Hello, Çerçok! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Also be aware of the tree-revert rule: you must not perform more than three reverts, in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material, on a single page within a 24-hour period! If you do you could end up getting banned! Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Enjoy your Wikipedia experience! Ahmet Q. (talk) 04:21, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply] Getting Started Contributing to Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article The five pillars of Wikipedia • Simplified ruleset How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions Directories and indexes Where to: ask questions • make requests Tip of the day Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style (Simplified) • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists The Signpost (Wikipedia's newspaper) Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Your recent editing history in Greek War of Independence 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. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for 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. Othon I (talk) 12:27, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Othon I (talk) 12:54, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of one week for personal attacks. There's a limit to the allowances new users can be extended when it comes to a personal attack as egregious as Deliberately racist deletion. Not to mention to then say I have not insulted anyone when the insult is pointed out. That isn't so much a Wikipedia-specific thing as it is conducting oneself in a respectful manner with another person (universally). Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

El_C 12:39, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Himara 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. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for 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. Khirurg (talk) 18:24, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Othon I (talk) 09:30, 14 November 2021 (UTC)"}}[reply]

You have crossed the line. Endlessly accusing and reverting is NOT cool at all. I suggest you follow the general guidelines else things will go bad. Sorry for saying that. Cheers.Alexikoua (talk) 09:50, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cercok, I have checked your edits and you have not done anything wrong. thank you for the interesting sources. Alexikoua accused me too just yesterday of removing content which is something I never did. unfortunately such talk is pretty normal in Balkan discussions but do not let that discourage you. in my opinion it is better to focus on what really matters which is improving articles instead of responding to comments like those of Alexikuoa. You should note that per WP:TALK, you can remove all such comments from your talk page. Durraz0 (talk) 10:50, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by DoubleGrazing were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

I'm not seeing anything to suggest that this family is notable in itself. Individual members may or may not be, but that does not confer notability on the wider family. Please cite multiple reliable, independent, secondary sources per WP:GNG, providing significant coverage of the family.

Also, the first two paragraphs are unsupported by referencing. Please ensure that all material statements are referenced to a reliable source.

Thank you, --

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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bixhili family and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Bixhili family, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 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 , on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:33, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Çerçok! Having an article 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! DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:33, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You made the map "15th-16th century Albanian tribes in the territory of modern-day Montenegro" a while back. Since then it has been updated with more tribes, so I wondered if you could possibly update it to include the other formerly Alb tribes in Montenegro. Thx in advance.Alltan (talk) 19:49, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Which tribes are currently missing? Çerçok (talk) 12:09, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Krici, Vasojevici, Kryethi and Mahine come to mind. Please see the template on Albanian tribes for any ones I might have missed. Alltan (talk) 16:40, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Çerçok. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bixhili family, 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) 16:03, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 the Balkans or Eastern Europe. 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.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. 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.

In particular, accusations that "Greek historians have falsified sources" [1] is a red flag. Khirurg (talk) 19:15, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Red flag for what? I am waiting since a week ago to see any sources that contradict what I have written. Either present sources or stop fighting the truth. Çerçok (talk) 21:15, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:TRUTH. Another red flag. Khirurg (talk) 21:18, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are the one refusing to provide sources. Çerçok (talk) 22:04, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I also participated in Margariti, in case you have noticed and I wanted to ask: Where have you got the quote "Relevant foreign language names (one used by at least 10% of sources in the English language or that is used by a group of people which used to inhabit this geographical place) are permitted"? Thanks! AlexBachmann (talk) 22:34, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, it is in this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(geographic_names). I noticed that one of the users removed the Albanian name arguing that the Albanians do not live there, in full violation of this policy, even though I had quoted it in a previous edit. Çerçok (talk) 22:43, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Shall we add Albanian names to some Cham towns? (Parga, Preveza, Syvota, ...) I don't know if that would cause problems (edit war, blablabla)... AlexBachmann (talk) 23:11, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the policy is very clear to allow it. Of course if even Margellic is unacceptable for some people, I believe Preveza will be to. Çerçok (talk) 23:37, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ahmed Q blocked me from editing in Thesportia, stating that it is "not an improvement". AlexBachmann (talk) 19:01, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On the regional unit of Thesprotia I agree with AhmetQ because while the historical name for the region was Cameria and that should certainly be reflected appropriately in the article, that is not the name for it as an administrative division. On Margellic and other nearby settlements I agree with you will support a balanced naming covention for both settlements on both sides of the Albanian-Greek border. Çerçok (talk) 05:42, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you, I've seen my mistake. AlexBachmann (talk) 19:11, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We did good work. I also created new articles, (Neochori, Thesprotia, Kanallaki and Agia (Parga)). I know that they're most probably watching how the Albanian names in cities and villages in Epirus are being added, and they can't do anything about it. AlexBachmann (talk) 21:49, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What is this [2] supposed to mean? Never what? How can a section begin with "These uprisings" when it's not even mentioned what "these uprisings" refers to? Khirurg (talk) 22:30, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Çerçok. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Bixhili family".

