Cloud200

Disambiguation link notification for July 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Michel Heller, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Social engineering. 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) 08:57, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Good luck!

Did you look at the older version of the page, just before this edit [1]. Good luck with this! My very best wishes (talk) 01:50, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Dictatorship of the proletariat

I put in a request for page protection over at WP:RFPP, so I won't waste any more time reverting the IPs. Hopefully, this gets resolved, but thanks for dealing with it anyways.

GAB (talk) 22:43, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Guys, I don't know what's going on here, but that's an edit war and 3RR was violated. I almost blocked both of you (you and the IP) but locked the page instead. To my eyes, this is a content dispute. Talk it out, please - the article talk page hasn't been edited since February 2015. Thanks. KrakatoaKatie 23:18, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I was doing some real life and didn't get your message till now. I wholeheartedly endorse KrakatoaKatie's action - page block with recommendation to use the talk page, on which I now see some starts toward resolving the dispute. If that fails, one can always escalate up to dispute mediation. Good luck! - Nunh-huh 05:23, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

July 2015

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), such as at Dictatorship of the proletariat, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:43, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Andrey Vyshinsky, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Class Struggle. 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) 08:59, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 10 November

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Bill Browder page, your edit caused an archiveurl error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:21, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Yuri Shvets, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Helmer. 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) 11:06, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Eston Kohver

Hi I write to you about Eston Kohver. Hes education is not right. It is written he was first in Johvi gymnasium and after that Kohtla Järve 5. Secondary school. These are not different schools. It is now Johvi gymnasium but when Eston was in this school it was called Kohtla Jarve 5. Secondary school. Please do something with it. Im just in my phone.

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

March 2016

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Humanitarian situation during the war in Donbass, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. "Donbasswarcrimes.org" is not a reliable source. Please read the policy on WP:RS. RGloucester — ☎ 15:09, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Date formats

Hi, just to let you know that dates of the format "2016 March 12" are not one of the valid dates allowed by the MOS:DATES. Please use "12 March 2016", March 12, 2016" or "2016-03-12" as per the MOS. Thanks. Keith D (talk) 15:47, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

March 2016

Greetings. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Little green men (Ukrainian crisis), did not appear to be constructive and has been or will be reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Iryna Harpy (talk) 21:14, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Russia–European Union relations, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Die Linke. 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) 10:16, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Kiselyov

Info from this article belongs in the Dmitry Konstantinovich Kiselyov content. Cheers! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 22:36, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Cloud200. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page.

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Cloud200. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Gulag letters

NB: s:Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:GULAG letter.jpg and this s:Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Letter Koteln Prisoner2.jpg. Sincerely, Hunu (talk) 07:18, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Data Validation and Certification Server

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Data Validation and Certification Server requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3029. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 13:08, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Cloud200. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Cloud200. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Cloud200. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ReactOS and Russia

Hi, in your revision, you have added

"The project is managed by a Moscow-based ReactOS Foundation and receives significant support from Russian government."

The foundation was registered in Saransk, not Moscow, and it has been dissolved back in 2015, and while Russian ROS contributors made significant efforts to lobby the government, all they got for it was

• that they once won 100,000 Roubles for their presentation at Seliger, and

• the Minsvyaz once mentioned it in 2015 as a possible basis for an open source client OS, without taking any steps.

Or do you know of other support given by the Russian state? I'd be surprised, as there isn't even a Russian ReactOS organisation today. --Johannes Rohr (talk) 12:02, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Friends of the Earth, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nuclear energy (check to confirm | 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) 14:15, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Interview Request

Hello, Cloud200. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— Etchubykalo (talk) 13:57, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Lysenkoism

Hi, and thanks for your contribution to this article. It is currently up for formal review as a Good Article, so obviously I'd hope to minimise any changes at this stage. There is some logic in having both the biological and political context, but these things should both be brief. The quotation is I feel rather on the long side, and its citation is incomplete; would you feel able to cut it down a bit? The reviewer will very likely ask for a full bibliographic citation for it so it would be best if we could fill that in now. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:21, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 28

