User talk:Miacek/Archives/2013/December

Disambiguation link notification for December 4
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Joseph Wirth, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page SED (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:49, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey
As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 15:09, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Your revert on United Poland
Coming from an NPOV perspective, once cannot claim that United Poland is a far-right party. It, being a splinter of PiS is at most a "Right-wing" party. Go look at the "far-right" article and explain why you consider it such from a NPOV perspective. Ajh1492 (talk) 16:13, 17 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't care two figs why you personally do not consider it as a far-right party. Sources have been offered and simply removing those as per WP:IDONTLIKEIT is highly disruptive. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 16:15, 17 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Your sources is Owen Jones, an opinion columnist at the Independent. He is not a news source. Please continue the discussion on the article talk page. Ajh1492 (talk) 16:59, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

December 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=586532213 your edit] to Polish Communist Party (2002) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:20, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * the „Liberator of the Peoples” and Kim Jong Il as the „Great Leader” [http://kompol.org/start/Kondolencje_KRLD.html

Blocked for edit warring
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 36 hours for edit warring, as you did at United Poland. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. 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. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:49, 22 December 2013 (UTC)


 * So far as I know, removing OR comes under content dispute, and 3RR applies. 3RR breaking is allowed for real vandalism - can you show that this OR addition was vandalism and not mistaken good faith editing? Peridon (talk) 15:19, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I did not violate 3 RR itself. Second, I never claimed it was simple vandalism or anything: but WP:OR is a nonnegotiable guideline and my opponent clearly and willingly violated it numerous times. As even a user who previously voiced support for him actually grasped . And it would be a funny content dispute where one side has zero sources for its claims but just keeps adding its own cooked up stuff into the articles. Quite disruptive in fact. The sentence this user added 3 times and I removed 3 times (″Economically the party follows a line of Progressive conservatism calling for government intervention in the economy, especially tax policy.″) has never been supported by a SINGLE source. For the simple reason that it is patent OR, as evident from the relevant talk page thread . Pan Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 15:29, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Stop
Read the party constitutions, principles.. The Socialist Party, Christian Democrats and Citizen Left all oppose capitalism (but the Christian Democrats also oppose "socialism"). These parties are not centre (at least officially).. These parties are all considered left-wing in Chile. Party for Democracy is a social liberal/social democratic party (left libertarianism doesn't even make any fucking sense, since you can't be both social democrat and libertarian, its like being a Republican and a Workers' Party of Korea member)... Just read their party principles and statutes (stop removing the Socialist Party of Chile page, its referenced). --TIAYN (talk) 14:10, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Honestly, here (the Socialist Party principles):

Esta Declaración de Principios está contenida en un documento extractado publicado por el Diario Oficial del 30 de marzo de 1990, el que a su vez fue suscrito el 8 de marzo de 1990 ante el notario de Santiago Kamel Saquel Zaror, complementado por escrituras públicas de 15 y 23 de marzo, respectivamente. La Directiva Central Provisional del PS de Chile (Unido), firmante de tales documentos, estaba encabezada por Osvaldo Pablo Lagos Puccio, Presidente; Francisco Javier Fernández Fredes, como Secretario General; y Ernesto Galaz Cañas, como Tesorero. Se consigna en esa época como domicilio comun calle Agustinas 853, oficina 1015, de Santiago

El socialismo es la más plena expresión de la democracia. En tal virtud, el Partido Socialista de Chile proclama su inclaudicable voluntad de contribuir siempre a la defensa y al constante perfeccionamiento de la democracia.

Los socialistas fundamentan la legitimidad de su vocación democrática en su histórica lucha por los derechos de su pueblo a la libertad y a la justicia y en sus contribuciones al desarrollo de la democracia política y social de nuestra patria.

Para los socialistas de Chile, la unidad del socialismo y la democracia se funda en su permanente y suprema aspiración a lograr la igualdad y la libertad de todos los seres humanos, considerando ilegítimo sacrificar una en función de la otra.

Por lo mismo, los socialistas luchan contra toda forma de opresión y hacen de la emancipación y de la igualdad de oportunidades de las mujeres y hombres de la tierra, sin exclusiones, el núcleo de su idea de libertad. Rechazan, en consecuencia, los comportamientos egoístas y excluyentes que la lógica del sistema capitalista impone a los seres humanos.

