User talk:Simon Levchenko

RCIRA was never the official name of the grouping, recently the splinter group has adopted the CIRA-GHQ name to differentiate it's self from the CIRA.

This would requiring adequate source(s). Sincerely, Simon Levchenko (talk) 03:35, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Do you have any sources that this socalled "RCIRA" name officially existed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.148.233.62 (talk) 18:24, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

With all due respect sir; the burden of proof is not on me as you first challenged the information. It was there placed by another user, perhaps sourced by an IMC report. Sincerely Simon Levchenko (talk) 02:18, 21 February 2018 (UTC) Continuity IRA is not on ceasefire. https://www.irishnews.com/news/2018/01/26/news/republican-groups-have-no-plans-o-nh-ceasefire-style-ceasefire-1242024/

With that article in mind; I placed a question mark which linked to the CIRA timeline. They have not committed attacks for several years, and of 50 members, 25 have been arrested, this coupled with major weapons seizures, the mass arrest of top leaders in Newry, and 4 splits within the already small group demonstrate to me a highly diminshed capacity.

Sincerely. Simon Levchenko (talk) 02:12, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Your recent arbitration case request
In response to your request for arbitration of this issue, the Arbitration Committee has agreed that arbitration is not required at this stage. Arbitration on Wikipedia is a lengthy, complicated process that involves the unilateral adjudication of a dispute by an elected committee. Although the Committee's decisions can be useful to certain disputes, in many cases the actual process of arbitration is unenjoyable and time-consuming. Moreover, for most disputes the community maintains an effective set of mechanisms for reaching a compromise or resolving a grievance.

For grievances about the conduct of a Wikipedia editor, you should approach the user (in a civil, professional way) on their user talk page. However, other mechanisms for resolving a dispute also exist, such as raising the issue at the administrators' noticeboard for incidents.

In all cases, you should review Dispute resolution to learn more about resolving disputes on Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia community has many venues for resolving disputes and grievances, and it is important to explore them instead of requesting arbitration in the first instance. For more information on the process of arbitration, please see the Arbitration Policy and the Guide to Arbitration. I hope this advice is useful, and please do not hesitate to contact a member of the community if you have more questions. Kevin ( aka L235 ·&#32; t ·&#32; c) 17:40, 18 February 2018 (UTC) Kevin ( aka L235 ·&#32; t ·&#32; c) 17:40, 18 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Alright, thank you.

Simon Levchenko (talk) 17:46, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Stanley Graham
I suggest you listen again to the 1977 radio documentary you cite as the source of your claim that a third (unnamed) home-guardsman was wounded during the gunfight at Graham's house on the night of 9 October 1941. No such claim was made by that documentary. As far as I know, nobody has ever claimed a third guardsman was wounded that night. I must tell you that I am H.A. Willis. I wrote the book Manhunt (1979) and I produced a television documentary about the manhunt in 1974, which was screened by the NZBC a few years later. Many of the men interviewed by Jack Perkins were interviewed and filmed by me in October/November 1974. I spoke to Colin Howat and Amuri King, at that time the only surviving guardsmen from the gunfight of 9 Oct. Neither told me of a third guardsman (counting Hutchison & Coulson as 1 & 2) being shot. In writing my account, I also had access to the Police file -- Perkins relied upon the published account of the Coroner's Inquest, conducted in Hokitika in late December 1941. The Police file, which contains more detail than the statements of the Inquest, makes no mention of a third guardsman being wounded on 9 Oct. I have restored the page to what I claim is the correct account. Should you disagree I suggest you ask a independent Wiki editor to review the material before reinstating your claim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.253.176.160 (talk) 01:46, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

I apologize; I must have misinterpreted when they said in the radio documentary one guardsman was injured; but later died. This paper newspaper clipping spoke of s "C R Ridley" who was wounded. It was in fact George Ridley who died a year later.

Sincerely Simon Levchenko (talk) 02:24, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Your edits on Falkland Islands
Your edits clearly did not improve the article, imposing POV laden terms such as Crown Colony that were clearly obsolete in 1982 and do not reflect a NPOV. Even the UN did not describe the Falklands as such in 1982, in doing so you are promoting one narrow nationalist narrative over NPOV. I suggest you read WP:BRD and WP:NPOV before editing again. WCM email 18:46, 21 March 2018 (UTC)


 * I in no way intended to alter the neutrality of the article; the page on Wikipedia that represented the Islands before Argentine occupation listed them as a Crown Colony. Could the version be kept but revised, assuming "Falkland Islands Colony" be changed to "Falkland Islands Dependencies"? Simon Levchenko (talk) 00:59, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Today
For this edit and this edit which resulted in me and others being pinged. Two times in my case!

I hope you have seen this...
Limit of one revert in 24 hours: An administrator has placed all articles related to The Troubles, defined as any article that could be reasonably construed as being related to The Troubles, Irish nationalism, and British nationalism in relation to Ireland under WP:1RR (one revert per editor per article per 24 hour period) as a page restriction. When in doubt, assume it is related.

You have now two reverts... The Banner talk 23:59, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 22
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Disappearance of Royal Marine Alan Addis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fitzroy ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Disappearance_of_Royal_Marine_Alan_Addis check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Disappearance_of_Royal_Marine_Alan_Addis?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 12:34, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Number of FIDF soldiers mobilized during Operation Rosario
According to Sergeant Gerald Cheek of the FIDF:

"I held the rank of Sergeant in the FIDF and, with some thirty-four other soldiers, presented myself for duty as instructed. Following a briefing from the CO, we were assigned our area of responsibility, and collected our weapons and 100 rounds of ammunition." (Memories of the Falklands, Iain Dale, Biteback Publishing, 2012)

I recall reading that another half a dozen late arrivals presented themselves for duty and were also sent to man various positions in and around Port Stanley and that the Royal Marines took all the best weapons with them, leaving the FIDF only armed with WW2 era rifles and limited ammunition, but I am going to need more time in tracking down the relevant book and pages to prove this.--Vanberkel (talk) 22:24, 25 April 2019 (UTC)


 * I appreciate your due diligence. Simon Levchenko (talk) 15:00, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Sock puppet case
You are suspected of sock puppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, then, if you wish to do so, respond to the evidence at Sockpuppet investigations/Simon Levchenko. Thank you. WCM email 10:31, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 29
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Brabant killers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hainaut ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Brabant_killers check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Brabant_killers?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 14:48, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Edit warring warning
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Tet Offensive attack on US Embassy. 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. On 15 May I responded to your comments at Talk:Tet Offensive attack on US Embassy, you did not reply, but instead by this edit: on 29 May you continued to edit war this issue, rather than responding to my 15 May comments. You must follow WP:BRD, stop edit-warring the page or I will take steps to have you blocked. Mztourist (talk) 06:50, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Salerno Massacre moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Salerno Massacre, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Snowycats (talk) 01:27, 5 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Thank you for informing me. There is indeed such an article on the Italian language Wikipedia. The infobox on the article here seems to have malfunctioned. Simon Levchenko (talk) 02:18, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Salerno Massacre


Hello, Simon Levchenko. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Salerno Massacre".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! - Rich T&#124;C&#124;E-Mail 14:20, 22 April 2020 (UTC)