User talk:Ke an

Hello, Ke an, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Moonraker (talk) 10:19, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like Lithuanian is prohibited even here. :D Okey, let's discuss in English. You have removed "Juodkrantė Monto de Sorĉistinoj Raganų Kalnas 29 kartludo.jpg|Ragana (witch) and devil in the Hill of Witches." from Lithuania. Do you really think it looks like a profanation? I thought it was quite cute because it is an old woman as described in the paganic sources. Plus it allows to mention Hill of Witches which is a worth visiting paganic location (enjoyed it myself years ago). -- Pofka (talk) 19:56, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(Pofka) Yes, they are made by amateurs "liaudies meistrai" and have little correspondence to the old belief - maybe more to animation characters. It was writings about profanation of old religion by Beresnevičius or Greimas, then powerful figures turn into anecdotical characters. my intention was too keep images with more genuine information as possible. -- Ke an (talk) 20:25, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ke an: Okey, they look quite funny and maybe you are right. Will add some other images there because now it looks a bit too empty. -- Pofka (talk) 12:00, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ke an: Hi, I saw that you was very involved into the dispute about the Corruption section in Lithuania. Detektyw z Wilna started a discussion about it with Wikipedia administrators at Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Lithuania#Corruption and your arguments would be very welcome there. -- Pofka (talk) 14:23, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Pofka: Done, thank you for the notice. -- Ke an (talk) 19:03, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ke an: Mačiau, kad sukūrei Wikipedia:Administrators noticeboard/Incidents#User:Detektyw z Wilna, bet pavartyk apie ką jis dažniausiai rašo. Labai primena zombį: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Detektyw_z_Wilna&offset=20171118143057&target=Detektyw+z+Wilna. Kol kas turbūt dar nei vieno pozityvaus pakeitimo. Vien tik negatyvumo ryškinimas visur visomis išgalėmis. -- Pofka (talk) 11:19, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Pofka: Let's use arguments and follow Wiki rules, which are quite good. And I think the issue will be solved. I have emphasized suspiscious behaviour already. There are more of course to find out. :) -- Ke an (talk) 11:22, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ke an: Yup, rules are everything and we should stick to them. However, from what I saw in a quick research - his edits might need constant monitoring and checking because I am really losing trust in his activity. Propaganda might be already here or just behind the corner. Russian propaganda channels are doing the exact same thing: they are boasting negative events in Lithuania and avoiding to announce the positive ones. -- Pofka (talk) 11:28, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Pofka: I think the best one can do - is to use Wikipedia self-goverment tools and good arguments. The page was neglected for a very long time, maybe too long. There are some good sources Wikipedia:Disruptive editing, Wikipedia:Tendentious editing. -- Ke an (talk) 11:36, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ke an: This is the best example how tendentious he is writing: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lithuania&diff=833781140&oldid=833755449. These 29% (highest in EU) sounds very, very negative, but when you add that EU average is 26% it doesn't sound that negative, does it? And guess what? He omitted these comparisons by leaving only the fact that it is the highest in the EU. Careful check of his edits is a must, but I am currently very busy. -- Pofka (talk) 12:04, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Pofka: I know. I have reported quite big portion of misedits and misconducts already. -- Ke an (talk) 12:56, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Pofka and Ke an: Your complains and investigations led nowhere, as expected. Maybe about time to say that you are sorry for unsubstantiated allegations and personal attacks against me? Detektyw z Wilna (talk) 14:41, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Louis Hjelmslev, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lithuanian (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) 09:09, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

solved Ke an (talk) 11:19, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alcoholism is yet another problem that was introduced during the Soviet times.Jonaitis, Marius. "Alkoholizmas - tylusis lietuvių tautos genocidas?". DELFI.lt. Retrieved 30 July 2012. Trying to combat this issue, Seimas prohibited to sell alcohol to people younger than 20 years old and it is prohibited for shops to sell alcohol from 8:00 p.m to 10:00 a.m from Monday to Saturday, while on Sundays it is limited to 3:00 p.m."Viskas: nuo šiandien alkoholio prekyba keičiasi iš esmės". DELFI.lt. Retrieved 1 January 2018.

I think this one is accurate and limitations are important. Soviet times made it popular much more than before. Villages looks like this today because of these 50 years. -- Pofka (talk) 10:55, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Pofka: Sources are not the best - delfi.lt. Statistical consuming liters per capita(PSO data) is not alcoholism. Where is statistics about alcoholism?(desease) Prohibition of selling alcohol from 8:00 p.m to 10:00 is just a very partial measure - there amore. -- Ke an (talk) 11:01, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Alexis Jazz (talk) 10:05, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please opt-in to User:SineBot as you seem to forget signing every once in a while. You have more than 800 edits so SineBot is ignoring you now. Alexis Jazz (talk) 10:30, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Enterprise Lithuania logo.png. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 10:31, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) fixed Alexis Jazz (talk) 12:46, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by RoySmith was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Lithuanian Innovation Centre and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Lithuanian Innovation Centre, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

