was blocked? Again that is not pure coincidence and I would like this to be examined as well. The Lake in Albanian until yesterday is known as Liqeni i Gistovës.

1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_lakes_of_Albania Aetolia (talk) 06:26, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

It goes without saying Mr. IZNO that in the not so distant past I have been also been threatened and sworn in Albanian please see the message bellow that was deleted concerning Lake Gistova's final decision reached concerning its position and sovereignty inside the Republic of Greece. Immediately after the final adjudication on the matter???So please be more careful on the organized coincidences concerning lake Gistova's territorial integrity and I also accept my responsibilities as well.

Please see below. They used VPN or other sites? Again nothing is coincidental concerning the above issue, please examine and retract the changes they have made. I could also would had easily made accusations but i don't think in an conniving organized manner. I believe in fair play and on facts. Thank you for your attention, See below message that was posted on the matter

moj bythqire e mutit

go shove your butt where it fits you good 2600:8801:222:C600:A965:F8CE:DF14:C7DE (talk) 05:33, 12 May 2025 (UTC) Aetolia (talk) 06:43, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Sarsenet. An edit that you recently made seemed to be generated using a large language model (an "AI chatbot" or other application using such technology). Text produced by these applications is not allowed on Wikipedia, and may contain factually inaccurate statements, fictitious citations, or other problems. You should instead read reliable sources and then summarize those in your own words. Your edit may have been reverted. If you want to practice editing, please use your sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or ask your questions at the Teahouse, a friendly place for new users. Thanks. Sarsenet•he/they•(talk) 23:42, 15 June 2026 (UTC)