Hello, Lute88, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! JoaoRicardo^talk 14:04, 28 December 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Tombeau, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://www.polyhymnion.org/tombeau/, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL), you can comment to that effect on Talk:Tombeau. Then you should do one of the following:

• Make a note on the original website that re-use is permitted under the GFDL and state at Talk:Tombeau where we can find that note; or
• Send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL.

It is also important that the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and that it follows Wikipedia article layout. For more information, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! —Centrx→talk • 15:57, 23 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note that the tombeau article was written by mathiasroesel for both Wiki AND Polyhymnion. Also note that the Polyhymnion Tombeau article is NOT copyrighted, and all material contained therein (includeing score library) is in Public Domain.Lute88 10:37, 28 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you are interested in Ukraine-related themes, you may want to check out the Ukraine Portal, particularly the Portal:Ukraine/New article announcements and Portal:Ukraine/Ukraine-related Wikipedia notice board. The New article announcements board is probably the most important and the most attended one. Please don't forget to anounce there the new articles you create. Adding both boards to your watchlist is probably a good idea.

Finally, in case you are interested, similar boards exist at Russia portal as many editors contribute to topics related to both countries. The respective boards there are: Portal:Russia/New article announcements and Portal:Russia/Russia-related Wikipedia notice board. Of course there are also many other portals at Wikipedia or you may just get right into editing.

Again, welcome! --Irpen 06:01, 25 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Запрошую Вас до вдосконалення української сторiнки uk:Українська музика. Шаблон edited поставив я, редагуйте смiло. --RoteArmee 11:08, 25 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Сію, вію, посіваю, з Новим роком поздоровляю!

На щастя, на здоров'я та на Новий рік,

Щоб уродило краще, ніж торік, -

Жито, пшениця і всяка пашниця,

Коноплі під стелю на велику куделю.

Будьте здорові з Новим роком та з Василем!

Дай, Боже!

Bandurist (talk) 01:13, 14 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I Wam.Lute88 (talk) 23:58, 22 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey there...

I am going through a number of images that have some minor licensing issues. I came across Image:Tor-bor2.jpg which you uploaded. The licensing on this image is not complete as it was uploaded many years ago. I wonder if you could follow the link to the image page and correct the licensing with a GFDL license (or other free license). If you have any questions or issues, please drop me a note on my talk page. Thanks. --Jordan 1972 (talk) 18:58, 11 October 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've left a comment on the talk page of the article. I do not understand why you had to remove my link, what does the category have to do with this (I didn't link to the category!), etc., and I would appreciate if you explained your position. --Jashiin (talk) 10:21, 19 November 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Cetera.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 07:05, 2 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, I've seen this issue before. It would be helpful if you could give me more information about Simon Reznik; where can I find out more about him? Jayjg ^(talk) 01:20, 28 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Russophone info only. He is a longtime Voice of America reporter, historian. Before emigrating he edited the famed book series "LIves of remarkable people" which was THE MAIN biographical book series in the old country.

He has his own article on Russian wiki. Much hated by conspirologists for his articles on Blood Libel in Russia.--Lute88 (talk) 04:53, 28 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What you are doing is violation Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons policy, please read it.

If you label some author (e.g. Vadim Kozhinov) as Judaeo-Masonic conspiracy theorist or proponent of blood libel, you shoud support this by references to this particular author works, not to the articles by some third person.

