User talk:Constanz/Archive2

Template:User support minorities Iran
Per your request, I have moved the userbox to User:Constanz/User support minorities Iran. I agree that the expansion of speedy deletion criteria has been most unfortunate. If you want me to restore more of your userboxes, please make a request on my user page. - Mike Rosoft 21:57, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your help. --Constanz - Talk 05:53, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Userboxes: A New Proposal
Hey, I've noticed that you've been active on the Userbox deletion page, either strongly FOR or AGAINST the use of the new T2 for deleting userboxes. I have noticed that most of the community is strong in their opinions on this issue; for that reason, I created my own proposal which attempts to create a middle ground for the two groups, and finally get this debate settled once and for all. I welcome your input into the proposal, as well as your (non-binding) vote on the straw poll. Thanks! // The  True  Sora  01:31, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Picture
No idea about the mao picture since I cant see the picture, maybe it got removed. (Deng 09:25, 20 May 2006 (UTC))

Collectivisation in the USSR
I am once again reverting your addition to Collectivisation in the USSR. First and foremost, the description of the Holodomor and the Ukraine are described separately below. Second, your usage of the word genocide is POV. Please discuss on the Talk Page before adding it again. -- TheMightyQuill 14:19, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Icebreaker
It sounds like you're more familiar with the book than I; could you go through the sections you readded and rephrase them to make it clear that they are discussing Suvorov's claims? As it is, they read like a commentary by the article's authors. --RobthTalk 13:20, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Estonia
Please warn me when it happens again. It seems now to be quiet on the article. Electionworld = Wilfried (talk 16:45, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Non-English books are listed because we've cited these (Viktor Suvorov)
--Constanz - Talk 07:19, 2 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, you're not exactly correct: cited books are listed in "Reference", and in the "List of books and articles of other authors" there are entries for those which were not necessarily mentioned in the article. I myself placed a non-English (Polish) book on that list, but only because of an English review of it exists and is accessible for English readers. --Barbatus 14:31, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Bold text

Nicaragua
I do not know as much about Nicaragua, as I should. In my view the Sandinista movement was co-opted by the communists as so many previous revolutions. Strangely it would appear that in this country corruption was a force for democracy, as Ortega and his friends made an exchange of "la pi~nata" property for free elections, and now they are allies of Aleman and his corrupt right wing buddies. However, I worry about the coming elections, and the emergence of what Senator Lugar calls pseudo democracies. which now, given recent past history of turning into real democracies, are under far tighter control. El Jigue 6-9-06

Constanz you have a lot of work to do,  You might start with William Walker to get historic perspective, I believe a Cuban patriot I think it was Goicuria fought with him. Will send references later El Jigue 6-9-06

Fair use images
Hi! I notice that you seem to have some "fair use" images on your user page. That's not quite kosher under current rules, you may want to look into that :) Regards, Haukur 23:40, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

PBKNL
Could you have a look at the following "Kõige aktiivsemalt tegutses pärast Oktoobrirevolutsiooni Tallinna SDNÜ. Detsembris 1917 andis ta välja oma ajakirja "Noor Sotsialist" esimene nr. Teine nr. valmis küll 1918.a. jaanuaris ent ei jõudnud enam lugejateni. Tallinna SDNÜ initsiatiivil kutsuti 17. veebruaril 1918 Tallinna kokku kõigi Eestis tegutsevate sotsiaaldemokraatlike noorteühingute kongress, kus pidi loodama keskne üleeestiline noorteühing. 20 delegaati esindasid rohkem kui 2000 liiget. Kongressil puhkes äge diskussioon Narva anarhistlike delegaatidega, kes ei nõustunud sellega, et loodav ülemaaline organisatsioon võtab oma tegevuse alguseks bolševistliku programmi. Kui see aga häälteenamusega siiski vastu võeti, lahkusid Narva noorte esindajad kongressilt. Uus organisatsioon võttis oma nimeks Põhja-Balti Kommunistlik Noorsoo Liit (PBKNL). Seoses saksa vägede sissetungiga ei saanud PBKNL tegutsema hakatagi. Suur osa ühingu liikmeist läks Punaarmeesse ning võitlesid juba Venemaal sealse kodusõja rinnetel."

