User talk:EdJohnston

*Original title was: A concern

• BasedBossx (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I recently stumbled upon edits by user:BasedBossx. Said user has systematically went through and added unsourced information to the infoboxes of numerous(possibly one hundred) sieges, battles, and wars. In turn they have been warned by:

• StephenMacky1, misleading edit summaries, unconstructive editing
• A.Cython, unconstructive editing
• Kansas Bear, disruptive editing
• Jingiby,

Even after these three(Jingiby's was after the discussion) sets of warning (1:23, 15 February 2026), user:BasedBossx continued to edit 19 battle/siege articles.

• A.Cython's post shows unconstructive editing.
  • BasedBossx response, "Hello sorry, i can fix those issues, as you can see i have done more construction than destruction".
• I posted revert all edits done to battle articles.
  • BasedBosss response, which was a false comment,I mainly added flags and included everything stated in the article though.
• I responded, That's so not true. You have added "Light" and "Heavy" to casualty sections, which are not supported by the article, to multiple articles.
• A.Cython added, You also changed the battle outcome siege of Constantinople. They linked it.
• A.Cython posted, Not to mentioned that you added additional information that was WP:OR by adding additional participants and used anachronistic flags.
  • BasedBossx response, I can fix those no problem, I just read the article and went off that. Is there a problem with the flags i put(3:51, 15 February 2026)

Then the discussion devolved into flag usage in infoboxes which is probably just a diversion to keep from repairing the WP:OR user:BasedBossx added to those articles. At which point I posted, "either they revert their unconstructive editing or I'd notify an admin."(4:02, 15 February 2026) To which BasedBossx states, "I am a historian, whats wrong with chatting with you, i will go revert them do not worry."(4:03, 15 February 2026) To which at 05:18, 15 February 2026, user:Jingiby posted a warning on user:BasedBossx's talk page.

As of this post on your talk page, user:BasedBossx had made zero reverts. Instead restoring their edit on battle of Ongal, which removes referenced information from the infobox. --Kansas Bear (talk) 15:41, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

I've invited BasedBossx to respond here. EdJohnston (talk) 18:57, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Ed, I'm not sure user:BasedBossx will respond. I, unfortunately, have to work on a wedding(youngest son) and divorce(oldest son), so I will not be available for response(s) to user:BasedBossx. Hopefully, I should be back sometime in April after everything calms down. Take care. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:35, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

FYI: Strangely enough an anonymous user (Special:Contributions/~2026-11852-84) is changing the same articles (three up to now) in question to the version by BasedBossx's with the edit summary Reverted to original. One article, I understand, two articles, I get suspicious, three articles form a pattern. Anyhow I reverted all three, but here are the diffs of the user:

• Bulgarian battle of 852
• Battle of Constantinople (922)
• Battle_of_Ihtiman

After another look at relevant articles I found another anonymous user doing the same thing (not revert yet), note the same edit summary Battle of Southern Buh:

• Battle of Southern Buh
• Battle_of_W.l.n.d.r A.Cython(talk) 22:26, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

If only a small set of articles are affected I could try semiprotecting them. I am unsure if these edits are attempting to push some kind of nationalist POV. If so the WP:CT/EE Balkan sanctions might be relevant. EdJohnston (talk) 23:41, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

I do not know what is the best of action (no admin experience nor I want to be any time soon), but I suspect that if left unchecked it will spread to all articles affected by BasedBossx. I just wanted you to be aware that this story has not ended. It looks more like a flagspam problem than anything else, but I cannot say for sure. In my limited experience I have seen anonymous inoocent-looking edits that aimed (as I fail to see any other possible reason) to make WP less accurate. I will keep an eye and I will let you know if the problem persists. A.Cython(talk) 00:01, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

In case this issue has to be reviewed at any noticeboards, can you briefly tell me what sort of issues are raised in this change by an IP editor at List of wars involving Bulgaria? EdJohnston (talk) 03:25, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Not much of an expert on Bulgarian history, as I am catching up with the Byzantine history myself these days, and some of these articles are not in great shape so I will summarize the best I can (relying on WP articles as sources).

In the change that you mentioned,

1. Some references related to a Bulgarian defeat in Bulgarian-Serbian conflict ("Invasion of the Principality of Serbia...") were removed.
2. A sentence that had negative connotation for Bulgaria was removed:
   • Bulgaria lost the Belgrade and Branicevo
   • Also changed the war outcome from defeat to victory. From Bulgarian–Serbian_wars_(medieval)#Campaigns_of_Samuil, it is clear that it was not a victory.
3. Sentences were added to show Bulgaria as the victor. Reading through the Siege of Zadar (998) and Croatian–Bulgarian wars, these two additions are reasonable:
   • Tsar Samuil conquered the entirety of Dalmatia and half of Croatia
   • Croatian King Svetoslav Suronja is deposed through Bulgaria's backing
   • Also changed from the outcome of the war from defeat to victory. Despite having lost the last siege (siege of Zadar), the Bulgarian king did conquered much of land and eventually the Croatian king was deposed. So it might be reasonable to argue as a victory. Nevertheless, a few years later, Bulgaria became vassal to Byzantium, see Croatian–Bulgarian_wars#Third_war. Note that Croatians had an alliance with Byzantium, so it could be argued that Third Bulgarian-Croatian War ended as a defeat since the First Bulgarian Empire ended. Here, it depends when one defines when the war ended.
4. Changed the war outcome of the First Bulgarian–Ottoman War from defeat to victory, which is direct contradiction to article's intro The wars resulted in the collapse and subordination of the Bulgarian Empire. so hardly a victory by any measure.
5. Changed the war outcome of Macedonian Struggle (second phase) from draw to victory. This topic is related to the first and second Balkan wars. In the first phase, Bulgaria, allied with Greece and Serbia, defeated the Ottoman Empire. However, in the second war, Greece and Serbia defeated Bulgaria, which lost much of the territorial gains from the first war. I cannot see this as victory. Some could even see this as defeat, but draw is more reasonable.

I hope I was helpful here. I might have missed something. A.Cython(talk) 05:07, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your review. The TAs seem to have a pattern of pro-Bulgarian edits. Which could be viewed as nationalist edit warring. EdJohnston (talk) 05:34, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello, EdJohnston. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 23:32, 7 March 2026 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

asilvering (talk) 23:32, 7 March 2026 (UTC)