-- RoySmith (talk) 16:37, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ke an! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! -- RoySmith (talk) 16:37, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Draft:Lithuanian Innovation Centre 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://ukmin.lrv.lt/en/sector-activities/innovation/innovation-support-measures. 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. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:26, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Lithuanian Innovation Centre logo EN - 12 04 2018.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:22, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have just added a new comprehensive section about Environment in Lithuania, however some of the data duplicates with the introduction of the Geography section. Maybe you have ideas how it could be solved? I was unable to decide what edits should be made in order to avoid duplications (e. g., about Aukštojas Hill and percentage of forest zones in Lithuania) without destroying this quite good introduction completely because some of these sentences does not fit to other sections and are valuable. -- Pofka (talk) 16:38, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ke an: You have been gone for some days. Not sure if you saw this, so adding a ping template here. -- Pofka (talk) 21:54, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Pofka: I think geographical data does not belong to Environment section. Ecology facts and nature protection information(like national parks) should be presented there IMHO. I would definitely move paragraphs starting with "Lithuania does not have high<...>", "Lithuania is a particularly watered <...>" to geography. Illustrations are really nice and do fit together very well.. -- Ke an (talk) 02:39, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ke an: According to Natural environment, it includes: "This environment encompasses the interaction of all living species, climate, weather, and natural resources that affect human survival and economic activity.". This article does speak about rivers and mountains and has illustrations of them, so I guess they fit there. So maybe the whole "Lithuania lies at the edge of the North European Plain..." paragraph should be moved to the environment section? The problem is that this sentence is purely geographic, while the rest ones starting with "Its landscape was smoothed by the glaciers of the last ice age" sounds very related to the environment. I think "Lithuania is a particularly watered <...>" fits in the environment because water is a natural resource. -- Pofka (talk) 15:10, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Pofka: I think all your mentioned cases belong to geographical facts. And there is already a Climate section - so not much space left for other facts in Environment section :). Environment contains mostly facts, related to environment protection(ecology) and natural parks and biotopes, endangered species, etc. For example - France and Italy articles.

@Ke an: Climate is about rain, snow and temperatures. Environment is about everything else that is in nature, excluding species which are in biodiversity section (animals, plants). I believe geography section should speak only about the location of Lithuania, Vilnius and probably what surrounds it (e.g., Baltic Sea). -- Pofka (talk) 19:15, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Pofka: No, geography includes nature facts as well. Environment is more about living area protection. Just look at English definition of Environment: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/environment And then at Environment section use cases in Wikipedia. I think it is simple.

@Ke an: I created this section based on France, which has: "Forests account for 28% of France's land area,[96][97] and are some of the most diverse in Europe, comprising more than 140 species of trees.[98] There are nine national parks[99] and 46 natural parks in France,[100] with the government planning to convert 20% of its Exclusive Economic Zone into a Marine Protected Area by 2020.". I think the beginning of the section should be reworked to "Location and borders" like in France. By doing so, we would omit any duplications. -- Pofka (talk) 07:40, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Pofka: I also would like to point out that "largest", "deepest", "longest" are definitely geographical facts.

@Pofka: The problem is quite simple, since Geography, Climate, Environment have intersecting parts. So if you have mentioned one fact in Geography, which also relates to Climate, don't mention it in Climate :) and vice versa. Some articles merge them in to one section even. To avoid duplication I would reserve Environment for ecology and nature protection.

Hi! Please mark your edits as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typo corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". But adding content is never a "minor" edit. Thanks, Renata (talk) 13:12, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I noticed that you often forget to add spaces before brackets in your edits. E.g., in Baltistics: "and culture(history, literature, folklore, mythology) of the Baltic nations". I think it is required or I missed something in grammar? :D -- Pofka (talk) 18:32, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Pofka: You are right. Yes, it is requirement of a good style. I'm more focused on content :) -- Ke an (talk) 19:53, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article Baltistics has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Wikipedia is not a dictionary. This is simply a definition.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Dane ^talk 01:59, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Alexis Jazz (talk) 23:15, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've suggested you should be blocked for continued edit warring at Corruption in Lithuania after you gave up participating in the April DRN discussion. You can respond if you wish. EdJohnston (talk) 02:23, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Eastern Europe, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Robert McClenon (talk) 17:36, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ke an, your name has been mentioned in a thread at WT:DRN that was opened by Detektyw z Wilna. You may wish to respond. Unless one of you changes your approach, blocks seem likely. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 18:10, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You've been warned per the result of the edit warring complaint. You may be blocked if you make any further reverts at Corruption in Lithuania unless you get a prior consensus for your change on the article talk page. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 03:24, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Lithuanian aerospace association logo.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F6 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:18, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Lithuanian Space Science and Technology Institute logo.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F6 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:18, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I think we did a great job expanding the Lithuania's article. I still have a few ideas there, but it is probably almost finished. I believe that our next target should be Lithuania's capital Vilnius article because it looks quite empty compared to other capitals pages (e.g., Paris) and it attracts quite a lot of visitors. You have a lot of great knowledge and our edits perfectly complements each other. Article of Paris seems to have a perfect structure and we can use it as an example. -- Pofka (talk) 16:22, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Pofka: Hi, yes, I think it is improved a lot. It still has problems though - I have started 'Improvements?' on Lithuania's talk page. Could we discuss the weakest points of the article there? I think it should return to GA category. Vilnius sounds nice - I can focus on it too. My current focus articles are those which belong to the Portal of Lithuania - Music of Lithuania, Lithuanian cuisine, etc. as they were really neglected. And lt:Vytinė (laivas) also. -- Ke an (talk) 00:04, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ke an: I tried to solve all the problems in Lithuania's article which I noticed and added content which I thought was missing. Probably the only problematic thing in my eyes is references because there are templates "citation needed" in some parts of it. Some lines/paragraph also are without references. This is important for GA/FA nomination. / Great, then add information which you are able to Vilnius. I will contribute as well soon. -- Pofka (talk) 07:28, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I think we need to find a better illustration than this one in Lithuania because it is of a very poor quality and reminds videos from the 90s of 240p. There is no place for such quality pictures in FA/GA. I replaced it with: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closing_ceremony_for_Iron_Sword_2014.jpg, however if you find anything better - replace with it. -- Pofka (talk) 11:22, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake with the image. I was sure that the last edit was made by the Litvinist editor who insists that Belarus is the "real" Lithuania, and I completely missed your change. My apologies. – Sabbatino (talk) 22:43, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Sabbatino: No problem. Thank you for keeping the history fakers out. I understood the intentions of the fakery edit and replaced the image with one of the most prominent examples of Vilnius baroque - as Johann Christoph Glaubitz is considered one of the 'fathers' of the Lithuanian baroque. -- Ke an (talk) 22:49, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We do not remove dead links. The information still can be found in internet archives. Please tag these links with template {{dead link}}. Staszek Lem (talk) 00:03, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating MO Museum.