My Estonian grammar is severly failing me;
 * Was the PBKNL formed by the Narva group or their opponents?
 * What happened with it at the time of German intervention? --Soman 12:22, 12 June 2006 (UTC)


 *  Kongressil puhkes äge diskussioon Narva anarhistlike delegaatidega, kes ei nõustunud sellega, et loodav ülemaaline organisatsioon võtab oma tegevuse alguseks bolševistliku programmi. Kui see aga häälteenamusega siiski vastu võeti, lahkusid Narva noorte esindajad kongressilt. Uus organisatsioon võttis oma nimeks Põhja-Balti Kommunistlik Noorsoo Liit (PBKNL). Seoses saksa vägede sissetungiga ei saanud PBKNL tegutsema hakatagi. Suur osa ühingu liikmeist läks Punaarmeesse ning võitlesid juba Venemaal sealse kodusõja rinnetel."  in the congress a heated discussion with Narva anarchist delegates took place, the anarchists disagreed that the future all-country organisation take bolshevist programme as its basis. When this programme was adopted by majority of votes, the representatives of Narva youth left the congress. The new organisation took itself name Põhja-Balti Kommunistlik Noorsoo Liit (PBKNL). In connection with the invasion of German troops the PBKNL could not start its existance. A big share of its memebrs went to Red army and fought in Russia in civil war fronts.--Constanz - Talk 14:09, 12 June 2006 (UTC)


 * You've got translation at my talk page. P.S. If you are a bit interested in certain parts of Estonian history, you better keep in mind that the monument you've chosen as your title image for Baltics is something like swastika to Jews. Your Baltic co-contributors may find it odd that their country collection is titled on your homepage by such a symbol instead of nice a independence memorial or tourist attraction! Constanz - Talk 15:53, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the translation. However, I think you misjudge the political context of the Guinea memorial. The 1970s was an extremly repressive period in Guinean history, in which entire ethnic groups were singled out as enemies of the state. The statue is erected not to far away from the city's main concentration camp (sort of an urban gulag). My intention of posting images at my userpage is not to glorify nor the opposite, but it is a arbitrary collection of images which each illustrate features of that country or its history. --Soman 08:12, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Thankyou
Thankyou for the Anti-Marxist userbox. Reaper7 20:12, 29 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Greatest thank to a creator is having one's creations used by the others!--Constanz - Talk 07:18, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Portal
Hi. I see that portal links are removed from many templates (one just now by you) so it must have been discussed already somewhere. Where can I find the reasons? Thanks. ActiveSelective 11:11, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I just reverted. See history and explanation by User:172.--Constanz - Talk 11:41, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorbs
You added a section about the treatment of the Sorbs in the GDR. This section is desputed. Please have a look at the discussion page to specify your sources for that information. Thanks --Mandavi 16:27, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

SuperDeng
Yep, Alex got it. Thanks for letting us know. --Woohookitty(meow) 09:01, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


 * You may be right about user BobShoe - I was thinking the same thing. Perhaps we should ask for a checkuser. DMorpheus 12:05, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


 * There's no doubt it is him. He left some garbage on my talk page, with the same misspellings Deng uses. DMorpheus 13:03, 19 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Its all funny but sad. I don't understand how someone can do these things. I also don't understand what sanction has been applied, if any, to the superdeng account itself. I see the socks were blocked indefinitely. DMorpheus 14:11, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Journal of Slavic Military Studies
Thanks for the new reference. I will definitely get my hands on it. DMorpheus 19:53, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

World War2
I don't really have anything new. Sigitas 15:20, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Mary Glantz
Thanks for providing the review. I have responded on the talk page of the COL Glantz article. All the best Andreas 20:38, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Sokolov.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Sokolov.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:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 07:49, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Help with translations
I'm currently working on a script intended to create short articles on political parties on a variety of wikipedias simultaneously. However, in order for the technique to work I need help with translations to various languages. For example I need help with Estonian. Thanks, --Soman 12:43, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I am ready to help on Estonian politics (in case we exclude EKP and similar gangs).--Constanz - Talk 15:47, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Zhukov memoirs
Please remind me in which Suvorov's book Zhukov was quoted as having few times less tanks than Germans? In Shadow of victory or Take my words back? Sigitas 17:11, 2 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Suvorov, Suicide, chapter 3: Если у немцев 3712 танков и это (если верить Жукову) в пять раз больше, чем у нас, тогда в Красной Армии было 742 танка. А если у немцев было танков в шесть раз больше, значит, в Красной Армии их было 618. Но что такое «и более раз»? Это как: в семь раз? Или в восемь? А может быть, в десять? Почему великий полководец говорит загадками? Почему мы должны гадать, сколько же у него было в подчинении сил? --Constanz - Talk 17:30, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Constanz we know so little of what is going on, now the emphasis seems to be on a support committee for Fidel Castro, rather than nominating Raul. This could, or could not mean, that Raul is now out and the Communist Party rules, or it could mean that the Cuban bigwigs are killing each other, or none of the above. What seems certain is that Fidel Castro is not in complete control, and may even be dead, or even recovered as is the present official line. Interesting and scary. The Raulites here in the US are defending him vigorously too vigorously perhaps....xe xe El Jigue 8-12-06

