User talk:Yarillastremenog/Archive 2

/Archive 1

Images without sources
Hi, you have removed nsd from a number of images: Image:Ukrainiannazigirls.jpg, Image:Ukrainiannaziatrocity2.jpg and Image:Ukrainiannaziatrocity.jpg. Please provide the sources for the images. The source needed not only for copyright but also for the verification purposes. If we do not the sources of a controversial image how can we be sure that the subjects are Ukrainian and not e.g. Croats or Russians or any other Eastern Europeans? How can we be sure the image was not photoshopped to add swastikas, etc. I am restoring the tags.Alex Bakharev 01:12, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * If you check the edit history of the images I have provided sources for all the images I uploaded, the authenticity of these images is not in question, to suggest I 'photoshopped swastikas' to the photographs is a ridiculous claim --Yarillastremenog 01:19, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I am sorry for asking the questions, but it is sometimes happen that an image that gets to an uploader through many hands get altered or misattributed somewhere on the way, it is not the question of your personal integrity but an attempt to restore the chain connecting the image with the source. It is just a matter of WP:V. No problem with the girls: it is a WW2 postcard. What bout the other two images. Have you worked directly with the archive materials or the images are from a secondary source (book, magazine article, website)? If the second is the case please describe the source, if the first please put a standard description of the archive source (name of the archive, the case number, the document number). Alex Bakharev 01:57, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * no problem, I added more information to the photographs --Yarillastremenog 02:47, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks Alex Bakharev 05:50, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

If you noticed, I do not remove images yuo added to Reichskommissariat Ukraine. Yet, they would need some comments there if you please. But I removed them from more general article History of Ukraine as they are not relevant to the one.--Bryndza 02:59, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

No personal attacks
Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. I'm referring to this edit - calling another user stupid is never acceptable, and if you do it again, you will be blocked. | Mr. Darcy talk 19:17, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Chuprynka says I am an avid viewer of porn? That is an unfounded allegation and is that not a personal attack in your opinion? I ask you to warn him as well --Yarillastremenog 19:24, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That's not a personal attack. And the NPA policy is clear - it doesn't matter what someone else said. You can't personally attack anyone at any time for any reason. | Mr. Darcy talk 19:34, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Why is it not a personal attack? 'Unlike you I am not an avid viewer of porn films ' that is more like a slanderous/libelous allegation, why is it allowed to make untrue allegations about people? --Yarillastremenog 19:37, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Perhaps I should consider legal action to remedy the libelous statements posted about me--Yarillastremenog 19:44, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing Wikipedia  as a result of your . You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our neutral point of view policy will not be tolerated. This is for the above legal threat. Please see WP:LEGAL. | Mr. Darcy talk 19:49, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Warning
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you.--Chuprynka 19:20, 21 January 2007 (UTC)