You probably did not read Reznik's article at all, because if you read it, you would notice that Sokolov is name of investigator, not the Czech town. [1]DonaldDuck (talk) 05:59, 28 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Tor-bor2.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 06:56, 25 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please read out policy on living people, and our policy on pneutrality. All material needs good sourcing and needs to be neutral. We don't accuse people of anti-Semitism, we can only record neutrally that others have done it. If items you post on a biography are reverted citing WP:BLP do not replace them without discussion. Thanks.--Scott Mac (Doc) 01:50, 10 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am treating the subject with kid gloves. He actually fits the adjective ODIOUS, but that is unencyclopedic.Lute88 (talk) 09:21, 10 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are still inserting non-neutral wording into the article. Desist or you will be blocked.--Scott Mac (Doc) 10:57, 10 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are the one to desist. FYI, antisemitism is a neutral term.Lute88 (talk) 19:16, 10 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You should also demonstrate GOOD FAITH by using the discussion page.Lute88 (talk) 19:27, 10 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lute88, please hold off on making further reverts until there's a consensus on the talk page.   Will Beback  talk  20:47, 10 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK, hopefully "Scott" will follow.Lute88 (talk) 20:48, 10 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please see the talk page of Eldridge Street Synagogue and research proper credit for the Restoration of the Eldridge Street Synagogue before making further changes to the page. You will clearly see that Walter Sedovic Architects IS the architect of record for the Restoration of the Eldridge Street Synagogue and removal of their name from the site mis-represents the credit for the restoration. Jayjg has been vandalizing the site for some time. The information on the site is NOT advertising by creating a proper history for the near demise and restoration of this incredible and historically significant building. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Littlefacts (talk • contribs) 17:48, 16 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page Vladimir Vavilov has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Netalarm 16:26, 31 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm sorry about the problem you had, you were clearly acting in good faith -- but would it be possible to translate your sources? We ARE supposed to use English in WP. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 18:09, 31 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Someone is asking to identify two plucked string instruments from photographs, here:

WikiProject Classical music#Can you identify these instruments?

I'm not sure if you're watching that page, so I thought I'd mention it here, since you're one of our experts in this field. --Jashiin (talk) 13:24, 21 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't have a lot of time to watch that page , but I did comment.Lute88 (talk) 14:03, 21 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks! --Jashiin (talk) 17:54, 22 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Lute88! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 1,808 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the ((unreferencedBLP)) tag. Here is the article:

1. Gisburg - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 06:15, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Lute88. You have new messages at Jayjg's talk page.
Message added 21:39, 19 May 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.Reply[reply]

Jayjg ^(talk) 21:39, 19 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Michael Andrec, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Bound Brook and Tom Lee (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:19, 29 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, why you keep removing the information I am adding to Lucien Dulfan Wiki Article? I barely editing it and I see you keep removing all the new info? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adulfan (talk • contribs) 20:08, 21 June 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Lute88. I really appreciate your trying to help, but this is exactly what I was trying to avoid at the Trawniki concentration camp article, which is... to break the list of perpetrators into an avalanche of raw bullets which are out of control and make the whole section useless. I hope you can see my point. The actual names stand no chance in hell for individual biographies. However, they work perfectly as a single block of data. I'm reinstating the original layout. Please forgive me, Poeticbent talk 21:57, 8 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Could you arrange it in columns? It is unreadable...--01:29, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

I found a better solution. Check it out. And, thanks for the feedback. Poeticbent talk 05:46, 10 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited United Scenic Artists, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page AICP (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:54, 10 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Miguel Yisrael may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• *Austria 1676], 2012 <ref>http://www.classiquenews.com/applaudir/lire_article.aspx?article=5645&identifiant=