Gisela Elsner
Constanz, why do you think, Gisela Elsner should have left the Federal Republic of Germany to live in the DDR? She wanted the Bundesrepublik to be a different country, different to what it really was. So from her point of view the best she could do was staying here and change the society. That's what she tried to do by her writing. (To make that crystalclear: I disagreed with her in almost every respect and didn't even feel she was a good writer. But this was her country as well as mine.)--80.136.213.3 15:16, 15 August 2006 (UTC) user ulula, German wikipedia


 * Lieber Constanz, Du wirst dringend gebraucht bei unserer These. Heute abend geht es weiter, habe Dodo erklärt, warum seine Löschungen und sprachlichen Sinn-Entstellungen nicht korrekt sind, ein Kompromiß bahnt sich an. Bis dann, --172.179.52.132 12:43, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
 * ich hoffe zeit dafür zu finden.Constanz - Talk 14:27, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Conflict Resolution
Hi Constanz, I think that there is little chance that we resolve our conflict over Arnold Rüütel, and, more importantly, that this has carried over to the personal realm, as we see in Talk: Toomas Hendrik Ilves regarding the anti-semitism issue. I honestly think that your edits on Estonian politics, in spite of your unquestionable factual knowledge, form grandstanding and soapboxing, and I also think that you are violating No personal attacks, because you phrase your responses as harshly and unfriendlily as you can, combining insinuation of bad faith, plain insults, innuendos of ignorance of Estonian facts and language, Wikistalking, etc. I have asked you to cooperate on a constructive basis, in spite of our previous encounter (where you called me a commie because I didn't agree with you), but it has not worked. Especially your summaries are offensive. Since I want to continue working on Wikipedia, and also on Estonian politics, yet want to do that in an unmolested way, I will ask you again whether it has any sense to go ahead in a decent way and whether you can abstain from your personal attacks. If not, I would suggest the Resolving disputes procedure, independently from the biography noticeboard, which is only on that one issue. I think third party comment, and then, if necessary, mediation (if you agree with that; I would) seem to be the logical steps to take. What do you think? Clossius 12:43, 24 September 2006 (UTC)




 * because you phrase your responses as harshly and unfriendlily as you can, combining insinuation of bad faith, plain insults, innuendos of ignorance of Estonian facts and language, Wikistalking, etc. I don't know, I think I kept a decent line on Talk:Arnold Rüütel, for my contributions on the article space speak for themselves (not ironic edit summaries added two weeks ago!), and secondly, this way I believe it is likely that other users will condemn your remarks (again: just like on Talk:Pro Patria Union you fail to criticise/cite/refer anything specific, no verifications, but prefer general comments like bias, slander etc - as if you were assuming that your comments are to be regarded as accurate or truths a priori. You better change your style, for people here are not your students who may regard your personal POVs a priori as NPOV. So far no-one has expressed significant support to neither your reverts on the article nor to your bulky comments on talk. Perhaps - only a slight doubt (don't tell anybody!) - it might be you who is the culprit on this matter?Constanz - Talk 08:16, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Why have you completely removed your characteristics? It's useful to have one's language abilities shown, just like interests/personal POVs. Mine has been rather useful than troubling.