A New Page Patroller Vexations just tagged the page as having some issues to fix, and wrote this note for you:

Please add references to independent, reliable sources.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can reply over here and ping me. Or, for broader editing help, you can talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Vexations (talk) 11:43, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Vilnius City Opera, 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 "Draft:" 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. Boleyn (talk) 09:25, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, friend. You changed and wrote "Undo vandalism again. We don't need low visual and statistical quality images here". Can you answer on some question? 1) First sentence is very funny. Do you know, what is "vandalism"? A rhetorical question 2) "We don't..." - who is "we"? Maybe "you" is more correct? 3) "We don't need low visual and statistical quality images here" - why is my map have low visual and statistical quality? My map have qualuty better, than a map before, and statistical quality is better - more options. So i don't understand, what's wrong? I'll edit back my version. if you don't answer, so i'm waiting Thank you LandRussia (talk) 07:41, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I know perfectly what is vandalism. Your behaviour falls into this category - constant reverting and placing the image without proper argumentation and discussions. Please discuss your image qualities on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Lithuania as it was advised. If it will be accepted, it will be placed on the page. Otherwise it will not be placed. Ke an (talk)

I see you don't. Ok, special for you from wiki: "On Wikipedia, vandalism has a very specific meaning: editing (or other behavior) deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose, which is to create a free encyclopedia, in a variety of languages, presenting the sum of all human knowledge." YOUR behaviour falls into this category - constant reverting the image without proper argumentation and discussions. I edited a old version with short options, without source, on new, that using on some different languages. Why I need open a discuss? "as it was advised" you didn't. Maybe it will correct if I edit back and you open discuss? And what problems on my map? I answered about your lie that map is incorrect. Correct me if I'm wrong. I want a good intellegent discuss, but if you will speak with empty words i will edit back, ok? LandRussia (talk) 12:08, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Since your disruptive behaviour is known already at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:LandRussia#Edit%20warring%20at%20Lithuania, I have nothing to add more. Ke an (talk) 17:27, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unworthy act. I knew LandRussia (talk) 21:26, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vilnius City Opera, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

scope_creep (talk) 12:33, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ke an. 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)[reply]

Thanks for creating Žygimantas Liauksminas.

A New Page Patroller Boleyn just tagged the page as having some issues to fix, and wrote this note for you:

This has been tagged for 2 issues.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can reply over here and ping me. Or, for broader editing help, you can talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Boleyn (talk) 09:57, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition to Christmas Eve has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:38, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

PLS read over WP:GALLERY and WP:SANDWICH. I assume you want people to be able to read the article.--Moxy (talk) 15:01, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed recently that an edit war was starting to emerge in Lithuania's article. I'm currently very busy with my real life and I will not be able to actively review what is being done in this article, so your input in protecting it from unmotivated edits would be very welcome. I partly agree with Moxy's statements that there may be too many illustrations and we should avoid the "sandwich style", so I kept only essential illustrations. I think something needs to be done with "Science and technology" section because it clearly has the "sandwich style". Maybe we should only keep the Simonavičius illustration because it is probably the most special achievement of the Lithuanians science? In my opinion, Gimbutas, Greimas and Kubilius should be kept only in the text. -- Pofka (talk) 12:27, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It will not help to solve the problem. It's just one section. There are quite meaningless illustrations - like Numavičius, Windmill, they have nothing particular. Also I don't want to start meaningless quarel which image is better etc. like it was many times before -- Ke an (talk)

Hi,

There is an IoT manufacturer based in Lithuania, which produces trackers and routers. I'm trying to create a Wikipedia page about the company. However, my draft was declined some time ago and recently I decided to try and fix the page.

The provided reason for the decline was that the page read more as an advertisement than an encyclopedic article and the references I used were mostly to their website. I've made some changes to the draft and was wondering if you could check it out and give me some guidelines on what may be wrong? In my opinion, the main issue right now is that I can't find any references to third party sources for the information provided, but the information used seems very basic (year they started the company, what they produce, some other activities, etc.)

