User talk:LechitaPL

File copyright problem with File:POLONEZ_ATU_PLUS_ulSienkiewicza.JPG
Thank you for uploading File:POLONEZ_ATU_PLUS_ulSienkiewicza.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log].

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation.

WikiProject Romania
--Codrin.B (talk) 05:43, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited FSO Polonez, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Nysa and Dongfanghong. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:19, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Page moves
Stop moving FS/FSC Lublin - please discuss and provide sourcing, preferably without attacking other editors in the process.  Acroterion   (talk)   21:24, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

June 2018
Stop WP:ABF. Read WP:TOOMANYREFS (since we don't need 3 sources for one statement). Read the article talk page. That's it - nothing complicated. 198.84.253.202 (talk) 16:10, 17 June 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. 198.84.253.202 (talk) 17:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC) You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule. 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:. Number  5  7  17:38, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

June 2018
Hello, your edits at Frankfurt (Oder) raise some concerns. The lack of response on the talk page could be construed as gaming the system. Your edits on the article itself thus may appear to be examples of any of the three following points (from the linked policy): "*Misusing Wikipedia processes to put another editor in an invidious position, prove a point, or muddy the water in a dispute, can also be a form of gaming. However it is more often categorized as using Wikipedia to prove a point or abuse of process. It would be appreciated if the proper editing process could be resumed, which would require, as stated before, a good faith attempt at discussion on the article talk page. Thanks! 198.84.253.202 (talk) 20:07, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Using policies and guidelines to build (or push) a patently false case that some editor is editing in bad faith, with the 'evidence' for this itself being an obviously unreasonable bad-faith interpretation of that person's action. This is more often categorized as a breach of the guideline to assume good faith, and in particular, repeated unjustified 'warnings' may also be viewed as a breach of civility.
 * If gaming is also knowingly used as a basis to impugn another editor or to mischaracterize them as bad-faith editors, then this may also violate the policy of no personal attacks."


 * If you do not finish your vandalous editions, the matter will be forwarded to the administrator with a request to block you. LechitaPL (talk) 15:29, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Calling "vandalism" when there have been clear explanations on the talk page (were you seem to be unwilling to comment) is WP:ABF - i.e. not acceptable. 198.84.253.202 (talk) 17:03, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

POV
Stop introducing POV to articles. 11 June 2018, you made a change - this is a controversial change and was reverted. You restored own version two times = pushing own POV. This is vandalism and edit-warring. This is a controversial matter and there must be a long discussion before the changes and must to be consensus. This edition and your revert are typical vandalisms and POV, falsification of history. Sorry, but part of Silesians sport clubs formed in a German state, not in Poland. It does not matter that you do not like it, these are facts. Silesia was connected to Poland in 1945, except in the Upper Silesian autonomy (1922-1945). Your replacing photo in here is also POV. Do not you like Silesian separatism? That's why you erase and hide it on Wikipedia? I am sorry but Wikipedia is not used to hide inconvenient facts. If you do not change your behavior, I will notify administrators for your POV, vandalisms and edit-warring. 89.76.190.249 (talk) 13:15, 18 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Ambox warning pn.svg Stop introducing POV to articles.