License tagging for Image:Drechsler.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Drechsler.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 07:04, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Copyright problems with Image:ZinovievAuto.jpeg
An image that you uploaded, Image:ZinovievAuto.jpeg, has been listed at Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Lupo 09:53, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Copyright problems with Image:ZINOVIEV.JPG
An image that you uploaded, Image:ZINOVIEV.JPG, has been listed at Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Lupo 10:07, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

RFCU request
You recently compiled and listed a case at request for checkuser. For an outcome to be achieved, we require you list the code letter which matches with the violations of policy, which is listed at the top of the request for checkuser page. This has been implemented to reduce difficulties for checkusers, and is essential for your case to be processed. A link to your recently-created case which has this information missing is here. Thanks for your co-operation. Daniel.Bryant 10:31, 22 October 2006 (UTC), checkuser clerk.

Thanks
Hi. Thank you very much for your advice and support. I'm usually reluctant to resort to this sort of measures, but I'm afraid I will have to do it one day. Cheers, --Kober 11:33, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * There are some users here, who sometimes need to be dealt with special measures. Most ridiculous thing about it that users like Ghirlandajo (and Kubankazak!) themselves declare their 'zero tolerance against trolling in wiki' (!!)Constanz - Talk 11:42, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Please refrain from implying that Ghirlandajo and Kubankazak are trolling. And another request: please do not remove messages from Portal:Russia/New article announcements entirely. We all know Ghirla has some problems with his (lack of) diplomatic talent, and we are quite capable to voice opposition to his actions if necessary. The only thing you'll accomplish is creating animosity. Errabee 11:58, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Removing other people's comments from discussions threads is almost considered vandalism, except in the case they are obvious ad hominem attacks. -- Grafikm  (AutoGRAF)  12:13, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Removing legitimate tags warning an assaulter also qualifies as such.--Constanz - Talk 12:15, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * It was not a template, but a (rather disgusting, I might add) attack. -- Grafikm  (AutoGRAF)  12:17, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah, and please don't forget that warning other people in a more polite way (by using "please" and other stuff you didn't bother with in your message) works a lot better, as a general rule of thumb. -- Grafikm  (AutoGRAF)  12:21, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Update 3: Calling other users "trolls" in edit summaries is unacceptable. -- Grafikm  (AutoGRAF)  12:27, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Threats
Hi, Constanz. I saw you repeatedly post threats on my talk page. If you have evidence that I called you a Russophobe (which term does not qualify as an insult, as best I know), you are welcome to denounce me anywhere you wish. It does not cut ice with me. Thanks, Ghirla  -трёп-  12:14, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

This edit summary...
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Portal%3ARussia%2FNew_article_announcements&diff=83405590&oldid=83403646 rv. trolling request by Ghirla...] is unacceptable. Please avoid personal attacks in the future.

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. -- Grafikm  (AutoGRAF)  12:25, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

personal assault question
(after several editing conflicts) Ghirla has never been blocked for trolling; for incivility perhaps, but not for trolling. And his latest block (in September) was highly contested, and a Request for Arbitration was denied because there was no coherent case against him to be made. As for Kubankazak, his latest block (for incivility, not trolling) was in May, about the same time you were blocked as well for recreating userboxes. I suppose you were trolling as well?

Portals are meant to place related information on, so other users who may be interested are alerted to certain developments. This definitely isn't similar to voting fraud, or canvassing for that matter.

And as for the way Ghirla voices his dissent, we all know that and are quite capable of forming our own opinions. Please do not think of the contributors at Portal:Russia as mindless morons, who accept everything for face value.

As for his comments on the talk page, I really do not see any personal attacks there, just frustration about a lot of anti-Russian sentiments on Wikipedia. Most of the time Ghirla is a fervent fighter of NPOV, but sometimes he makes a bad judgement call; he is only human after all. Blocking him for something like this would definitely not be appropriate, and I find the suggestion rather offensive. Errabee 12:26, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I think this addressed all your concerns already. Again, I don't find any personal attacks where you perceive them. Airing russophobic statements says something about the statements being russophobic, for which a case can certainly be made. It does not say that you yourself are Russophobic. Errabee 12:38, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Does this estimation read: Constanz being a member of wikipedia anti-Russia POV (while never blocked for trolling/tendentuious editting), while Ghirla fervently NPOV compared to me (though he really has had troubles with numerous admins?). I don't agree, I'm afraid.Constanz - Talk 12:42, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * This is definitely a misrepresentation. True, Ghirla has had problems with admins, but not for trolling or for POV matters. But I welcome a RfC on this article; this mess has gone on long enough. Errabee 12:46, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * The deeper you search, the weaker any case becomes. If you have complaints, focus on the here and now and don't drag in a RfC from 1 year ago. Besides, Ghirlandajo does not shy away from controversial subjects and is thus more likely to get involved in conflicts. I am starting to dislike your behaviour. Errabee 15:40, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

