User talk:Dert45

please feel free to comment

Civil Society
I noticed you made some changes on the Civil Society page. That is awesome!! Hope you enjoyed the edits. I want to point out that some of the changes you made were not grammatically correct and hurt the syntax of that section. However, do not fear! I caught it pretty quickly. I hope you continue to edit, and please remember to read over you changes to ensure that we keep Wikipedia's syntax as professional as possible. If you have any questions feel free to contact me (I added a welcome template to help you figure out how the community works, or just dive in editing, whatever feels best to you).

Looking forward to answering any question or helping you along the way, SADADS (talk) 20:22, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you gratefully. Usually my articles are corrected by native editors in very extensive manner. --Dert45 (talk) 20:36, 6 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Are you a multi wiki user? Which one is your home wiki? SADADS (talk) 15:21, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * haha. no i ment journals not a net.--Dert45 (talk) 14:30, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Journals as in academic journals? are you published?SADADS (talk) 16:55, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

it happens --Dert45 (talk) 12:50, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

haha, what subject?SADADS (talk) 14:33, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

sorry, i can't tell it here --Dert45 (talk) 07:48, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

In all sincerity, I suggest that you declare your Conflict of Interest (COI) on your user page, that way people interested in the associated topics can consult your expertise. If you read the wiki link to COI you will find that policy, and most users, would prefer to know this conflict rather than have you hide it. Even if you have a conflict of interest, people will only object to your edits if you push a position or promote your own activitie. If you indeed use scholarly sources and expertise to improve wikipedia, we would be all the better for it.

My guess is that you are a political scientist who focuses on basic political theories, including those proposed by Hobbes.

SADADS (talk) 12:36, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I will try to express something --Dert45 (talk) 09:10, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Good governance
Could you take a look at good governance, I could use someone with more experiance in the field than I. Perhaps point me in the direction of some good places to look for further development. SADADS (talk) 14:15, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

personally, i would remove this cheesy annotation about human rights --Dert45 (talk) 12:07, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your Poland-related contributions
thanks. --Dert45 (talk) 12:26, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Dert, left you a message here[]Best.--Jacurek (talk) 20:11, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

[]--Jacurek (talk) 20:19, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Civil Society
Hey that last edit was great, I am pretty sure that is constructive, from my understanding of the topic. However you did not use an edit summary, and when I saw the large section deleted, I read through to make sure it was not something useful. If you had justified this in an edit summary, it would have been easier for me to figure out what you did. Would you mind being conscious of these and try to include them in each of your major edits?SADADS (talk) 15:48, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

thank you for great and appreciating comment. i did consider to write something in summary, but as far as this part still require a lot of cleanup i reckon my changes as rather minor. best --Dert45 (talk) 20:24, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

STOP!
Yes, according to the Nazis, some parts of Poland were annexed to the Third Reich, while others were occupied as part of the General Government, but this organizational scheme was recognized by nobody else, except perhaps the Soviet Union (the "Ribbemtrop-Molotov Pact" was still in force}. As far as the rest of the world was concerned, all of Poland which was taken over by the Nazis, both the "annexed" part and the General Government was occupied by the Germans. Please stop changing the terminology in articles, you will just be reverted, as we do not present reality as seen by the Nazis, but reality as accepted by the world at large. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:40, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Occupied Poland
Hi, I see that you've been removing occupied Poland from the Auschwitz article since 2009. If you remove it again, you're likely to be reported for edit warring. Please go to Talk:Auschwitz concentration camp and argue your case there. Many thanks, SarahSV (talk) 20:02, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. SarahSV (talk) 19:46, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

February 2018
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 36 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. 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:. — CYBERPOWER  ( Be my Valentine) 19:58, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. SarahSV (talk) 18:50, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

February 2018
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring, as you did at Auschwitz concentration camp. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. 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:. Neil N  talk to me 21:00, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

The next block will be an indefinite one if you don't start using the article's talk page to discuss your change. --Neil N  talk to me 21:04, 15 February 2018 (UTC)