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:20, 20 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Lute88,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Gary Southwell for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Sulfurboy (talk) 14:15, 23 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gary Southwell, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Sting and Romantic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:57, 26 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear Lute, please do not revert my edits. Please see the discussion page in the Category: Galicia (central Europe). That will be much appreciated.--Martina Moreau (talk) 20:52, 16 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Galicia is part of Ukraine which is in Eastern Europe.--20:57, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Ukraine is a country in Central Europe, more than Eastern Europe due to its culture, history and geographical location, but some argue it is in Eastern Europe. There is no consensus how to classify Ukraine, but Galicia lies central Europe. All other languages on wikipedia classify Galicia as central European as well--Martina Moreau (talk) 21:01, 16 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Lute. I noticed the Sankt Petersburg IP jumper is back adding the same block of text that MVanova previously tried to add. Just FYI I asked Ged UK to consider a longer semi protection. Happy New Year, Sam Sailor ^Sing 10:42, 2 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you! and happy New Year to you too.--Lute88 (talk) 13:50, 2 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Samuel Maykapar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Karaite (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 17 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your upload of File:Bandura classical.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:50, 19 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are invited to join the discussion at User talk:Ged UK#Sam Sailor. Sam Sailor ^Sing 19:48, 26 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Our friend has replied, but it continues to be utterly unsourced and to me gives the impression of a person that may be out of reach. I'm not going to feed the troll. ThEy perform the usual interpretation of 88 in your user name; since ThEy seem to think you and I constitute a kind of cabal, I sometimes wonder why they never jab at the initials in my user name, Sam Sailor. Best, Sam Sailor ^Sing 16:55, 28 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Lute88. I'm certainly not interested in any sort of edit warring in the article about Romanos the Melodist, and will refrain from further reverts. The reason I reverted your revert was the accusation of spam. I respect if you oppose adding Legacy sections with mentions of modern adaptions, etc., even if I disagree. But please just don't throw accusations of spamming. With kind regards, --Danmuz (talk) 16:48, 3 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dakha Brakha, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ukrainian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:52, 16 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is customary to give a reason when editing a WP article. Also, out of curiosity, is the "88" in your nick your age, the year you were born, or the notorious neo-Nazi acronym for "Heil Hitler"? --Mondschein English (talk) 23:14, 20 August 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You apparently don't understand the purpose of a Talk Page at Laz People. If there is disagreement on the main page, then you go to the Talk Page to discuss it, not by continuing to place contested text into the article. You have not proven significance with your references, especially when some are not even in English. You are violating the principles of Wikipedia to not discuss the issue on the Talk Page and trying to make your points through edit summaries. Go the the Talk Page and discuss. You've been on Wikipedia long enough to know better than to ignore discussion on the Talk Page. --Taivo (talk) 17:45, 31 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You apparently don't understand the use of Google-Translate. The Adjarian Laz data is not controvercial, and I don't understand your POV on the subj.--Lute88 (talk) 18:10, 31 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your assistance. If it is a lute community consensus that the gittern is not related to chitarra Italiana then this assertion needs to be discussed and referenced with verifiable historic source material. I have discussed this point with User:Galassi (see user talk section 'Citterns...etc.) whose edits in Wikipedia appear related to a range of similar article subjects. My apologies for the lacunae with regard to edit summaries - I will pay closer attention to this point. User:Pupsikon Pupsikon 20:58, 31 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

They are not related, especially in tuning. You might want to refer to Grove, rather than 100year old dated sources.--Lute88 (talk) 21:37, 31 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is incorrect POV. Please see the following articles in editions of the Lute Society Journal;

Notes on the Cittern, Gittern and Guitar in 16th and 17th century England , John Ward, Vol.21 (1979-81)
The 17th century Gittern and the Englisch Zitterlein, Donald Gill, Vol.35 (1995)
Further Remarks on the Four-Course Guitar, James Tyler, Vol.17 (1975)
The Tunings of the Four-Course French Cittern and of the Four-Course Guitar in the 16th century, Charles Dobson, Ephraim Segerman and James Tyler, Vol.16 (1974)
Also useful - Fourteenth Century Instruments and Tunings: A Treatise by Jean Vaillant?, Christopher Page, Galpin Society Journal, Vol.33, March 1980.
You will find articles in the FoMRHI quarterly journal on a number of issues related to tuning, string materials and manufacture and a website assisting you to obtain copies.
The article in Grove is no doubt useful as a limited introduction to the subject, but (probably by virtue of necessity) somewhat brief and lacks in depth analysis. As far as I am aware it does not support the claim the gittern is not related to it's contemporary forms of chitarra, guitarre, guitarra, etc.. User:Pupsikon Pupsikon 02:14, 1 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Further to preceding - I cannot think of anything apparently less related than a Fender Stratocaster and a René Voboam guitar. POV aside, they are both guitars by virtue of historic development, one leading to the other. User:Pupsikon Pupsikon 04:41, 1 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Would you please provide page ##, as well as direct quotes that claim that Ch.Italiana and Guittern are the same.--Lute88 (talk) 14:58, 8 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good day,