La democracia, para los socialistas, es el sistema político que debe asegurar la convivencia entre los diversos componentes de la sociedad e inducir, por tanto, el desarrollo de los valores de la solidaridad y de la participación ciudadana en todas las esferas de la vida social.

Coherente con ello, el Partido Socialista de Chile lleva a cabo su acción política respetando a quienes disienten de su ideario, propugnando la resolución democrática de los conflictos de intereses e ideas y rechazando la violencia como forma de imponer un determinado proyecto político. El régimen político democrático no es, por lo tanto, una simple forma de administración del orden existente, sino la vía para su propia transformación así como de la estructura de la propiedad en que descansa, con el propósito de abrirlo a la progresiva participación de los ciudadanos y las organizaciones sociales, políticas y culturales en todas las esferas de la vida nacional.

En el Partido Socialista de Chile confluyen distintas expresiones del pensamiento emancipador y transformador del mundo contemporáneo, insertas todas en la matriz crítica de la sociedad capitalista. Es así que convergen en su seno el pensamiento marxista enriquecido y rectificado por todos los avances científicos y el devenir social, con las mejores tradiciones humanistas y con los valores solidarios y libertarios del mensaje cristiano.


 * When you're finished reading them, I'll give you the principles/statutes of the other parties.. --TIAYN (talk) 14:13, 23 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Stop violating 3 RR and pushing OR into articles. If you really think party programmes are to be preferred to third party sources, you have no idea what WP:NPOV should look like.--Pan Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 14:15, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
 * See the Socialist Party of Chile page, it says "Claimed" Social democracy and "Official" Democratic socialism, Marxism, anti-capitalism.. That is neutrality. You're one is bias. Its like stating in the infobox of the Communist Party of China is capitalist (when they clearly call themselves communist).. Secondly, the Socialist Party page used the same sources before I edited it, the Party for Democracy only uses one source, the party program (before I removed them).. The same goes with the other parties. Did you actually see what sources were used on the articles before I edited them? They used the same ones. --TIAYN (talk) 14:24, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
 * To be honest, I prefer sources like Britannica to personal opinions of OR pushers like you. Please do not post on my talk page any longer but find a way to the respective article discussion pages as appropriate. Pan Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 14:30, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Civility
Hello, I'm Darwinek. I noticed that you made a comment while editing the article Jędrzej Giertych that didn't seem very civil. Wikipedia needs people collaborate, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page and revıew the essay on Civility. Thank you. - Darwinek (talk) 19:02, 23 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Funny you would come to that. I characterized Giertych as a 'ludicruous fool', not you. Whilst not necessary, this is no violation of rules. And it's nothing compared with how Poles themselves characterize such people ( see comments by Marcin Sobczyk (″Of course Giertych is a sad ideological heir to his ridiculous grandfather Jędrzej Giertych and the filo-Russian and anti-Semitic fascist Roman Dmowski, who lived in pre-war Poland (Giertych's first name, Roman, was given to him in honor of that Dmowski thug).″)Pan Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 19:10, 23 December 2013 (UTC)


 * People have different opinions on many things, including historical persons. Wikipedia is not a platform to vent these sentiments. - Darwinek (talk) 19:14, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

False edit summary
Here, this information was never removed from the article as you claim. Of course Ritter being a Nazi sympathizer and nationalist disregarding non-German perspective isn't a reliable source about Poland, but this can be discussed other time.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 15:56, 24 December 2013 (UTC)


 * It has been discussed and no-one apart from you found anything wrong with Ritter, on the contrary, numerous sources were presented that argue his biography of Frederick is one of the finest. But it's hopeless to explain it to primitive obdurate anti-German fanatics like you. Pan Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 16:23, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Notification
I am sorry but your continued violation of warning to cease personal attacks against others left me no choice but to request enforcement.  --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 00:42, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement sanction: Topic ban and interaction ban

 * Murzyn zrobił swoje, murzyn może odejść. Pan Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 14:51, 27 December 2013 (UTC)