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sustainable energy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nuclear energy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:31, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 4

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Public opinion on nuclear issues, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gallup (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:36, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:15, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

November 2020

Hello. In a recent edit to the page Mail, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, or Pakistan use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author of the article used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. — Smjg (talk) 10:21, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Category:Scientists of Polish descent has been nominated for discussion

Category:Scientists of Polish descent has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Place Clichy (talk) 19:00, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Pest/weed terminology

Hi Cloud200. About this edit, the terminology can trip people up: "Pest" is commonly used to mean bugs and a few small kinds of rodents. (The same problem comes up with "bugs," which entomologists want us to use differently than we do.) But in the original sense - and still most often in the professional sense - a "pest" is anything that causes losses or problems in any living thing. That's pretty broad. Weeds, viruses, molds, etc all count as a pest.

However Wikipedia has lots of people reading it. Not just pest management professionals. So I do think it would be good if we could cater to both understandings - so instead of removing that part of the WP article, if you (or someone, like maybe me) could use both kinds of terminology and make it understandable to both, that would be better. I edit a lot of the pesticide articles and I definitely notice we're not making it understandable to everyone. Invasive Spices (talk) 21:35, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cost of electricity by source, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Discount rate.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Epoch Times reference at Solar power

Hi. Please do not use the Epoch Times as you did at Solar power. It is not a reliable source. See WP:EPOCHTIMES . Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 09:19, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Help with one thing

Hi Cloud. I recently saw your last edit on Russia–European Union relations, I could ask someone else but you're the first that comes to mind. I have something to address about the Politics of Vietnam article and its "neutrality". I wanted to ask more people about it but I'm not sure where, you think Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics is the right place? Or maybe there's some other better place for that? Thanks. Lone Internaut (talk) 11:37, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Lone Internaut I don't know much about Vietnam but I can certainly have a look from Wikipedia rules point of view! Cloud200 (talk) 12:29, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm sure you'll help. I was just unsure whether to post my address to the article in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics or not. Lone Internaut (talk) 12:34, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 1

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cost of electricity by source, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Discount rate.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Russo-Ukrainian War for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Russo-Ukrainian War is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Russo-Ukrainian War (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

--Renat 17:25, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Our discussions at sustainable energy

Hiya. I wanted to tell you I do enjoy our discussion at sustainable energy, and I'm reading most of the reliable sources you link. Learning a lot.

I wanted to make you aware of discretionary sanctions around the topic of climate change, which means we're held to slightly higher behavioural standards because of the sensitivity of the topic. I would like to encourage you to continue as you do, seek consensus, and maybe be a bit less bold (as to not be WP:reckless) in your edits. Thanks!

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in climate change. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

FemkeMilene (talk) 20:23, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks

		The Science Barnstar
		Cloud200, thanks for bringing your expertise on nuclear to Sustainable energy, and for your patience in all the discussion. You're a great person to work with. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 20:21, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 20:21, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

A few tips

I was just reading your work on nuclear energy debate and hope you don't mind some unsolicited advice

• Make sure you don't add see also templates / further reading in the middle of prose: Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Layout#Section_templates_and_summary_style
• Use quotes very sparingly. The source you're citing has a free licence, otherwise this would have been copyright infringement. See WP:QUOTE for more advice. Quotes should never dominate normal prose, and should be paraphrased whenever possible.
• Use dispassionate sourcing. Don't try to recreate the nuclear energy debate by citing those involved, but instead cite people describing the debate. FemkeMilene (talk) 07:14, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Solar power reassessment

Solar power has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:32, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Stalin etc

I think some explanations are needed.