3RR warning
I'd like to warn you not to revert again on Ghirla's talk page, as you would be in violation of WP:3RR. Errabee 12:29, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Canvassing/sollicitation of votes
Perhaps you should read WP:SPAM before you're going on a crusade against wind mills. Errabee 14:49, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Re:Russian portal and offensive annoucements
While I completly agree that the problem exists, I am not a neutral admin here. Consider bringing this issue with User:Alex Bakharev, a reasonable admin who frequents the Russian portal. If that fails, try WP:PAIN or WP:ANI.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 19:08, 25 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I am afraid I am not neutral here as well, but I do not see the way it announced on P:RUS/NEW (at least now) to be offensive or somehow against the wikipedia rules. Jageilo/Wladislaw indeed ruled by a significant piece of the current Russia and inside the interests for many Portal regulars. Wide advertisements of discussions among interested parties increase the participation rate and usually lead to more convincing results. It is not like I would solicit opinions of the portal regulars on viscoelasticity or the Australian rules football. Alex Bakharev 08:58, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Your Box Templates
Hello Constanz,

Would you mind if you used your "This user rejects Marxist thinking" box on my user page?

Many thanks,

Goatboy95 20:53, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Btw, if you feel that Ghirla offended you on discussion pages - I certainly think he did - consider reporting him to WP:PAIN. I think that turning discussion pages into flaming is certainly disruptive to Wikipedia, and he has to learn to behave in a civil manner.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 08:24, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, I'm afraid I have to the next time. Though I have sonme doubts whether this helps or not - I've got no idea, what kind of 'consensus' might be waiting there. Constanz - Talk 08:29, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Another of yet countless examples of Piotrus' sneaky effort to achieve his opponents' blocks, specifically by inciting the editors to act so that Piotrus' name does not even show up. --Irpen 08:39, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


 * You are generally entitled to edit most of your page as you see fit, but I specifically request that my note is left for the record. There were multiple instances of Piotrus' acting this way and not just against Ghirla and I would like this fact recorded. If needed, I already quoted diffs to Piotrus multiple times and this is going to be another one. --Irpen 08:45, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

When it's others editors who are offended I usually leave it up to them to take action, although I am happy to point them to tools that will make them less likely to be abused and offended in the future; I am sorry Irpen that you disapprove of defending agaisnt personal attacks and fight their criticism instead. Considering that Ghirla accused me of vandalism and nationalism in the past 24h I reported him myself now. I am sure Irpen you will be there soon to defend Ghirla, but he has committed clear violations of NPA. This cannot be denied, and unless he learns to behave he will be blocked per our policies. Btw, Irpen, if you make accussations against others, please provide relevant diffs instead of mentioning them.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 08:58, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

WP:PAIN report on Ghirlandajo
The report has been removed from the noticeboard. The noticeboard is not a substitute for dispute resolution. As per the header instructs, please do not repost the material but discuss it with the admin who closed it or on WP:AN/I. Thanks. Shell babelfish 12:42, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * discuss it with the admin who closed - i.e. above signed User:Shell Kinney himself, I guess. We certainly shall - I find such speedy removal of the case very discouraging for the entire PAIN idea.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:24, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Piotr, for the umpteenth time I see you harrassing a administrator. I have to submit report on WP:PAIN... -- Ghirla -трёп-  16:38, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

SuperDeng
It looks as though Deng's indefinite block is going to be upheld. So. If you see any evidence of him anywhere, let me know and we can start another CheckUser request. I would be floored if he didn't try to create more socks. --Woohookitty(meow) 17:01, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm as sure as you, that he'll join us soon, if one of his sock puppets hasn't done it already. Let us see, all those have carried his obvious characteristics, so far. Constanz - Talk 18:43, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Occupation of Latvia 1940-1945
I would urge you to reconsider your approach to this article. If those who believe it was not an occupation cannot provide any evidence to support their view, then it will not prevail. It will be plain as day, as opposed to accusations of trolling, which is a judgment call. If you continue behaving in an emotional way and violating WP:3RR, then it will be harder for others to respect your arguments. Basically, if you think you are right, then I think you should have more confidence in that. It is a small thing whether a POV tag occurs at the top of the article for a period of time. Grouse 17:24, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with Grouse completly. By violating 3RR you create an image that it is you who is an irresponsible editor in monority. Instead, you should consider steps of WP:DR, reports their violation to appopriate places (WP:ANI/3RR, WP:PAIN, etc.) or ask other editos for comments (like myself). Sometimes it happens that a dedicated group of POVed editors will 'overwhelm' more neutral group at certain article - but violating 3RR is not the way to solve this - asking others for help and comment is.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 19:04, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Violation of Wikipedia policies by certain users

