User talk:Lstanley1979/Archive 1

Welcome!
Welcome to Wikipedia, I hope you will like it here. Please be bold (aka. fixing typos does not require a permission). Your efforts are badly needed as most articles on Eastern Europe were written by ESL people and badly need professional copyediting. Good luck, and if you need some help you know where to find me ;) Renata (talk) 18:56, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Boxes
Wow, that's a lot of userboxes! :) Anyway, I am not much of an expert on userpage layouts (my own page was laid out with someone else's help), but I did organize your userboxes into a table, so hopefully it'll work out better for you.  Welcome to Wikipedia, by the way!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Latvian Socialist Soviet Republic
Hi there Louise. I am afraid you have made two corrections to this article that are not quite correct. The Latvian Socialist Soviet Republic indeed was a puppet state since it was only recognised by Lenin and his Bolshevik government. During the years 1918-20 it was a Bolshevik government and not a Soviet since the Menshevik fraction at the time still was in opposition to the Bolsheviks. The opposition of the Mensheviks ended 1921 when they were declared illegal. Philaweb  T  23:35, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi! I was leaving a note for Philaweb and noticed yours there. I had reverted one of your similar changes too. Basically the convention is to use the terms "Bolshevik" (for the Bolsheviks) and "Bolshevik Russia" and switching to using "Soviet" only after the formal establishment of the Soviet Union. There's no intent on terminology other than historical accuracy. So, it was Bolshevik Russia that invaded the Baltics in 1918 and that signed the initial peace treaties with the newly independent Baltic states. —PētersV (talk) 22:55, 28 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Always glad for new editors willing to improve the articles! One of the greatest challenges is all that has passed into collective memory about the Baltics which is simply not true no matter how plausible, and that such collective memory is seen (by some editors) as one POV while "nationalist" collective memory is seen as just another competing POV (regardless of reputable sources)--the implication being both are equally valid "views" and should be "equally represented" to have a NPOV article. 2007 was rather a Wiki-contentious year all across the Baltics and Central and Eastern Europe. Hopefully, with your help, in 2008 we'll be able to focus more on improving the story of the Baltics. —PētersV (talk) 16:48, 29 February 2008 (UTC)


 * On "on the sentiments within the Lithuanian Catholic Church at the time of publication in 1978, it is going to be a phenomenal task to convince a lot of people that the period should not just be totally ignored" — This mirrors the feelings of the adults of the DP generation: fleeing home, the death and destruction witnessed, all were nothing more than tragic and bitter memories better left behind to focus on a new life and sustaining the Baltic identity in exile. Not burying the past, but recognizing nothing was going to change it. By the 70's the expectation was that the Baltics were lost forever; however, it seemed that the quixotic-ness of their quest only bolstered the resolve of Baltic nationalists, who were in it for the long haul, no matter how many generations it took.... I've mentioned elsewhere that my references are mostly packed away as we sort through a combination of family circumstances and necessary house renovations at home. I do expect to spend more time on the SSR and aspects of the occupation later this year. We'll also be starting a non-profit to make materials on Baltic culture and history more accessible (lobh.org). —PētersV (talk) 17:59, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Liepāja
Please don't change the facts of my edits, OK? Change the spelling only. And I don't think you know Russian better than me ;) Чёртова деревня - Damned village, чёртовая деревня - devil's village. Feel the difference. Denis Tarasov (talk) 07:17, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice
Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 07:34, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Wol
Please see the talk page of Owl (Winnie the Pooh) for my reply. Mjroots (talk) 07:33, 21 December 2008 (UTC)


 * In answer to your question, you could have looked at the edit history of the article, where you would have seen my edit summary stating Why Wol was called Wol which I left on 26 March 2008. Mjroots (talk) 17:04, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Talkback
I agree with you it is POV. I put in a separate section but really mine is a reply to yours, it was not as such I just came to the same conclusion, and don't mind if you combine them but can't do so myself (naughty naughty to edit talk pages). I am an atheist who likes quiet Sundays so I am coming probably from the opposite POV, which will I hope make a good balance between us.

God bless. SimonTrew (talk) 21:05, 4 May 2009 (UTC) SimonTrew (talk) 21:05, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Survey
Hi Lstanley1979!

I have put together a survey for female editors of Wikipedia (and related projects) in order to explore, in greater detail, women's experiences and roles within the Wikimedia movement. It'd be wonderful if you could participate!

It's an independent survey, done by me, as a fellow volunteer Wikimedian. It is not being done on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation. I hope you'll participate!

Just click this link to participate in this survey, via Google!

Any questions or concerns, feel free to email me or stop by my user talk page. Also, feel free to share this any other female Wikimedians you may know. It is in English, but any language Wikimedia participants are encouraged to participate. I appreciate your contributions - to the survey and to Wikipedia! Thank you! SarahStierch (talk) 05:04, 30 September 2011 (UTC)