Link to my draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Teltonika)

Best regards, Dziugas Dziugas1 (talk) 06:59, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Dziugas1: Yes, the page looks indeed like an advertisement page. The history which is more interesting to Teltonika itself than others, photos of products which are not significant to readers, etc. If Teltonika is notable - what is so notable about it on EU, world scale about it - why we should know about it and which facts. Definitely not a characteristics of some products. Wikipedia is not a company website. --- Ke an (talk)

Hi, I recently got an invitation to the Lietuvos Vikimedijos dalyvių grupė project. It is a newly created group which main aim is to improve Lithuanians collaboration in the foreign languages Wikipedia articles. I thought that you might be interested in joining such project. If yes, add your name and talk page link to the "Susidomėję dalyviai" section. Vogone is the creator of the group. -- Pofka (talk) 11:00, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, done. Good initiative. -- Ke an (talk)

Dear Ke an, Thank you for improving the Jonas Noreika article. I haven't looked over your edits, but over all they seem helpful, for balance, focus, neutrality and readability. I may work more on that article later. AndriusKulikauskas (talk) 19:27, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@AndriusKulikauskas: Thank you. If you don't mind, I have moved your comment from my User page to this User talk page. -- Ke an (talk)

@Ke an: Hi, I want to note that Republic of Užupis may easily qualify as a micronation. Keep in mind that micronation means it is NOT RECOGNISED by any government and that's exactly what Užupis is: somewhere between reality and a complete prank. If you look at the micronation wikipedia article, you will notice that even such territories as the Principality of Sealand and Principality of Seborga (VERY close to Užupis situation) qualifies as a micronation, so Užupis definitely is something similar to this (and possibly even better micronation than something like Sealand because it has constant inhabitants). While the Republic of Paulava definitely is a microstate (because it was officially recognised by King and the Great Seimas). Some sources even describes the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth as a three independent states federation: Lithuania, Poland and Paulava. In this case, it is very important to distinguish micronation from a microstate because these are completely different (and it was done in the section of the article). -- Pofka (talk) 13:01, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@ Ke an, seamingly, you are Lithuanian.

Therefore, I am very astonished, that you deny or do not know that term.

I had prepared a reply, which is no more needed, as your proposal has been declined by somebody else:

No:

By good reasons, this artcle has quivalents in Belarusian (be:Беларуская готыка, German (de:Weißrussische Gotik) and some other Wikipedias.

The term "Belarusian Gothic" is suboptimal, as these buildings were erected, before "Belarus" was a term. But it is established, and there is no better alternative term.

In the age of Gothic architecture, the borders in Europe were not the borders of today.

The Grand Duchy of Lithuania for a long time was a pagan state, but it ruled vast territories with (Orthodox) Christian Slavic inhabitants.

A great deal of these territories are presentday Belarus.

From the Union of Krewo and the Union of Lublin, the recently christianized Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Kingdom of Poland lived in personal union, but still were different states.

Under these conditions, in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, a significant number of Gothic buildings were built for Orthodox parishs → congregations and landlords.

Sometimes, the controversial nationalisms of modern neigbouring states have problems to accept the uniform conditions of that region in Late Middle Age.

With very few exceptions (such as the Chamber of Facets in Novgorod Kremlin and a few early primarily Protestant churches), all other Gothic architecture is Roman Catholic.--Ulamm (talk) 17:06, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Amendment:

Remember, as late as in 1897, in the national split of the inhabitants of Vilnius, the Lithuanians were a small minority (2 %) among Jews (40 %), Poles (30,1 %), Russians (20 %) and Belorusians (4,2 %).

The first Lituanian book was printed in the Duchy of Prussia in 1547. The first Bealrusian newspaper was printed in Vilnius in 1906.

Last not least:

It is a very unfriendly act, to nominate an article for non-controversial deletion, if it is clear that there is no consensus at all.--Ulamm (talk) 17:42, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ulamm: Not sure what are you trying to prove by putting such non-relevant facts as first Lithuanian book or Belarusian newspaper or inhabitants census in Vilnius in 1897. I hope you know that the Gothic architecture is not a phenomena of 16th or 19th century. If yes, we can proceed further. Belarusian gothic is a term invented by some fringe Belarusian historians and used only in Belarus and without any other ground but ideological. Belarusian nation and language started to form only in 18th century, long after the gothic period. It is correct that the term is suboptimal and it is far from established. This type of gothic is called a Byzantine Gothic or Gothic of Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Origins of it are quite simple - Lithuanians during the wars with Teutonic Order made contracts with German architects who built castles and churches for them. After Lithuania conquered Ruthenians those architects were invited to build Gothic Orthodox churches in the East. Not only the architecture symbolized the mix of two cultures - Eastern and Western, but it also had the ideology of united church, and some of these churches were used by Catholics and Orthodox at the same time. It was an attempt of Grand Duchy of Lithuania to westernize the Orthodox community and limit the cultural influence of Moscow. The term Belarusian gothic is very artificial and pseudoscientific term. Can it be applied for a gothic Lubart's Castle, which is in Ukraine now, but built by Lithuanians? Cant it be applied to the churches of Byzantine Gothic in Poland and Lithuania which were never conquered or infuenced by Belarus? -- Ke an (talk)

I would have preferred another term, but I did not find.

I looked for "Ruthenian Gothic" as Ruthenian is the international term for the Slavic lingua franca of the Grand Duchy of Lituania. But the only building it was used for was a small wooden church from Carpatho-Ukraine that was transferred to a museum in Brno in the 1920es.

"Byzantine Gothic" wood be misleading, as in consequence of the crusades, Gothic buildings were erected in former Byzantine territories, such as Cyprus.

If suboptimal terms are established, we Wikipedians cannot invent our own terms:

"Digital"is logically wrong concerning that a "digital clock"s a clock without hands (the Latin term for the hand of a clock is digitus)

"Triforium as a storey in Medieval churches cannot be explained from triforium as a triple mullion.

Of course, Belarusian nationalists have invented the term Belarusian Gothic in order to emphasize that their region had more connections to central Europe than Moscovian Russia.

But as you can read, the article begins with a description that is far away from claiming this style were the Gothic-of-Belarus.