 * Ok, I'll add the list of Wikipedia policies violations by Ghirla/Grafik:

again claiming Baltic states were members of the USSR - which is techically wrong, as prov my sources on talk page. Plus own argumentation like were SSRs on their own rights, their representants sieged in the Supreme Soviet, they had the same rights and obligations as Russians, Kazakhs or any other ethnicity in the USSR. which doesn't make point here.
 * Original research (as rationale for POV tags): (claiming Baltic states joined the USSR - this is not acceptable opinion)

own interpretation of the events


 * disruption due to not recognising sources presented by the other side: ,


 * WP:POINT violation: littering talk page by adding unsuitable Russian propaganda, with no relevance to the 'dispute' (Spam)


 * Last but not least: the users who initiated their dispute over neutrality of the article have not pointed out any sources that would advance ytheir view. Thus, the talk page has been filled up with WP:OR based on traditional Soviet propaganda myths. Isn't it disruption or trolling? Constanz - Talk 09:03, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

(the users are probably unaware of the fact that these events are described in historiography with titles Latvian War of Liberation and Estonian War of Liberation, respectively. Thus, again WP:OR.Constanz - Talk 09:06, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Unilateral changing of article titles:

Constanz - Talk 08:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Regarding reversions made on December 6 2006 to Occupation_of_Latvia_1940-1945
You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. The duration of the block is 24 hours. William M. Connolley 18:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Yep
BigBobCool is Deng. I'm not even going to ask for a CheckUser it's so obvious. He used User:BobShoe in the past. He's not even being creative. --Woohookitty(meow) 17:24, 12 December 2006 (UTC)


 * 15 minutes? . --Constanz - Talk 17:26, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Oeselians
Could you categorize this entry? -- Ghirla -трёп-  15:47, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

XMAS gift
Lots of good intentions flying around, but not much in the way of useful stuff. Here is a nice template I found to organize your ever-growing collections of awards :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 14:41, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Piotrus-Ghirla
Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Requests for arbitration/Piotrus-Ghirla. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Piotrus-Ghirla/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Piotrus-Ghirla/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Srikeit 05:34, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Reverts

 * 15:17, (January 14, 2007)
 * (00:54, January 15, 2007)
 * (11:08, January 15, 2007)
 * []

(Reverted to version: )

Thank you for your efforts to stop the Soviet POV pushing
Your concerns about the Soviet Union POV and false information being pushed to Wikipedia, is shared by millions. Although the pushers are not that many by number, they're vocal and fiercely dedicated people, who are trying to come in terms with themselves, their past and their new reality.

I believe you'd agree, that while we must not tolerate their propaganda, we must try understanding, that - whether they realize it or not - they too are among the last victims of the totalitarian terror and brain wash that went on for so long in the Soviet Union and its satellite countries.

Our comfort lies in the fact that the truth shall always prevail. -- Nietjärvi 19:28, 15 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Quoting from User:Nietjärvi: This user is a sock puppet of Art Dominique, and has been blocked indefinitely. -- Petri Krohn 22:22, 15 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I really hope that your quarrel with Petri Krohn did cloud your judgement when you wrote to the Talk:Continuation War. I also guess you didn't check the contested text in Talk:Continuation War/Archive 4. And the proof of my Stalinist edits: Talk:Vyborg and . --Whiskey 23:34, 15 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Maybe I could create a userbox for you to post on your user page. What should I include in the text? -- Petri Krohn 00:07, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Good old Finnish humour! I think I can offer you a similar gift: Constanz - Talk 18:27, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Arbitration
Instructions on how to start the arbitration are available at WP:RfArb. Go ahead! --Irpen 18:22, 25 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh yes, and it's up to the user who starts the arbitration to make a list of parties and warn them all about the starting arb case. If you want to start it, go ahead and do the job. -- Grafikm  (AutoGRAF)  18:29, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * You have to set up a list and provide diffs that you officially notified every party listed of the case on their talks. It is part of the ArbCom procedure, even if you already told them so. -- Grafikm  (AutoGRAF)  18:40, 25 January 2007 (UTC)