• First. I joined this Katyn dispute primarily to demonstrate my approach to resolving that type disputes. I hoped (and I am still hoping) that we will be working together on the MKuCR article (which is, frankly speaking, awful from the NOR/NPOV point of view). It is can be easily demonstrated that I was not going to push any specific POV, and my own view was that both parties (DK and you) are misintereting the Duma's declaration by emphacising only part of information (which, as I suspect, corresponds to your personal POV). Therefore, my initial proposal (the text that I proposed on the talk page) was an almost verbatim reproduction of the Duma's declaration, and you must admit that is was much closer to the original that your and DK's POV-laden interpretations. I am not providing diffs, because I am sure you are perfectly aware of what I mean, but I can provide them upon a request. That means that your statement that I am pushing some specific POV regarding Katyn is totally unjustified.

• Second. Upon reflection, I decided to demonstrate how that type disputes are supposed to be resolved. To do that, I performed a google.scholar search for good quality secondary sources IMPORTANT. I DIDN'T know what the results of this search could be. It is easy to demonstrate that I am right: just do similar search using some different neutral set of keywords: if the result will be pretty much the same, then I couldn't be able to play with keywords to select the set that yields desirable results.

Now, when I got the sources, I selected the best sources according to purely formal criteria (good peer-reviewed journal, many citations), and read what they say. I found that both of them emphasize the role of Stalin and tell nothing about the "totalitarian state". Indeed, extended quotes from those sources can be found below:

Sterio: " In November 2010, the Russian Parliament (Duma) voted a declaration blaming Stalin and other Soviet officials for having personally ordered and approved the Katyn massacre."

Guryanov: "However, in 2010, a new situation arose. After seventeen years of silence, the Russian authorities at last articulated Russia’s political position on the Katyn Massacre. Prime Minister Vladamir Putin, and then more definitively President Dmitry Medvedev, publicly voiced their opinion about Stalin’s culpability in the massacre of Polish citizens. On November 26, 2010, the State Duma of the Russian Federation made its first public statement noting the personal responsibility of Stalin and his associates as the main perpetrators of Katyn Massacre.29 In 2010, copies of 137 of the 183 volumes of unclassified materials of the Russian investigation of the Katyn criminal case were handed over to Poland.30 But none of the other thirty-six secret or top secret volumes has yet been declassified and handed over.31 On January 26, 2011, President Medvedev’s press office commented that the declassification of Katyn materials is ongoing and the copies will be transferred to Poland.32 Formally, there is no contradiction: the recognition of the classification as legal in the past does not preclude the declassification in the future. Despite the recent decision of the Russian Supreme Court, some shift of Russia’s official position may occur, at least on the declassification."

I provided links to those pdf's, and I hope you can easily check that I am quoting those two articles correctly and do not take author's words out of context.

Obviously, if the two reliable sources stress one aspect of the Duma's declaration and ignore another one, then we must follow what those sources say. In connection to that, I proposed another wording, which was in accordance with those two sources.

• Let me reiterate. In this concrete case, my goal was to demonstrate how should we work with sources. I gave you an example, and I gave you a hint how to respond if you disagree. You could (i) point at some logical error in my words or conclusions, (ii) demonstrate that my sources are not good (for example, if a different, more neutral keyword set yielded 15 sources saying Duma blamed Soviet totalitarian state without mentioning STalin's personal role. You also could point at some fundamental flaws in my approach in general. Note, I even reverted DK's edit, who reverted the change proposed by you. You must agree I did my best to provide a calm and respectful atmosphere for resolving that dispute.

And what I got in a responce? Personal attacks and accusations of POV pushing. Do you really believe it is appropriate?

Let me reiterate it. So far:

• I do not care if Stalin was personally responsible for Katyn

• I do not care if Marx supported mass killings

• I do not care who started Red Terror

I need to come to an agreement on how we should resolve disputes using good quality peer-reviewed secondary sources found according some neutral and unbiased way. If we come to such an agreement, I need no apologies, because the utmost disrespect that I cannot tolerate is a disrespect for logic. Ok?--Paul Siebert (talk) 20:23, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

I continued to digging sources from the same list, and I found two more good quality sources that seem relevant. One sources (Kerry Longhurst. Where from, where to? New and old configurations in Poland's foreign and security policy priorities. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, Volume 46, Issue 3, September 2013, Pages 363-372) says:

"The Polish government acknowledged that the accident investigation was conducted in an open and honest manner. Moreover, in the aftermath of the accident Russia published a large number of previously restricted documents on the Katyn Massacre. Furthermore, the Russian Duma passed a resolution which admitted that Josef Stalin had personally ordered the Katyn Massacre, an admission that the Poles had sought for a long time, the Duma declaration also called for the massacre to be investigated further to confirm the list of victims"

which is consistent with the description provided by the above sources. Another source (Michael P. Scharf and Maria Szonert-Binienda, Katyn: Justice Delayed or Justice Denied - Report of the Cleveland Experts' Meeting, 44 Case W. Res. J. Int'l L. 535 (2012) Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/jil/vol44/iss3/2) says.

"According to this resolution adopted by the Lower House of the Russian Parliament, the Katyn crime represents mass extermination of thousands of Polish citizens held in the Soviet prisoner-of-war camps and prisons, and it thus constitutes an act of terrorism of the totalitarian state. This resolution places direct responsibility for the Katyn crime on Stalin and the Soviet leadership."

Note, that is the first time when the mention of "totalitarian state" appears in the sources found by me, although the stress is still made on Stalin personally. However, it took special efforts to find the source that (partially) supports your POV. IMO, that perfectly demonstrates who is neutral in that dispute, and who is pushing their POV.--Paul Siebert (talk) 21:42, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Talk:Red Army Faction# Mention of terrorist organisation in the lead

I see you have been editing Wikipedia for nearly as long as I have. Therefore you should be well aware of the problems of Wikipedia:Edit warring and the WP:BRD. I am loath to revert you most recent revert and would prefer to reach a consensus at Talk:Red Army Faction# Mention of terrorist organisation in the lead so please explain your reasons for your most recent edit there. -- PBS (talk) 15:18, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in Eastern Europe or the Balkans. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

--Ymblanter (talk) 07:45, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

(Copied from "Denial of the Holodomor" talk page)

"Your accusations are absolutely false, and they may be interpreted as personal attacks. You misinterpreted my words absolutely blatantly, and my only hope is that is a result of a good faith and sincere misunderstanding. If that is the case, I can, once again, explain my position, provided, but only provided that you are ready to listen. However, if you don't want to listen and are going to continue in the same vein (accusations of others of disruptive editing, POV pushing, and canvassing), I will report you. I see you have been duly notified that you are working in the area covered by WP:ARBEE, which means I may resort to WP:AE."

Personally, I still hope that is a good faith misunderstanding. Don't disappoint me, please.--Paul Siebert (talk) 14:20, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Just in case if you are not familiar with rules, this, this, this, this, and that is called canvassing, and it is sufficient to inflict severe sanctions on you. Since I am under an obligation not to take any actions during the DR process, I am not going to do anything with that, neither during DR, nor after it. However, I expect you to openly acknowledge the fact that those (and, maybe, other) users have been canvassed by you, and promise to refrain from similar actions in future. Regards, --Paul Siebert (talk) 14:47, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:38, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Dispute resolution noticeboard (double genocide theory)

I wanted to thank you for thanking me for this. In regards to this, I would note that you accused me (I could be wrong though) of Holocaust denial when you wrote: "I find it entirely possible that you were not aware that Holocaust alone took life of 6 million Jews, ... ." As you are clearly aware, even saying it was less than 6 million Jews is a form of denialism,1 and I am certainly not a denialist; while I thank you for what you wrote, I was and remain full aware of it and all the other victims — if I appear "too soft" on Communism is because I think you are being too extreme on it by equating it with Nazism (from the POV of those who lived under both regime types, I can understand and respect it but I want to make it clear many mainstream2 scholars disagree with this view); if you were truly arguing with a pro-Communist or denialist, trust me, I would be the first to criticize them and be called an anti-communist and a bourgeois useful idiot in return, e.g. see this as me arguing with a real pro-Communist (I was called not left-wing for disagreeing with their views).