On the other hand (That's why I mentioned the first Lithuanian book, the first Belarusian newspaper and the late 19th century national split of Vilnius city) old Lithuania was not as Lithuanian as presentday Lithuania. It was more than a bit (Belo-)Russian (see Ruthenian language).

Vilnius Cathdral (remember its stage before 19th century Russification) is the remaining example that first Gothic churches for the Orthodox Slavic inhabitants of the Grand Duchy were built, when the Lithuanian upper class still was Pagan.

The Gothic architecture of Catholic Lithuania is more western.--Ulamm (talk) 20:31, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

About the examples: Lubart's Castle up to now is not mentioned, but two buildings in presentday Poland are.--Ulamm (talk) 20:36, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ulamm: It looks like your knowledge about the culture and history of Grand Duchy of Lithuania and it's history quite fragmented or based on non-reliable sources. Ruthenian gothic is being used for buildings in present day Czechia and Romania. I think still Byzantine Gothic is the most suitable term, since it comprises perfectly the merge of two cultural traditions. Another term which is way more exact that a Belarusian Gothic - Gothic of Grand Duchy of Lithuania it is correct historically and comprises the cultural and historical context way better. Regarding the Vilnius and Lithuania, ethnicities in 16th century - there is a map of Lithuanian language area: https://lt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lietuvi%C5%B3_kalba#/media/File:Lithuanian_language_in_the_16th_century.png Your knowledge about Vilnius cathedral are completely flawed - it was never an Orthodox Church. Very easy to find out - Vilnius Cathedral was built in Gothic style in a place of Lithuanian pagans' sanctuary. "The Gothic architecture of Catholic Lithuania is more western." - how do you measure "westerness" ? For example, Cathedral of the Theotokos, Vilnius in Lithuania firstly was built in Gothic by pagan Grand Duke of Lithuania Algirdas for his Russian wife. At this time the Catholic Vilnius Cathedral was already standing. -- Ke an (talk)

With Vilniu Catedral, I meant the Cathedral of the Theotokos, Vilnius.

If Mindaugas converted to Christian belief, but his country remained pagan, his church wasn't a cathedral i.e. a bishop's see.

What happend to Mindaugas's church, when his successors returned to Paganism?--Ulamm (talk) 21:45, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ulamm: Well, then you should know, that Cathedral of the Theotokos (which was built almost as a private church of Grand Duke's wife) is not a Cathedral of Vilnius. You simply don't know and picked up or live by selecting some random facts or fake histories. Mindaugas has built a Cathedral pope Pope Innocent IV issued a papal bull for this. How can you imagine a baptised country without it's main church :) It is little known what happened with Vilnius Cathedral after Mindaugas' death. There is a version, that it was turned into pagan sanctuary, but it is also equally possible that it was left for Catholics, since Vilnius already had some monks and German citizens who had their own churches (e.g Šventaragis' Valley). -- Ke an (talk)

I have also found something: http://www.aruodai.lt/paieska/vaizdas.php?VId=2399

The first "cathedral" or better church was replaced by a Pagan temple.

In 1387, this temple was replaced by the second cathedral.

Meanwhlie, in 1345, the Orthodox cathedral had been built. At that time, the Orthodox cummunity was the only Christian communtity in the Grand Duchy. And until the Union Of Lublin, the Orthodox, later Greek Catholic community was the largest Christian community in the Grand duchy of Lithuania.--Ulamm (talk) 23:01, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ulamm: You generate false statements just out of the blue :) There are no clear facts the Mindaugas' cathedral was converted into pagan temple. See - Church of St. Nicholas, Vilnius - (I guess you won't attribute it to some pseudoscientific, fake Belarusian Gothic, hahah ) and other churches were built mostly for German merchants community living in Vilnius and they were not closed by pagan Lithuanian Dukes as everyone had rights to worship their gods in Lithuania, see Letters of Gediminas. The chancery of pagan Grand Dukes of Lithuania, e.g. Gediminas' comprised Franciscan monks. It is known that Gediminas in 1320 has built a church for Dominican Order in Vilnius (and yes, Gediminas was pagan), later destroyed by Teutonic knights (usually Teutonic knights destroyed churches and monasteries in Lithuania, since their aim was to "baptise" Lithuania by conquering it, therefore they wanted to have as less of Christianity as possible in Lithuania ir order to have a pretext). Ruthenian merchants also had their churches in Lithuania propria. Orthodox religion was seen as a religion of the conquered lands and quite alien to Lithuania. Once Lithuanian pagan dukes who rulled e.g. Kiev, baptised as Orthodox they automatically lost the right to become a King of Lithuania. After baptism of Lithuania Orthodox nobles had no right to serve as statesman unless they converted to Catholicism. That's why the Byzantine Gothic becomes interesting, because it marks the expansion and beautiful merging of the Gothic style quite deep into Orthodox lands.

By the way, don't you find the Gothic below looking very Belarusian?

https://www.123rf.com/photo_86257444_neues-tor-new-door-gate-in-the-town-of-neubrandenburg-germany.html

I think it should be placed into Belarusian Gothic page too.. It has those oriental, Byzantine elements.. -- Ke an (talk)

Rather replaced by a temple than converted, see Theodor Narbutt and Urbanavičius.

Don't forget that the Lithuanian Paganism was a main theme of European politics for about 150 years.

Fighting against Paganism was the reason for the international suppport the Teutonic Order enjoyed.

After the enduring Christianization of Lithuania, the system of the Teutonic Order collapsed step by step.--Ulamm (talk) 09:07, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

About the relation of Belarusian Gothic and Brick Gothic:

Most examples of Belarusian Gothic can been seen as a subgroup of Brick Gothic, the buildings of Catholic Lithuanian Gohthic, too.