The word amateur is not suitable for biography Shmatko https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mykola_Shmatko - he is not engaged in creativity in their spare time. He is not a an amateur - it's his profession. I would ask you to approach objectively and not write he is amateur. https://ru.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D0%BB%D1%8E%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B5%D0%BB%D1%8C https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%84%D0%B5%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%BB --Rerter 2 (talk) 12:55, 12 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Mykola Shmatko. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
I see you've been blocked for edit warring before, too. Please also familiarise yourself with WP:BLP. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:01, 12 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I first added this article.

1. Information about the exhibitions of the author has been removed.
2. The information of their work at the museum has been removed
3. Give me the information what is an amateur and profession?
4. Why does the user to remove the information about the author? This is his personal desire?

--Rerter 2 (talk) 07:51, 13 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited D. Dominick Lombardi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Zing. 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) 09:00, 7 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Regarding you're reversion, the current wording has to go one way or another; "as well as one of organizers of the genocidal 1932-33 famine in Ukraine."... I don't care if this is true or not, what I do know is that this is not as clear cut as its made out to be. Honestly, before the Ukrainian revolution the fourth largest party (the Communists, which has now been illegalised) opposed such a view and the Party of Regions (which has collapsed because, if we are to generalise, of corruption) didn't support such a position either. And this is just in Ukraine, the historical community is not united either, and the Russians neither seems to support this position (since a large chunk of them also died during the Soviet famine of 1932–33), arguing that it was not only Ukrainians who died, and that the famine was nondiscriminatory in its evil ... As I said, I don't care if this is true or not (or if you believe its true; I don't have a particular position on this issue), but the current wording has to be changed or the sentenced removed for the sake of following Wikipedia's policy of neutrality. --TIAYN (talk) 23:54, 15 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We relay what them sources say, per WP:RS. Hence the wording.--Lute88 (talk) 01:31, 16 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

But other sources disagree, hence WP neutrality rule. One narrative can't dominate other narratives, thats the whole point of WP neutrality. If this is you're point of view, I will either remove it or seriously reword it. --TIAYN (talk) 09:49, 16 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Which sources deny GP's involvement?--Lute88 (talk) 16:09, 16 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You reverted my edit w/o any explanation. I'm sorry but I would like one as I disagree with this revert. The sentence says "in French, every country needs an article except Israe/ël". It means every name of country needs an article except one and this one, the one w/o article, is "Israël" as we're talking from a french name, not of the english corresponding name. You understood as if the sentence was " in French, every country needs an article except the one we, english speaking people, call "Israel" but this is not what is written. BIRDIE ^® 22:19, 25 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article is about Ukraine, not French spelling intricacies. Irrelevant. --Lute88 (talk) 02:07, 26 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The sentence is about articles in French country names. If it was just about Ukraine, why don't you erase the whole sentence that speaks about articles in French and German countries' names? Erase everything, don't stop in the middle of the way. If you don't have anything more productive to do, I suggest you either to wake up or to go back to your semi-retirement as you seem to be still unable to understand simple facts like making a name match with the rest of the sentence. BIRDIE ^® 17:15, 26 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, it is not about articles. It is about the name of one country. Please keep your social difficulties out of wiki.--Lute88 (talk) 20:18, 26 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Slavic neopaganism, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Rod and Slavianism. 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) 08:55, 28 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Lute 88: Wrong! It's just WP: I don't like it. You may write "Socrates has said that...", but not "George Soros has said that...". If you don't like the fact that he is a businessman, propose an other way to introduce him. If you don't have one, I'll reinstate my edit. Againstdisinformation (talk) 16:51, 22 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Soros needs no "introduction", especially insinuating anything. He also has HIS OWN wiki-article, which introduces him nicely.--Lute88 (talk) 17:09, 22 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Lute 88: Wrong again! You are the one who is making insinuations, and not particularly pleasant ones at that. Do you have anything against American businessmen? Myriads of people have a wki-article, that doesn't mean no introduction is necessary. For instance, which is better "Joachim Gauck has said..." or "Johachim Gauck, Germany's President has said..."? Besides, my introduction is taken word for word from "HIS OWN wiki-article, which introduces him nicely". So? Againstdisinformation (talk) 17:46, 22 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, you could at least have the courtesy to inform me when you revert two of my edits. Your insistence to state that Anna Palitkovska was murdered on Putin's birthday would be laughable if it was not a tragic event. Why not write "on Desmond Tutu's birthday", it was his birthday too after all. Or is it that you have a hidden agenda and you want to insinuate the grotesque suggestion that it was a present for Putin? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Againstdisinformation (talk • contribs) 21:00, 31 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please, stop your WP: WAR. I would hate to have to report you, it goes against my nature. However, your violations of WP: NPOV are damaging Wikipedia and something will have to be done if you continue. Againstdisinformation (talk) 02:07, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WP:NPA. You have already been reported.--Lute88 (talk) 11:19, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I saw discussion on the talk page. Well, this is an obvious "disruption only" account engaged in WP:SOAP, WP:FORUM and POV-pushing on almost every page. I wonder why he has not been blocked yet. He received an AE warning and therefore ripe for WP:AE. I know these subjects and might be willing to help with sourcing, but would rather stay away of the page for now. My very best wishes (talk) 00:57, 8 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