I do not necessarily dispute anything of what you said — my main issue is that you provided no source (e.g. while I do not personally doubt that "whenever such claims are being raised usually by right-wing politicians they are promptly and correctly dismissed as Holocaust denialism and whataboutism", it would be helpful if you provide an equally reliable, e.g. academic peer-reviewed article, in support of this) and dismissed my scholarly sources as obscure or just their views — but let me remind you that it is scholars' views that matter, not ours (this is how Wikipedia works), which is why I want you to realize that I am expressing my personal views, which are in fact closer to yours than you realize, but I am simply summarizing what respected scholars say. The Contemporary European History is a respected peer-review academic journal published by the academic press, and I find it disturbing that you dismiss the cited article as "one ignorant scholar." You then say you "find it not only ahistorical but also deeply offensive and nonconstructive", which is your personal views rather than providing an equally reliable academic source that support what you said or that say the cited article is ahistorical and the like.

P.S. In regard to this, let me tell you that I am very sympathetic to anarchism and to repressed anarchists, as with many other repressed victims, and I think the wording is perfectly fine and is not the issue but sourcing may be one, as you cited this to The Anarchist Library (I personally like and appreciate it as a library, and I have used it as a source, e.g. when there was not a Google Books link), something that I did too in the past but have since then become more strict in reading of our policies and guidelines, which can be considered as a self-published source. I am not going to remove that stuff because it is indeed true, and the wording is not the problem, but it would be better if we could cite the quote to a secondary book instead, and do the same for the Bolshevik repression of anarchists, from which I am sure there are plenty of academic books about it, so it should be easy to find.

Notes

1. Holocaust denial also says: "In some former Eastern Bloc countries, Holocaust deniers do not deny the mass murder of Jews, but deny the participation of their own nationals in the Holocaust." The cited ref is the academic journal East European Jewish Affairs.

2. I am talking about many respected scholars, not necessarily me but they. Again, I am trying not to present my personal views but only those of many mainstream scholars.

Davide King (talk) 15:54, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

From the AfD talk page

Please, read this. Just to make sure you have read that. Regards, Paul Siebert (talk) 17:11, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

The DRN has been resumed. Since we all voluntarily agreed not to discuss any conduct issues of participants at any platform, my previous message may be temporarily disregarded. If a productive dialogue between you and other participants (including me) will be established, the I will consider the previous incident completely resolved. Paul Siebert (talk) 23:28, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

• I'm assuming from a comment you made, from memory, that I can remove you from the participants in the related DR; it goes without saying you can revert what I am about to do. Any other perspective in the discussion was useful to me, so I read what you have already contributed with appreciation for that reason. Hope you are finding as much joy in editing here as I mostly do. ~ cygnis insignis 14:06, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

  @Cygnis insignis: do you mean my proposal about withdrawing myself from the dispute together with the other editors involved in AfD? If yes, then sure, I do. If it's something else then sorry, I had busy week and haven't followed the recent developments closely. Cloud200 (talk) 16:15, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Violent revolution

I noticed your comment, "Jesus was not obsessed about the necessity of "violent revolution", while Marx was." [15:05, 20 December 2021] In fact Marx never called for "violent revolution" other than in the 1848 French rvolution which resulted in the Second Republic. But even then, it is disputed. TFD (talk) 19:43, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

I recommend reading "State and Revolution"[2] as it's a fantastic collection of quotes from Marx and Engels justifying use of violence and terror, carefully picked by Lenin to argue that Marx and Engels writings were "a veritable panegyric on violent revolution". Additional quotes can be found in Dictatorship of the proletariat. Cloud200 (talk) 07:23, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Hope you can comment on a merge discussion

Hello I see you are interested in the subject so I hope you might have time to write a sentence or 2 at

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cost_of_electricity_by_source#Merger_proposal

Chidgk1 (talk) 06:56, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for your efforts

		The Current Events Barnstar
		Awarded for efforts in expanding and verifying articles related to the 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis and 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Awarded by Cdjp1 (talk) 7 March 2022 (UTC)

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	Awarded for efforts in expanding multiple articles to the 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis and 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Awarded by Cdjp1 (talk) 7 March 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

CS1 error on Wagner Group

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Wagner Group, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 14:40, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Behavior in AfD discussion

I hate to be doing this, but I hate even more that I have to say this:

Please do not accuse ethnically Arab editors who disagree with you of "dismissing [your sources] as 'Jewish propaganda'".