Brick Gothic has a lot of regional variants, and some details can be found in very different regions.--Ulamm (talk) 09:14, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ulamm: Theodor Narbutt is not a very reliable source, being a Romanticist, he created some fake stories. Regarding Urbanavičius, I still don't see 100 percent proofs about former brick pagan temple. Teutonic Order didn't collapsed because of Christianisation of Lithuania. It was decisively defeated in Battle of Grunwald.

Lithuanian gothic is a subset of Brick gothic for sure, more precisely it is a variation of brick gothic common to Hanseatic league or Baltic region. Same Baltic(Wendic) brick bonding was used, many elements a very similar. The term Belarusian gothic is not used in any solid sources, even it's definitions in Wikipedia are completely vague. So nobody knows what is it. Byzantine gothic is a merge of Hanseatic gothic style with Orthodox architecture. Very simple as that. -- Ke an (talk)

There are prsentations tellimg that an old chronicle as well as T. Narbut desribe the conversion of the first church into a temple in a reliable way.

On Lithuanian paganism there is a general consense.

The defeat of the Teutonic Order in the battle of Grunwald based on structural conditions.

These conditions are the loss of international support, the Order suffered when his wars ceased to be a crusade against the pagans.

When the Order could no more recruit volunteers for its army, it had to hire payed soldiers.

Raising taxes to pay soldiers caused the opposition of the cities in its territory.

The rebellion of the cities in alliance with the king of Poland lead to the peace of Toruń in 1466.--Ulamm (talk) 11:47, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ulamm: Could you provide links to the reliable sources regarding the brick pagan temple in the place of gothic Vilnius Cathedral? There is no consensus even among Lithuanian historians. And yet another pun regarding the fake term Belarusian gothic - some gothic buildings in Lithuania attributed to Michael Enkinger, the architect from Danzig. For example, his work Church of St. Francis and St. Bernard, Vilnius was attributed as example of Belarusian gothic in Wikipedia. Can you explain why? The architect is not Belarusian, the building is not in Belarusia, the style has no significant differences from those in Lubeck or Danzig. -- Ke an (talk)

@Ulamm: You state in your talk page: "Many articles of WP were much better, if Wikipedians would read primary researches and original documents instead of using second hand knowledge to produce third hand knowledge." It is a good advice, but why you defend a fakery on Wikipedia then? -- Ke an (talk)

Sorry, but these are not facts. Basically situation was like this: Lithuania took over Vilnius from Soviet union in October 1939, after Soviet invasion of Poland. They quickly realised that majority of inhabitants are Polish, and because they conisdered Polish rule over the city as "occupation" they made a law that stripped everyone of citizenship who wasn't able to prove that was permanent inhabitant of the city in July 1920. It was their excuse to get rid of majority of Polish inhabitants. They were labelled "aliens" ("ateiviu") and because of lack of citizenship they were not able to get a job and so on. Of course some of them emigrated to Vilnius in interwar period (nothing unusual about this, people travel from town to town), but majority were either unable to provide any eligeble prove or did not want to this, because of their patriotism and so on. Also the numbers are wrong, number of all aliens was 87 616, but only 55 382 of them were adults, the rest was children. Also again it is not true that all of them imigrated to Vilnius in interwar period. Even cited source does not claim that! The actual quote of cited source is like this (book of Regina Žepkaitė): "Gausiausią lenkų "ateivių" grupe sudare darbininkai. Lietuvos raudonojo kryžiaus duomenimis, jų buvo 11 320, su šeimu nariais - 35 181 žmogus. Tai sudarė 42% visų "ateivių". Toks didelis lenk "ateiviu" darbininkų burys susidarê dèl kelių priežasčių. Daugelis jų buvo vietiniai Vilniaus ir krašto gyventojai, bet negalėjo dokumentais irodyti savo teisés i pilietybę. Kai kurie darbininkai tikėiosi gauti geras pašalpas iš užsienio; dar kitus veikė lenkų nacionalistu propaganda, skatinusi likti ištikimais Lenkijos valstybei ir neieškoti Lietuvos pilietybės", abd in English: "The largest group of Polish "aliens" was made up of workers. According to the data of the Lithuanian Red Cross, there were 11,320 of them and 35,181 people with family members. This accounted for 42% of all "aliens". Such a large group of Polish "alien" workers is due to several reasons. Many of them were local residents of Vilnius and the country, but could not document their rights to citizenship. Some workers were hoping to get good foreign benefits; Others was influenced by propaganda of Polish nationalists who encouraged to remain loyal to the Polish state and not seek Lithuanian citizenship". So even cited, Lithuanian source is not claiming that all of them were some kind of "settlers" as article suggest. Also it is against commons sense, sheer demographic data does not indicate such big influx of inhabitants during interwar period Marcelus (talk) 09:45, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Ke an and edit-warring at Adolfas Ramanauskas - at your service.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:28, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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) 21:42, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Adolfas Ramanauskas shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Jayjg ^(talk) 22:00, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for continued removal of material. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  ~Swarm~ ^{sting} 04:27, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• This is, of course, for your continued deletion of sourced content without a policy-based rationale.[1] You have been given ample opportunity to make a policy-based argument and have failed to do so. Unilaterally deleting sourced content because you personally deem it to be false is POV-pushing. If it happens again, you will be banned from the article. ~Swarm~ ^{sting} 04:30, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Jurgis Pliateris (1810), 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 "Draft:" 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. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:45, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Didžioji Kova military district.

