User talk:Mario1421: Difference between revisions

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at ELAM (Cyprus), without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. LakesideMiners^{Come Talk To Me!} 15:12, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks it was a mistake Mario1421 (talk) 15:14, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at ELAM (Cyprus), you may be blocked from editing. tony 15:28, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What you write doesn’t reflect the truth about ELAM. Mario1421 (talk) 15:31, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at ELAM (Cyprus) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. An edit war occurs when two or more users begin repeatedly reverting content on a page in a back-and-forth fashion to restore it back to how they think it should be, despite knowing that other editors disagree with their changes. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or undo the edits made by other editors when your changes are reverted. Instead, please use the talk page to work toward creating a version of the page that represents consensus among the editors involved. The best practice at this time is to stop editing the page and to discuss the disagreements, issues, and concerns at-hand with the other editors involved in the dispute. Wikipedia provides a page that helps to detail how this is accomplished. If discussions reach an impasse, you can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection while a discussion to resolve the dispute is ongoing.

Continuing to engage in further edit warring behavior can result in being blocked from editing Wikipedia—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, or whether it involves the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also, please 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 demeanor, behavior, or conduct indicate that you intend to continue repeatedly making reverts to the page.   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 15:38, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello everyone.

I would like to make substantial edits to this article because the current text includes terminology that violates Wikipedia’s Neutral Point of View (NPOV) policy — particularly politically charged labels such as “neo-Nazi” and “neo-fascist.”

These terms are not used in official documents or by neutral sources, and they misrepresent a legally registered political party that currently holds seats in the Cyprus Parliament and the European Parliament.

My goal is to rewrite the article to reflect verifiable facts only, based on reliable sources such as the Cyprus Parliament website, the European Parliament member list, and reputable Cypriot or international media.

I will ensure that all statements are properly cited and phrased in neutral, encyclopedic language, without promotional tone.

Before proceeding, I want to confirm that this approach aligns with Wikipedia’s content guidelines (WP:NPOV, WP:RS, and WP:BLP). Once I get consensus, I’ll begin section-by-section edits with full sourcing. Mario1421 (talk) 15:54, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at ELAM (Cyprus). tony 15:49, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The current version of the ELAM (Cyprus) article contains language that appears politically biased, using terms such as “neo-Nazi” and “neo-fascist.” These phrases are controversial and not representative of the party’s own stated ideology or of its current legal status as a registered political party in Cyprus.

My goal is not to remove sourced information, but to ensure that the article follows Wikipedia’s Neutral Point of View (NPOV) policy by presenting both perspectives fairly. ELAM has been a legally recognized political party since 2011 and currently ranks third in national support, with elected Members of Parliament and a Member of the European Parliament. Mario1421 (talk) 16:34, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Descriptions are sourced, not usually to the subject’s own statements, and you did remove a lot of text to include only what seemed positive, with earlier edits copy/pastes from their website, seemingly. If you want a second opinion use {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ~Lofty abyss 16:45, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]