`==Image copyright problem with Image:Ant4_1.gif== Thanks for uploading Image:Ant4_1.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images.  If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days.  If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.  For more information on using images, see the following pages: *Wikipedia:Image use policy *Wikipedia:Image copyright tags  This is an automated notice by .  For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.   :Hi. Further to this I see you've added a fair use tag, which seems to be appropriate to for the subject. You do however need to state the source of the image and who owns the copyright. It's a very cool image by the way. Thanks!    == Sockpuppet ==  I think the sockpuppet notice should be moved as a notice to the talk page. There was just one sockpuppet, and he is no longer using them and he (the main account) was not indef-blocked.    == Page move vandalism == Wikipedia has clear procedures on moving pages. Other than in exceptional circumstances all pages should be moved by following the instructions on the Requested Moves page. Unilateral moves can trigger edit wars, break links and cause a lot of problems. Please stop unilaterally moving pages, as you did with Kim Jong-il, and follow the correct procedure.     I gather English may not be your native language; article names should match common usage in English, and not (for instance) a transliteration of the Russian version.   :I see you have already been warned about this in regard to Sanhedrin, and you agreed to stop doing it to avoid getting blocked.  Well, please do stop.     == Amenia == Since you were one of the few regular users supporting me in the RfC, just wanted to say thanks. You have any advice on the best way to go about a next step? It seems so unfair that this little click can distort the borders of Europe   ==Block==  I have reverted nationalist anti-Soviet propaganda, mass deletion and removing the mention of Nazi collaborationist war crimes in Participants in World War II about once a day. I have been blocked in circumvent of the rules by a POV admin. The article should be restored to the pre-edit war status  Nixer, you reverted that article four times. I have blocked you for only 24 hours, although your repeated 3RR violations would usually warrant more, as would your ``POV admin`` remark above.     :Taking no position whether Nixer  deserves a block for revert warring, I must note that 4 reverts accumulated in 36, not 24 hours as per this. Staying under 3RR is no entitlement in any way and general revert warring is subject to admin's discretion blocks. However, in such case the admin should be uninvolved, unlike  who was one of the editors who reverted Nixer. Again, I take no position on whether Nixer should be blocked for RV warring in general, just noting that technically 3RR is not there and blocking by admin who participates in article disagreement is highly inappropriate in such case.  :All this aside, Nixer, you should cool down finally.    ::Three of Nixer's reverts were within 24 hours and the fourth was the following morning, which I reverted, but subsequently restored. Furthermore, I am not a recent editor of this article, and am not thrilled by the attitude presented by either Nixer or the editors reverted; if there had been any genuine discussion, they might have been able to reach a compromise, as they were both presenting opposing nationalistic views. Nevertheless, he reverted the article four times in a row without discussion, while  and the others did not. Sadly, he has a long track record of such behavior.    :::Please look the talk page more precisely. The discussion is going and all sides present their arguments. I do not revert without pointing my arguments in the talk page. The first edit of my opponents seemed to me as vandalism because they performed mass deletion of valid info. The version I do protect stayed in its status for many months and users who perform mass deletion to a stable version should better explain their moteves in the talk page first.   :::ProhibitOnions, Holocaust Denial is not acceptable in Wikipedia. I'm appaled at the suppression of data about the crimes perpetrated by the Nazis and their collaborators. It is even less acceptable to abuse 3RR in order to block one's opponents. I advise all interested parties to move their dispute to WP:ANI, with a stern warning that Holocaust Denial will not be tolerated.     ::::There is no holocaust denial, dispute is about the fact that was the participation in holocaust enough importnant to put it in article that is meant to be short overview or not. If Holocaust there actualy quite small amount of Estonian collaborators participated is mentioned then a lot more  things that were at similar or bigger scale need to be mentioned and that would make article too long. Also Nixer's version has factual mistakes in it. ( ) :::::I've already corrected the mistakes you pointed. If you know some things of bigger scale connected to participation of the Baltic states, please point them.  ::::::The murders and deportations of Estonians between June 1940 and August 1941 were much more numerous than Holocaust victims of Estonia, but in your opinion it shouldn't be included ()   :::::::The Estonian SS units participated not only in Estonia, you see? And Estonians murdered all 100% Estonian Jews. Do you think it is not worth enough to be mentioned? Holocaust victims were murdered, not just ``deported``.   Since I was first to have commented here I will add extra two cents. If ProhibitOnions per his judgement concludes the Nixer was running a sterile revert war, the block may be justified. Lack of technical 3RR is not a foolproof defence. Even though 3RR is a policy for a reason and should be applied in most cases, some revert warriors permanently stay 1 step under 3RR and do nothing but reverting. This should not be allowed. If PO thinks that this is the case here (sterile revert warring technically under 3RR) he should NOT have said that the block is for 3RR but he should make it clear that this is a judgement block imposed by his own decision based on the evidence that Nixer was involved in a sterile revert war despite staying under 3RR. At the same time Nixer claims that he was not running a revert war but attempted a discussion at talk which was ingored by his opponents. Whoever studies this (or PO himself) needs to take a good look on all details.  However, Nixer is indeed known as generally a hot-headed guy, even though I commend his committment to add content to Wikipedia. He may be right or wrong but in any case he gets excited too much. Nixer, an advise. Do not revert any article more than twice in any 24 hours even if your opponents are ``wrong`` and otherwise ``bad``. I almost guarantee that by adopting this you will not be blocked for revert warring. Now, please seize attempts getting yourself unblocked. It is only 24 hours. Take a break and come back tomorrow chilled out.   Regards,   ::Irpen, thank you very much for commenting. In fact the users in this case do not ignore my comments (although it happens rather frequently in other articles), but their nationalistic POV seems to be very strong. Anyway I did not revert this article more than twice a day (by my 