User talk:Miacek/Archives/2012/November

More on Pilsudski dictatorship in Poland
Thank you for your recent edits and reviews of the Wikipedia article on Pilsudski.

There is an on-going discussion and edits of this article related to Pilsudski dictatorship. Your contributions to this discussions and edits will be most appreciated. See the talk page of the Pilsudski article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:J%C3%B3zef_Pi%C5%82sudski#Sources_on_Pilsudski_dictatorship:_Britannica_Concise_Encyclopedia.2C_The_Oxford_Companion_to_Military_History.2C_Gale_Encyclopedia_of_Biography.2C_Columbia_Encyclopedia_and_Time_Magazine  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.102.172.86 (talk) 07:40, 25 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Sorry if my words are vandalism or if I hurt you, but it seems to be that many enwiki users forget about how wikipedia maintains its neutrality. Wikipedia keeps its neutrality not by delete selected information because of Soviet this, Soviet that. It preserve that neutrality by accepting and expressing many points of view together. So if you see some articles are too POV, the only good thing to do is add verifiable sources from the other points of view to restore the balance, not by deleting the sources. Deleting like that is not making wikipedia more neutral. It is CENSORSHIP. To be frankly, I am sick of some users using the agrument "Soviet this, Soviet that" and delete the information, even if the sources are taken from reliable sources such as Russian Archive Agency (Russian, not Soviet). I used to think En.wiki is the most neutral wikipedia version because English users can be the citizens of many different countries, but now I am gradually believing that it is merely a propaganda machine of CIA and the anti-Soviet powers. Михаил Александрович Шолохов (talk) 14:02, 27 November 2012 (UTC)


 * English Wikipedia is a rather neutral Wikipedia, in contrast to, say, the German Wiki, which is heavily biased to the left.Estlandia (Miacek) (dialogue) 14:06, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Sorry I was rude and I was impolite to you. But I believe, if the German wiki was biased to the left, the good thing to do is add more info in the “right” point of view to restore the balance, not deleting. Михаил Александрович Шолохов (talk) 14:22, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Zori Balayan
Isa Gambar is an Azeri politician, why should his criticizing Zori Balayan's book be added to the article? He criticizes Zori Balayan' book about the historical events, but he is not a historian. Ninetoyadome (talk) 18:16, 29 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Gambar is a professional historian who at the time (1982—1990) worked at the Institute of Oriental Studies of AzSSR, so I think he qualifies. Secondly, Hearth was critized by many Azeri intellectuals, whilst it was said to have been hugely popular in Armenia. I think this deserves a mention.Estlandia (Miacek) (dialogue) 18:32, 29 November 2012 (UTC)


 * His wiki page states he is a politician and doesnt mention anything about him being a historian. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isa_Gambar it says his wife had a Doctorate in History but nothing about him. Is there a source you can add that shows hes a historian or an Azerbaijani historian that criticized the book? Ninetoyadome (talk) 19:42, 29 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I relied on Russian wiki, where it's mentioned that he graduated as a historian and worked as orientalist (also mentioned here as orientalist: (востоковеды Абульфаз Эльчибей и Иса Гамбар)).Estlandia (Miacek)  (dialogue) 19:48, 29 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank You Ninetoyadome (talk) 22:16, 29 November 2012 (UTC)