User:Onel5969 while examining this page as a part of our page curation process had the following comments:

Please be careful of simply cutting and pasting information from other sources onto Wikipedia. See WP:COPYVIO.

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Onel5969}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:46, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure whether you are aware of this, but articles you are creating routinely contain copyright violations. (They also contain POV issues, but right now we are not talking about them). Right at this moment, Žemaičiai military district‎ and Kęstutis military district are waiting for copyright violations to be revision-deleted, and I will do this in a couple of minutes. I did two more articles earlier this week. May I please remind you that repeated addition of copytighted material to the articles is unacceptable and will likely lead to a block. Thank you for understanding.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:41, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if you are not overreacting. I have read notices from Onel5969. So I don't think it is worth repeating. The sentences he mentioned had source references. I also think "perished" is not attributable to POV language, even if you might like to think so. -- Ke an (talk)

I am sorry but you need to read WP:MOS, it is pretty clear POV.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:00, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If the word "perish" sounds like a POV term to you, then you have tons of job on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=perished&title=Special%3ASearch&go=Go&ns0=1

Ke an (talk) 15:52, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OTHERSTUFF--Ymblanter (talk) 16:06, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it seems you argument that "perish" is a POV language are too subjective and miserable or maybe applied to one WP article only. At least you are not able to explain. -- Ke an (talk) 20:16, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Next time I will present the argument to the community, and we will see what it thinks about it.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:32, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

But what is your secret argument? Can I know it? I'm a part of community :) "perish" implies violent death and it is far more formal and neutral and more abstract than the "killed" you have used - besides people perish in battles without being killed. So I would suggest you to consult the dictionaries. -- Ke an (talk) 20:44, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I started the discussion here: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#Perished vs killed--Ymblanter (talk) 20:56, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ke an: Hi once again,

You recently edited the Lithuanian Activist Front article, however I noticed that something is wrong with its style. I have in mind the "Controversy section" where the sentence "He published a number of leaflets illustrating German and Soviet crimes in Lithuania and the Lithuanian resistance, for example, In the Name of the Lithuanian People (1946) and Appeal to" is cut by the quotes and continues behind them "the United Nations on Genocide (1951). In 1964 he published a book Alone, all alone about the Lithuanian armed resistance.". I think this needs to be fixed somehow. -- Pofka (talk) 15:23, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Pofka: Hi, currently I'm more concerned about smearing campaigns on en:Adolfas Ramanauskas site. Well referenced content, exposing KGB acticivties removed, smnearing content prioriticised. It loloks like the "owned" article. -- Ke an (talk) 16:59, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ke an: Wow. It seems Ramanauskas is under attack by the Russian propaganda trolls. Maybe they opened a new branch in the troll factory which focuses exclusively on Wikipedia because these lines you removed are identical to the russian propaganda... I wonder if they will have any evil ideas about Sierakauskas & Kalinauskas in November-December because their state-funded funeral will be similar to Ramanauskas. -- Pofka (talk) 18:21, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Pofka: It looks like the Adolfas Ramauskas - Vanagas page is "taken" under tight controll and being "owned". All new content related to KGB attrocities instantly removed. -- Ke an (talk) 18:42, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have left a message on the trolls' page, no answer so far: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kyuko#Regarding_your_persistent_vandalism_and_dissemination_of_KGB_forged_fake_news_on_Adolfas_Ramanauskas_page -- Ke an (talk) 19:11, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Leonas Prapuolenis, 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 "Draft:" before the article title) where you can improve 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. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 07:53, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't need to go through AFC, as it's probably notable. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 07:55, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@OxonAlex: Thank you for your message. I have added references and complemented the article with wikilinks. -- Ke an (talk) 10:27, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ke an, It looks fine to go into article space.

I've added a tag to the Leonas Prapuolenis to ask for a page mover or admin to move the draft back into mainspace, as there is still a redirect to the draft holding up the move. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 10:36, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:18, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jurgis Pliateris (1810), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

DGG ( talk ) 23:36, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Lithuania proper shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:46, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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) 02:45, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please, stop removing historical names of Lithuanian settlements. Polish, Russian/German names are used in all the documents before 1918, so they are important for searching information in the archives. Some of older names are even more correct that standardized Lithuanian versions (ex. Dziewaltowo > Deltuva, Syrwidgale > Servitgaliai). Just add 'formerly' or 'historically' that it would clear as they are obsolete now. Hugo.arg (talk) 10:47, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Hugo.arg: What do you mean by historical and more correct?? How can one name be more correct than other?? :) These names put so as if they are equivalent official names, still in usage which is misleading. Most of these names are just distorted versions of historical Lithuanian name. Even more so they are present in the wiki pages in Polish and other languages, so no need to keep them al in EN page. - Ke an (talk) 16:13, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is norm to list all historical or other local names in English wikipedia (see Lviv, Miskolc, Samsun, Hradec Králové, etc.). Other wikipedias may not have the necessary articles to check the name (ex. for a small settlement) or historical name could be not currently in use (like pre-revoliutionary Russian names, German names). They may be 'distorted' but they there used in official data. I am working with recovering census datae of Lithuanian settlements from various pre-1918 or interwar Polish, German and Russian sources. To have these names are vital to quicken the search. The same goes when seraching in old maps. By "correct" I have ment "correct etymologicaly", ex. Syrwidgale is "Sirvydgaliai" (name Sirvydas + galas (as Vandžiogala, Betygala, etc.) but then these names there 'relithuanized' some errors occurred (like "Servitgaliai"). If you see 1923 census data you will notice how most place names differ from the current ones. So, these "official names" is a resoult of a long transformation process, and why this should be hidden? The note 'formerly' or 'historically' should make it clear, that these names aren't officialy in use no more (although in Wilenszcyzna Polish names de facto are currently used). Hugo.arg (talk) 17:29, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Hugo.arg: There is no such "norm" in Wikipedia. Essentially the names in 99 percent cases are just transcribed and somehow distorted Lithuanian form, used in other languages. So if there is a need just to register all possible name deviations which were recorded, separate page paragraph is of better use. Polish names are not used in Lithuania. Wilenszcyzna is a mythical, non existing region. - Ke an (talk) 20:49, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Pofka: Maybe you could suggest possible ways/best practice? - Ke an (talk) 12:58, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kėdainiai, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Janusz Radziwiłł. 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) 06:17, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