One has to, sadly, sooner or later.--Lute88 (talk) 22:16, 8 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I tend to believe that he simply does not know anything at all about this subject (he called her "Anna Palitkovska" on your talk page above), but it does not make this user less disruptive, in my opinion. My very best wishes (talk) 05:18, 9 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

He (possibly she) should have been Digwuren'ed long time ago.--Lute88 (talk) 10:44, 9 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Againstdisinformation (talk) 02:58, 8 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Lute88. I've been asked to review the situation around the Ivan Fyodorov (printer) article, in which you are involved. While undoing other people's edits is often a part of normal editing process, it is only considered acceptable behavior when it is done with an explanation of reasons and in a civil manner. This first edit of yours technically meets these criteria (although one could wish that you elaborated on your reasoning in a little more detail), but this other one is absolutely unacceptable and is actually the reason which prompted that user to seek administrative input. When your edit is undone by more than one person, the proper course of action is to take the discussion to the talk page, not to resort to subtly worded passive-aggressive comments.

I am restoring the article to its July version. You are very welcome to start a discussion on the article's talk page, where you can explain the reasons you believe the current wording is unacceptable. I will also prompt the other party that they will need to participate in that discussion if the issue is to be resolved. Before posting anything, please also reacquaint yourself with the civility guidelines, so you are absolutely sure which kinds of comments are acceptable and which are not. I'm putting this article on my watchlist but am hoping that no further administrative intervention will be necessary.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); September 25, 2015; 13:25 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Anatole Krasnyansky 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/Anatole Krasnyansky until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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..-- Toddy1 (talk) 14:02, 31 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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) 13:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Did you bother to read the edit summary or look at the context before you reverted the edit? I don't think so, because the change you undid fixed a quotation from a source. Please be more careful in the future. Thank you. 66.87.114.163 (talk) 02:19, 19 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am mystified by how that edit came out. That was not what I did. I did a few citations, that is all. Thanks for reverting. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:21, 28 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No problem!))--Lute88 (talk) 15:22, 29 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Are you seriously suggesting that the Knesset is not a reliable source for details about its members? Number 57 19:53, 3 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Apparently so. It is not scholarly, and it contradicts the scholarly info.--Lute88 (talk) 19:59, 3 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The fact that it's occasionally incorrect does not make it an unreliable source. Number 57 20:38, 3 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