Nableezy at no point used the words "Jewish propaganda" and your putting words in his mouth to baselessly accuse him of antisemitism over a neutrality/sourcing dispute came off as incredibly racist.

I will assume good faith and proceed as though this was not your intention, but I hope you will understand how your language could be perceived that way and I ask that you try to avoid such behavior in the future.

Thank you.

 Vanilla  Wizard 💙 21:17, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

@Vanilla Wizard I have no clue who Nableezy is and what is his ethnic background. It doesn't really matter if he was Swedish or Egyptian. What does matter is that he in wholesale dismisses Hamas policy confirmed by countless cases as "propaganda". Cloud200 (talk) 14:51, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

No, he dismissed the state of the article as propaganda, a reasonable thing to do when even most of those who !voted keep agree it needs a lot of work to comply with policies relating to sourcing and neutrality. I'll admit I am quite disappointed that you didn't address, much less take back, why it's a problem to caricature those who disagree with your sources or your framing as rabid antisemites who would call everything they don't like "Jewish propaganda". Especially when your sources included ones listed at WP:RS/P as questionable or unreliable. I don't think furthering this conversation much more than this will be productive so I'll leave you with this: please try to avoid assuming bad faith like that in the future. If not because I asked you to, then because it is a foundational pillar of the encyclopedia. You've been editing Wikipedia a lot longer than I have so I sincerely hope you'll understand. Take care.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 19:07, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Could you put the important information in the article ?

Cloud200, could you put the important information in the preamble of the article of 2022 annexation referendums in Russian-occupied Ukraine (see. below) ? "These "referendums" have nothing to do with the free, democratic expression of the will of the people, as they were held under conditions of Russian terror, psychological pressure and persecution of Ukrainian citizens and Ukrainian activists, whom the occupying Russian authorities threw and continue to throw into prisons, torture chambers and filtration camps. They also violate intentional laws and Ukrainian legislation." This above excerpt should be included in the article. I placed this excerpt in the Ukrainian and Russian Wikipedia articles on these referendums. I can not edit the article why I ask you to do this. Please see also Talk:2022 annexation referendums in Russian-occupied Ukraine ..Wise2 (talk) 11:53, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Sierra Club nuclear and CES

I added a failed verification tag to a source you added about the Sierra Club embracing nuclear as a clean energy source, and deleted a quote about CES and nuclear that I wasn't able to find in the referenced LA Times article, which was about mountaineering and not energy policy. If the organization is indeed changing its longstanding stance on nuclear power opposition, that would be a worthy addition to the article, but I'm not seeing the sources saying these things. BBQboffin^{grill me} 21:24, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Massacres of Poles in Volhynia

Since this article is only editable by established editors, could I ask that you incorporate the following changes to the text that are more accurate: Change "The UPA's actions resulted in up to 100,000 deaths." to "The UPA's actions resulted in the death of around 100,000 Poles." Remove: "The ruling Germans also actively encouraged both Ukrainians and Poles to kill each other." and from section title remove"...and the Ukrainian anti-German uprising". The first statement is somewhat problematic because though the Germans might have instigated ethnic hatred on a lower level there is no evidence that they directly worked with UPA to organize the massacres, so this statement should not be included in the lead as it suggest the Germans were the co-organizers. Also, the second statement is problematic because UPA only operated in the Kresy region (now Western Ukraine) so this was not a Greater Ukrainian uprising and also its scope was very limited as UPA spent most of its time on attacking Poles and Soviet partisans. So, this is a very questionable claim especially to be used in a section title. 94.172.109.57 (talk) 16:48, 24 October 2024 (UTC)