Please, stop the articles being vandalized, adding untrue and mendacious information about the nationalist and separatist tone (even RAS does not take into account!). Wikipedia article states that this is an autonomous and regional movement, not SEPARATISTIC! The article about the Silesians says "Today, Silesians inhabiting Poland are considered to belong to a Polish ethnographic group, and they speak a dialect of Polish" - it is not a separate nation, stop so restoring untrue information. Śląsk Świętochłowice and Naprzód Lipiny were created in 1920 in POLAND, so why do you add false information that they come from Germany? This is scandalous POV! I am sorry but Wikipedia is not used to hide inconvenient facts. If you do not change your behavior, I will notify administrators for your POV, vandalisms and edit-warring. LechitaPL (talk) 17:52, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
 * First case: "adding untrue and mendacious information"??? I do not add anything new. I advise you to read about the rules of en.Wikipedia. This version has existed for a long time, you come on en.Wikipedia and remove data. I (and any other user) have the right to undo your new changes. Second case: "Śląsk Świętochłowice and Naprzód Lipiny were created in 1920 in POLAND"? No, not in Poland. Please read Silesian Uprisings (pl:III powstanie śląskie) and Upper Silesia plebiscite (pl:Plebiscyt na Górnym Śląsku), these localites in 1920 are still in Germany, in Poland from 1922. Third case: read what the word "separatism" means, it does not apply only to independence. Even article of separatism explains: "A common definition of separatism is that it is the advocacy of a state of cultural, ethnic, tribal, religious, racial, governmental or gender separation from the larger group. While it often refers to full political secession, separatist groups may seek nothing more than greater autonomy". Fourth case :Silesians are Poles? Sorry, but Silesians are not only Poles, it is also Germans (the majority of peoples from Lower Silesia resettled to Germany in 1945 because they could not speak Polish), Czechs (Czech Silesia) and separate nationality (about million Silesians). Even polish article about Silesians - pl:Ślązacy say, these people are different, not only Poles. 89.76.190.249 (talk) 19:56, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
 * The fact that incorrect data in English Wikipedia has been for several years does not mean that they have to remain. Since 1920, it has been a plebiscite site, not a German one. Clubs also founded by Poles - in the same way clubs from Warsaw founded before 1920 should have the category "football clubs from Russian territories". RAŚ has never talked about separating from Poland or even having a broad autonomy. In addition, it can not be said that Silesians are talking about separatism because RAŚ has marginal support. From English Wikipedia: "Today, Silesians inhabiting Poland are considered to belong to a Polish ethnographic group, and they speak a dialect of Polish." Stop contradicting facts. LechitaPL (talk) 22:30, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
 * No, these localites in 1920 are still in Germany, in Poland from 1922. "Based on the results of the plebiscite, which has been held on 20 March 1921, Upper Silesia was divided between Poland and Germany. The Polish part was incorporated as the Silesian Voivodeship. Consequently, to the referendum of 1921, the German-Polish Accord on East Silesia (Geneva Convention) was concluded on 15 May 1922 which dealt with the constitutional and legal future of Upper Silesia as it has partly became Polish territory". These are clubs of the Polish minority, ok, but in 1920 these clubs existed in Germany, these are facts. RAŚ "talked" about autonomy, striving for autonomy is separatism (plase read article or many other sources), if you can not understand it, it's your problem. It does not matter - "marginal support" - even if there is marginal support, does not change the fact that it exists and works and thousands of people support them. Also, RAŚ is not the only organization in Silesia. Silesians are not only a group inside Poles, there are German Silesians, Czech Silesians and Silesians as a nationality, all Silesians are Poles is total nonsense, POV and contradicting facts. 89.76.190.249 (talk) 00:24, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
 * If you do not stop your propaganda activity, you will receive a blockade today. The territories were designated as a plebiscite in the Versailles Treaty in 1919, during which time the uprisings in Silesia were continued, the clubs were founded by Poles in the territories where Poles were the majority. You add a controversial category, which is scandalous. LechitaPL (talk) 12:39, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
 * "the clubs were founded by Poles" - yes, by Polish Silesians, I agree. "in the territories where Poles were the majority" - no, I do not agree but it does not matter (FC Polonia Berlin founded by Poles but this is sport club in Germany, not Poland). The territories were space for three uprisings and plebiscite - I agree, but the territories officially were located in Germany, not in Poland. Three uprisings and plebiscite were in Germany = their result was the inclusion of these lands to Poland in 1922, not in 1920 before uprisings and plebiscite. It's logical. Clubs created in 1920 in Germany, Province of Upper Silesia (pl:Górny Śląsk (prowincja). So, Category:Football clubs from former German territories is correct. At the end, "You add a controversial category, which is scandalous" - what are you talking about? Please read the rules of the English Wikipedia, these categories existed for a long time, you come on English Wikipedia and remove data - if someone does not agree with your change (everyone has the right to undo your edits) - you must prove that your new change is correct. There must be a consensus for new disputed changes, per Wikipedia:Consensus. Sorry, that's how it works on English Wikipedia and probably on most others. 89.76.190.249 (talk) 21:14, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Warsaw Uprising Edits
You are falsifying the accuracy of the Warsaw Uprising and adding your fake edits that are propagated by one side. Facts are facts, history does not care about your POV. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.161.95.31 (talk) 09:54, 21 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Stop vandalizing the article against the sources! Sources (not communist) are added to this number and if you do not stop vandalizing, you will be punished with a blockade. LechitaPL (talk) 23:49, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello! Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. At least one of your edits, while it may have been in good faith, was difficult to distinguish from vandalism. To help other editors understand the reason for the changes, you can use an edit summary for your contributions. You can also take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Stop inserting your POV to Warsaw Uprising Article 185.161.95.31 (talk) 13:47, 29 July 2019 (UTC)


 * That was your last warning. Next time will be a blockade. LechitaPL (talk) 17:37, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Polonez
Hi LechitaPL, I was just wondering if you could confirm that "Atu" means "trump!" (as in the card game, not the cheeto-fingered wannabe autocrat). I also see that the ATU insurance company didn't like the name too much, maybe you could find a nice source for that? My Polish consists of about twelve words, of which nine are profane, so you should do better than I. Best,  Mr.choppers &#124;   ✎  23:17, 3 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks!  Mr.choppers &#124;   ✎  21:04, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

List of active separatist movements in Europe and POV again.
Hi,. Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to List of active separatist movements in Europe. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Besides, you could’ve used the talk page instead of simply reverting without the edit summary. And also, be aware that undoing my edits. Yet is justified but is also pinging me. I see that you aren’t going through articles through articles. Therefore, I won’t be reminding you again. You simply don’t see the talk page as a solution as I claim. You may have violated 3RR first if you aren’t aware. But there is a honest appeal for that. Please come to either the article talk page or my talk page instead of edit war. Also, the last time you reverted was less than 23 hours. Therefore it counts as a 3RR violation. Theee is a particular chance that you may have committed Assume bad faith again. Explode! Pop! 23:26, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Poland dispute.
Don’t you know that there is an active discussion regarding Danzig right? It is right on the talk page. Why can’t you use the talk page for once in contribution history? Can’t you check on pages such as the Free City of Danzig Government in Exile for once! Explode! Pop! 20:34, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

September 2022
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Azerbaijanis. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. —  Golden  call me maybe? 14:48, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Important Notice
DatGuyTalkContribs 17:24, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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 2023 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:34, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

125p
Do you have any references for the 125p having been assembled in Thailand and Indonesia? I am not officially doubting it, I would simply like to know more. Thanks,  Mr.choppers &#124;   ✎  19:07, 31 January 2024 (UTC)