With only 2 terse sentences - it is not even a source.--Lute88 (talk) 21:04, 3 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think you need to familiarise yourself with the website. It contains far more information on him than that. Number 57 21:12, 3 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I looked: nothing clickable.--Lute88 (talk) 21:38, 3 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Click on "Public Activities". Number 57 22:01, 3 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Azov Battalion, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oligarch. 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) 09:33, 28 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kazakhstan is not included in the death tolls for the Holodomor. It was heavily populated by Kazakhs and a minority of Russians. Please stop reverting my edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.195.91.50 (talk) 22:56, 10 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. The above is insufficient to explain why you object to my edits. Specifically, it does not address the two points in my edit summary: "some don't?" and "repetition of 1st sentence". zzz (talk) 17:20, 11 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Take it to the article talk page.--Lute88 (talk) 18:05, 11 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In future, please note that editors are obliged to provide an informative edit summary when using rollback to revert good faith edits that include an informative edit summary. Thanks zzz (talk) 18:26, 11 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please do not mislead in edit summaries, and refrain from disruptive editing practises such as deleting entire sections from articles on nationalist's grounds. On 10:10, 22 April 2016‎ you removed historical background with numerous book citations from Antisemitism in Ukraine (-5,707)‎. You falsely claimed that the section was a WP:POVFORK, even though such FORK could not exist, because there's no other article in Wikipedia devoted to this subject. Book citations from reputable historians are not WP:POV. Please do not try to force me to have to spend considerable amount of my time writing a report about such behaviour. Please respond to my post at Talk:Antisemitism in Ukraine#22 April 2016 new section with your concerns. I'm here to improve Wikipedia's coverage of world history, not to fight, so please don't get me wrong; my intention is not to condemn, but to inform in an neutral way about what happened during World War II. Thanks in advance, Poeticbent talk 15:01, 22 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Lute88, edit-warring and pro-Ukrainian POV pushing, as promised. Please comment there.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:20, 12 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[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 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.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Brunetto Latini, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Sodomite and Blasphemer. 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) 11:31, 14 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Can you take a look here? --XXN, 13:04, 14 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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 Paul Wexler (linguist) page, your edit caused a URL 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) 00:25, 20 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I noticed that you might be regularly editing this page: The Holodomor. I am unable to determine the accuracy of this edit made by an IP [2], I am wondering if you take a look to see if it is accurate and if it is not please revert it. Thanks. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 07:00, 18 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I couldn't figure out which diffs are questionable.--Lute88 (talk) 21:50, 18 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Lute88. 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. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.6.41.228 (talk) 21:19, 18 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Lute88, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia, such as Babanaboat2882 (talk · contribs). Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who use multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Thank you. Exemplo347 (talk) 00:00, 8 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm not. Banababoat seems to be a newbie, feel free to contact a checkuser.--Lute88 (talk) 01:18, 8 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Then how do you explain re-adding something that the other editor wrote, word-for-word, as soon as I had reverted them? It makes no sense. Exemplo347 (talk) 06:17, 8 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How about this: you revert was a good-faith error?--Lute88 (talk) 12:04, 8 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Read up on WP:GOODFAITH.--Lute88 (talk) 12:05, 8 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My reversion wasn't an error. Neither was my placing of the Conflict of Interest tag on the article, which I have replaced. Are you D. Dominick Lombardi? Do you have any connection to this person? I ask because the image in the article is self-taken and you uploaded it, saying that it was your work. Wikipedia's WP:COI policy requires that you declare your conflict of interest - it is not optional. Exemplo347 (talk) 12:13, 8 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm not Lombardi, which would not have precluded me from knowing him in real life. He is a public person. --Lute88 (talk) 12:18, 8 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So... do you have a conflict of interest? What is your personal connection to him? After all, that picture is your own work isn't it? Exemplo347 (talk) 12:21, 8 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My interest in the subject is not a COI.--Lute88 (talk) 12:23, 8 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My question is quite clear and I shouldn't need to repeat it. Do you know him personally or do you not? Exemplo347 (talk) 12:25, 8 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have told you that I'm not him. I'm not related to him either, and the rest is irrelevant, and within the rules here. This is my final answer.--Lute88 (talk) 13:10, 8 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please be sure not to revert valid edits when attempting to remove vandalism from an article, as you did here. Thanks. Nihlus 17:02, 13 November 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:MenofTomorrow reported by User:Toddy1 (Result: ). Your name is mentioned because the user in question reverted an edit by you.-- Toddy1 (talk) 20:20, 1 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Lute88. 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)Reply[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Dasuprmastr reported by User:Toddy1 (Result: ). Your name is mentioned because the user in question reverted an edit by you.-- Toddy1 (talk) 20:39, 20 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello there. You contributions to the Taras Bulba-Borovets article are very helpful and insightful, but there is a disruptive editor there deleting our posts and using false information. If you could add to the discussion on the talk page so we could reach a consensus I would appreciate it. Thank you very much. 71.121.248.91 (talk) 21:29, 13 April 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi You used rollback [3] not according to the Wikipedia:Rollback#When_to_use_rollback.Please rv yourself. Shrike (talk) 15:48, 29 June 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Lute88. 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[reply]