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 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) 15:44, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at it, the pic there has a cn tag in its caption. Maybe you can solve that issue [3]. Ktrimi991 (talk) 22:08, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just another stalling attempt by the same person... How is it necessary to cite what the painting itself states? Mysteries of Alexikoua. Çerçok (talk) 21:57, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alexikoua and his cn/vn tags. I have removed several frivolous ones recently. It is not clear what "verification" he wants when there is a quote, page number and the source is online. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 15:18, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at WP:ANI regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Edit warring regarding Albanians in the Greek revolution. Thank you. - Therealscorp1an (talk) 21:34, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. I was browsing Wikipedia when I stumbled upon this Himara Revolt. It seems the article is not as sourced as it could be, so I am referring it to you in case you can make improvements to it. Thanks. Alltan (talk) 16:01, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I have noticed this article too. It is written in the same style as some of the ones we have recently improved. I may look into it properly once falsifications in those other articles are fully addressed. Çerçok (talk) 17:50, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, 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, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Alexikoua (talk) 20:45, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cercok, you have done nothing disruptive in regards to using the RS Xhufi. You are free to remove the above inappropriate warning. Alltan (talk) 21:02, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Exposing your manipulation of the source material does not constitute disruptive editing. Çerçok (talk) 21:32, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. - ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 23:36, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is better to post your comment at the bottom of the thread, i.e. after the latest comment. Otherwise admin(s) might not notice it. Lengthy discussions become very messy to read. Ktrimi991 (talk) 13:48, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I indented it to separate it from the two comments above and below it. Next time I will post it at the bottom. Çerçok (talk) 14:49, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Alexikoua (talk) 01:57, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Can you re-write your summary please? [4]

As it is now, it is so confusing. It has 5 sub-summaries without reason. In my 14 years, I have never seen anything like that. The 3rd subsummary, titled "1.1.1.3 Alexikoua's summary" needs to be removed asap, as it can be misleading as if it was written by Alexikoua, not you. I have been struggling to understand why Alexikoua wrote inside your summary. It was only the aid of the Edit History that cleared confusion for me. Fix it asap please. All other sub-summaries (1.1.1.1, 1.1.1.2, 1.1.1.4, and 1.1.1.5) also should be merged into "1.1.1 Summary of dispute by Çerçok" to keep only 1 summary for yourself. No editor is permitted to have more than one summaries. It is very important that in the Dispute Resolution, everybody respects the structure and formatting. DRN are very serious and attention is needed in how you format your summaries in them. Thank you. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 22:25, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Also, read the DRN rules please. [5] That means, to remove ASAP any mentions of you to Alexikoua's own summary. You are not allowed to commnent directly or indirectly to other editor's summaries in any way, without Admin permission, like how you did by stating "It is unfortunate that Alexikoua's summary never even attempts to discuss content that has been added from Xhufi.". The DRN rules are clear about this: 7. Do not engage in back-and-forth discussion to statements by other editors unless the moderator gives permission; that is, do not reply to the comments of other editors. That has already been tried and has not resolved the content dispute. Address your comments to the moderator and the community. Except in a section for back-and-forth discussion, replies to other editors or back-and-forth discussion may be collapsed by the moderator and may result in a rebuke. It may result in a rebuke from an Admin to you, and you don't want that.
• And a last note: Do not mention other editor's names nor target/criticize them directly like how you did with "Khirurg and Alexikoua continue to force removals of Dr. Xhufi's citations from articles." Only summarize the dispute without pointing fingers by naming specific editors. The DRN focuses solely on the dispute, not on editors; doing so, may result in ramifications against your participation in the progress. I say: Revert yourself entirely, read the rules and then re-write it. To a number closer to 2.000 text limit down from the current 8.000 text, if possible. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 22:30, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @SilentResident I agree with some of the points you made. I can make a few improvements. But can you please tell me where to find the edits that Alexikoua made inside my summary? I cannot see it anywhere, including here the edit history here [6]. Çerçok (talk) 23:03, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies if I wasn't clearer to you: You gave one of your summaries the title "1.1.1.3 Alexikoua's summary" making other editors assume that Alexikoua wrote it. Never do anything like that again in the future please. "Summaries by X" may never by written by editors other than the writer himself, with X denoting the name of the writer of that summary.

Edit: Also keep in mind that in the DRN, only actually involved parties may be invited, not third party admins. That means admins such as Drmies (who is among those you pinged) has not been an involved party in any talk pages arguing in favor or against Xhufi in any way, may not be pinged to the discussion. Pinging him is a violation of the Wikipedia's rules as it constitutes WP:FORUMSHOPPING and may result in ramifications by Admins and Volunteers. You don't want that. If you have any further questions, about the DRN or whatever, feel free to ask Robert McClenon. He is our Volunteer, as I will be unavailable for the rest of the day due to busy schedules. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 23:24, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the sub-summary title about Alexikoua's summary, although no one would think I did not write it as it literally starts with me referring to Alexikoua in third person.

My summary was still shorter than Alexikoua's, now it is far shorter. That initial summary makes it difficult to write less.

I pinged only editors who had participated in talk pages discussing Xhufi, here is Drmies': [7]. Pinging him is not a violation.

Çerçok (talk) 00:51, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Çerçok, I friendly want to invite to discuss in Ioannina. I wanted to add Janina to the lede, because more sources use this name than the Greek one (for real). But see yourself. AlexBachmann (talk) 23:21, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:48, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Çerçok. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Albanian Resistance to Ottoman Rule (1479-1912), 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) 13:01, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Çerçok. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Albanian Resistance to Ottoman Rule".

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 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) 14:04, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In many of your latest posts, you accuse me or others of "covering up massacres". This is a personal attack and an assumption of bad faith, and needs to stop. If you make one more accusation of "covering up massacres", you will be reported. I won't warn you again. Khirurg (talk) 00:13, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When you remove well-sourced content about massacres, you are covering up massacres. Maybe you are covering up massacres with very good intentions or maybe not, that is something that only you know, and I have no interest in. Whatever your intentions are, stop doing it. Çerçok (talk) 00:46, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I only remove things that are not well-sourced. On the other hand, when you make aggressive accusations against other people, there is no excuse for doing so. That's what needs to stop. Khirurg (talk) 02:14, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What is aggressive is massacres. And you removed content from two historians. That is well-sourced content. Çerçok (talk) 02:47, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:47, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]