User talk:Vasilystepanov

Hi Vasilystepanov! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, try the "Suggested edits" module top left on your homepage, or you can always find a task here:

Search the Task Center

Happy editing! Zalaraz (talk) 01:33, 8 August 2026 (UTC)

Please stop editing indian military history topic, you cannot edit it until you have been here for 30 days and have 500 edits. Zalaraz (talk) 01:33, 8 August 2026 (UTC)

Okay, sir. I agree that my account has not yet completed 30 days or reached 500 edits. I will continue to improve my editing and contribute more carefully to Wikipedia. Thank you for your guidance. Vasilystepanov (talk) 08:44, 8 August 2026 (UTC)

Your request for draft restoration is declined. The notice above is serious, and needs to be heeded. We appreciate your intention and hope you can learn to operate within our five pillars, policies and guidelines.

Over our history, the Wikipedia community has learned certain contentious topics often attract edits which may be regarded as contrary to the pedia's purpose. While we want to assume good faith, we are prepared for the few who wish to be disruptive. One such preparation is the extended confirmed permission, automatically applied when a user account reaches both 500 edits and at least 30 days since registration. Wikipedians have learned that after such permission, new users generally have sufficient experience to be trusted and to be held accountable for misbehaviors.

How a new user reacts under such restrictions is an issue the community has decided is important.

Restoring this draft is not allowed at this time. Your multiple restoration requests is technically a violation of the restriction. We encourage you to pursue other good faith editing pursuits elsewhere to acquire experience. Please be aware that gaming this restriction by making repetitive edits is another frequent mistake new users make, so do your best, alright? Ping me when you hit thirty days and we'll talk. BusterD (talk) 12:28, 8 August 2026 (UTC)

Hello Sir, I believe I can now contribute responsibly to Indian military-history articles and campaign sections. My account has crossed 500 edits and 30 days of age, and I intend to focus on well-sourced contributions with reliable citations, especially from reputable scholarly and historical sources. I’ll also make sure that claims are accurately attributed and supported by inline citations, while following Wikipedia’s content and sourcing policies. Vasilystepanov (talk) 19:06, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

Hello Sir, I believe I can now contribute responsibly to Indian military-history articles and campaign sections. My account has crossed 500 edits and 30 days of age, and I intend to focus on well-sourced contributions with reliable citations, especially from reputable scholarly and historical sources. I’ll also make sure that claims are accurately attributed and supported by inline citations, while following Wikipedia’s content and sourcing policies. Vasilystepanov (talk) 19:07, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions. Per WP:BURDEN, unsourced content can be removed from Wikipedia, and should be removed if it might damage the reputation of living people or groups. In other cases, rather than removing the text immediately, please consider finding sources to verify the content or encouraging others to do so by adding {{citation needed}} or similar tags. The criterion for including content in Wikipedia is verifiability, and many statements are true and verifiable even if citations to reliable sources have not yet have added explicitly. Thanks again, Certes (talk) 21:33, 17 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice, these redirects don't make sense , all but hoax, no mention of them in any sources, can I start a redirect for discussion? If yes then please tell how to nominate all at once. Vasilystepanov (talk) 22:02, 17 August 2026 (UTC)

Yes, you can nominate them as redirects for discussion. There is a case for deleting them, even if the criteria for speedy deletion do not apply here. You can either group them into a single section because they have similar characteristics, or leave them separate in case someone finds good reasons to keep a few of them but there is consensus to delete the others. Certes (talk) 09:08, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks but I was referring to nominating multiple redirects at once with twinkle, is there a way? See for example this. I want to enlist Maukharis of Gaya, Megari, Megars & Megar Dynasty at RfD for Maukharis of Kannauj. I can nominate each of 4 by twinkle but how to do at once? Vasilystepanov (talk) 13:11, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

I think the only way is to nominate them individually then combine them on the RfD page. Grouped RfDs would certainly be a useful enhancement to Twinkle, even if it's only an "add to existing nomination for [type other redirect name here]" box. Certes (talk) 13:21, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll try! Vasilystepanov (talk) 13:46, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Orientls (talk) 02:20, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

The above-linked discussion archived before I saved my edit in the thread, so I've adapted it slightly and pasted it below. BusterD (talk) 17:35, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

I have User:Vasilystepanov at 438 active edits. I see 75 deleted edits (all made in violation of ECR). That's 513. I see an automatically awarded ECP (clearly unearned). I also clearly see the user editing in restricted areas before the automatic granting of extended protected status. That's blatant PGAME activity. I do see a new user with an unwholesome interest in rapidly getting ECP so they can get back to their CTOP pet draft (entirely created in violation of the contentious topic). I did ask them to ping me, and instead they applied at the thread at their own talk page (which I missed). I was hoping their later behaviors would reflect well on them. In the recent ANI thread they've pretty obviously used LLMs to discuss their own editing history. Many of their edits are removals of uncited information, true, but on CTOP pages. Do we all agree this demonstrates a pattern of consistent problem behaviors? So I'm removing extended confirmed permissions from Vasilystepanov's toolset, and they can police themselves. To regain ECP, they may either apply to me on my talk or make their case to any admin at WP:PERM after they reach 800 combined edits, the next 287 NOT IN contentious topics. BusterD (talk) 17:27, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement regarding a possible violation of an Arbitration Committee decision. The thread is Quick enforcement requests. Orientls (talk) 00:31, 31 August 2026 (UTC)