At your service.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:02, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for nationalist POV-pushing and personal attacks.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 15:53, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Ke an (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I was blocked per Yblanter requests to block without providing any evidence of "pushing nationalist POV" (just a quote from Ymblanter without any evidence, nor diffs !), just by simple wish to block me which he repeated many times instead of analysing the 3RR case reported by me !!. In order to block me he even invented other multiple false accusations. It is worth to note, that the behaviour of Ymblanter exceeds good will, non-biased behaviour on Wikipedia and he is abusing his power as administrator. I see the block as a personal attack of Ymblanter and overall as a very harmfull practice. Ke an (talk) 16:19, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

As others have stated, it is trivially easy to find examples of nationalist POV-pushing in your edit history, even without any prior familiarity with this case (I just cmd-F searched for reverted edits and found plenty) _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:52, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Given that your previous block was for trying to whitewash the biography of a Lithuanian national hero, and that now you're sparring over whether a surname is Lithuanian, I'm not sure why I'd suspect anything else. Ymblanter had nothing to do with the block, I acted alone. And finally, you still haven't addressed your obvious personal attacks towards Ymblanter; baseless accusations of chauvinism and bias are clearly beyond the pale. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 16:42, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Very strange things happenning - I'm under personal attack of one of the administrators of Wikipedia with his historic bias. And other people just repeat what this amdinistrator said. If you can find my block "for whitewashing of a Lithuanian national hero" I would be more than happy. Are people blocked for whitewashing? How can you judge without any diffs nor references?? -- Ke an (talk) 18:30, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(EC) Ymblanter didn't request that you were blocked. They simply asked for your comments to be evaluated. They never said you were a "pushing nationalist POV". The closest they said was "it was because they were edit-warring in an article on a Lithuanian Holocaust perpetrator removing the info on Holocaust crimes and presenting him as a national hero". The nationalist POV pushing was the blocking admin's own assessments based on your words at the ANEW thread and/or whatever else they saw. The quote ""Your bias and chauvinism, low discussion ethics disqualifies you from judging states previously occupied by Russia" is clearly visible in the linked thread. If you're going to demand a diff then here [2]. It was your very last edit before you were blocked. If you're going to demand evidence for something you clearly said and so recently, I don't think you're likely to be unblocked any time soon. Nil Einne (talk) 16:46, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yblanter demanded to block me IMEDIATELLY after I reported very obvious 3RRN case. He even didn't bother to analyse the case and present the arguments. Therefore I think I'm under personal attack of one of Wikipedia administrators. There is the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User%3AHugo.arg_reported_by_User%3AKe_an_%28Result%3A_Filer_indeffed%29 (10:15, 18 December 2020 (UTC))
I was even accused for "pushing nationalistic POV" (??) Again without any arguments. As far as I know only Ymblanter is sure about or "knows" -- Ke an (talk) 18:30, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For some peculiar reason Ymblanter executes informational atacks on Adolfas Ramanauskas claiming him as Holocaust perpetrator which he never was. The views of Ymblanter are heavily biased and his behaviour for executing personal attacks on those not agreeing with his version of history are outrageous. Wikipedia already was infiltrated by Russian biased editors yet now you have bigger problem with Russian administrators who are judging the history of nations and people. -- Ke an (talk) 19:21, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For clarity, diffs are useful to enable others to easily find some comment, especially if the thread has been moved or archived and to confirm it was really the editor who made the comments. The editor who actually made the comment should not need a diff for confirmation they made the comment unless they genuinely don't remember their comments which is only likely to arise if it's been a while. And yes, you should not need diffs to remind yourself of something you said less than 2 hours ago. Therefore the quote, which was also the entirety of your signed comment, and a link to the thread was sufficient. If someone else had trouble finding it and wanted a diff, that would be fine. For you to demand a diff is silly. Nil Einne (talk) 16:57, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The only silly this is to repeat that someone said without any further research nor evidence and to have some promoter of Russian chauvinism in Wiki administration accusing others in nationalistic POV. -- Ke an (talk) 19:09, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, I did say today that they are pushing Lithuianian nationalistic POV (in the same 3RRN thread), but I can easily find diffs, and the last block was exactly for this. I actually did not expect Ke an to take this defense strategy, since nationalistic POV is trivially to demonstrate, and it is not really defensible.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:01, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Even more - Yblanter in his block request presented more accusations which I would ask to prove as well. -- Ke an (talk) 18:34, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• There was no "block request". None. Nada. Zippo. Zilch. Every time you claim there was a "block request" you demonstrate very clearly why you should remain blocked. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 23:17, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What is the aim of your comment? A message to yourself, I guess. Little help: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User%3AHugo.arg_reported_by_User%3AKe_an_%28Result%3A_Filer_indeffed%29 -- Ke an (talk) 23:46, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]