 * What they said. It's rather tiresome (which is why so few people do it, and why I am an advocate for WP;3RR/WP:RFI-like 'shortcuts' to deal with such issues. So yes, anybody can file a 'request for ArbCom, and then it's up to Arbitrators to accept or reject it. Do note that they will almost certainly reject it if you have not tried other DR procedures (mediation, RfC).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 20:20, 25 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry about stepping on your toes with the diffs - I noticed the "List confirmation" part wasn't bolded in the template you copied, which made me think you may have missed it. Cheers, Daniel.Bryant 10:42, 26 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I reverted my additions, since you'd already done that job.Constanz - Talk 10:44, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Regarding Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Occupation_of_Latvia_1940-1945
And the other parties probably see your position in the same light. The history of Eastern Europe (particularly 20th century history) is a common area on Wikipedia for such disputes to flare up. However, the parties to this dispute seem like more-or-less reasonable editors; while there's no guarantee that mediation would work, I would like to see a more formal attempt at it (with an outside, uninvolved editor actually attempting to mediate, rather than just having the involved editors argue back-and-forth).

(ArbCom tends to be a blunt instrument, for what it's worth. We can't make a decision about the content, so the underlying dispute won't really be settled by an arbitration proceeding.  All we can really do is to ban some people from the article; I don't really see that as a very desireable outcome, so I'd prefer to avoid having to resort to it, if possible.) Kirill Lokshin 17:59, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * And the other parties probably see your position in the same light they may see whatever they wish, but I've cited plenty of sources, which use the term I suggest using.Constanz - Talk 16:43, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Tere! Thank you for your intestinal fortitude to try and achieve some sort of stability, at least to make the incessant POV tagging go away. While I realize that this arbitration cannot determine content, I've done my best to state the problem (and alternate should there be no protection for referring to the Soviet occupation as an occupation) in the workshop page you set up.  &mdash; Pēters J. Vecrumba 17:16, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * If you're unavailable to participate over the next few days, you should note that somewhere; I'm sure someone will point to your absence as a sudden unwillingness to produce evidence/sources/etc. (Even if in the workshop you put in a placeholder saying you'll comment on XYZ date as you are unavailable before then.) If this gets settled in a day or two it will be a miracle.  &mdash; Pēters J. Vecrumba 17:31, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Deng XXVIII
Just so you know, Deng's appeal has been rejected by the ArbCom and he has been re-blocked. So. Again. Please watch out for socks. I'd really appreciate it. I really doubt that he'll stop. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 02:20, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Occupation of Latvia
Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Requests for arbitration/Occupation of Latvia. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Occupation of Latvia/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Occupation of Latvia/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Thatcher131 01:22, 3 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Just some advice... it will greatly increase your chances to get a more favourable ArbCom ruling, if you immediately change your style of argumentation. From now on, just avoid saying clever things like "you seem to rely on Pravda instead of Britannica". The ArbCom will not care about who is right, but they will look at statements like that, and it reflects very badly on you. Per WP:JESUS ;), even in the face of the most ridiculous assertions, please try to go beyond being civil, try to be friendly and show that you are trying to understand the other side's concerns. Best wishes, Merzul 19:11, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Bloomfield & Co
Hello, thans for the note. Yes, £ and QQQQ were the same and I have blocked £ and somebody else blocked QQQQ. I don't think that Roobit is the same person because a. performed checkuser would have picked him up; b. he edits a different array of articles than Bloomfield & Co.; c. same POV might originate from similar background and political beliefs. So I don't think there is any basis for suspecting him. But let's don't forget Bloomfield: his main account is still open and at least 7 of his suspected sockpuppets still roam free. So if you see some new users or users from the checkuser list editing Estonian articles and adding hatred on neo-nacism, skinheads, etc. Let me know and I will take care of it. Similarly I am on alert on Lithuanian dukes pages. Renata 15:28, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanx, I'll keep my eyes open! --Constanz - Talk 16:49, 8 February 2007 (UTC)