I noticed you have been a member of the Wikiproject Musical Instruments. There are very few past members that appear to be active on the project, and I have begun to work on past articles, as well as create new content. I wondered if you would mind assessing the musical instrument articles that I create (nearly all stubs). I don't feel right evaluating my own work. A recent example would be Kse diev. Jacqke (talk) 03:07, 20 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. According to the first line of the lead of the article "Ukrainian literature is literature written in the Ukrainian language", which automatically excludes everything that was written before the 18th century, or if we stretch it a bit the middle of the 17th century, because before then there was no Ukrainian language. The Ukrainian language evolved slowly, over a period of 300 or so years, from the southern dialect of the Ruthenian language, with the other main dialects of that language becoming the Belarusian and Rusyn languages. Meaning that whatever was written during the time of the Kievan Rus' most definitely wasn't written in the Ukrainian language, and thus doesn't belong in the article. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 16:57, 29 September 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Italian literature much predates the country, and so does Flemish, and many other literatures.--Aristophile 17:25, 29 September 2019 (UTC)Aristophile 17:03, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Yes, but those articles don't explicitly limit the scope of the article to literature in a single language, as Ukrainian literature does (and I'm not trying to exclude things that predate the country of Ukraine, only things that predate the Ukrainian language). Your edit summary in the second revert, pointing to WP:REDFLAG, was utterly ridiculous, BTW, there's absolutely no "red flag" in what I removed, and everything I did was explained in my edit summaries. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 17:16, 29 September 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Languages and literatures do not develop overnight, and Ruthenian and Ukrainian are closely related to each other. You would need a lot of consensus.--Aristophile 17:25, 29 September 2019 (UTC)17:23, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

The earliest possible date for a Ukrainian language is the mid 17th century, during the Cossack Hetmanate, as you would know if you knew anything about languages. Nice try, BTW, using a fake signature to make it seem as if you have support from others, and then removing my note calling your bluff... - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 17:38, 29 September 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What do you mean/insinuate by "fake signature"???--Aristophile 18:00, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

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) 00:06, 19 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey, You reverted my edit to Kwitra. Can I ask why? I made what I thought was a constructive edit? Thanks. Jo Dusepo (talk) 22:42, 7 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You add what appear to be images of instruments made by you. These as such constitute selfpromo.--Aristophile (talk) 22:51, 7 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

For discussions you should use the corresponding page, not my personal one.--Aristophile (talk) 22:57, 7 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you can not compare the quality of sources independently [4], I will probably present you for the topic ban, which is long overdue.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:14, 6 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Lute88: The way the notability works, is its 2-state gig. Somebody posts, and them somebody with more experience checks and then removes it, if they think the subject is notable. The subject is notable here. Also you have reposted the advert tag. It is far an advert as its possible to get. It not an advert in shape or form. scope_creep^Talk 15:11, 17 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It was an advert until it was cleaned up recently, with a lot of peacock language.--Aristophile (talk) 16:49, 17 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That may be the case, but there is no promotion in the article, so it doesn't need an advert tag. scope_creep^Talk 17:30, 17 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[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) 01:21, 24 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Are you saying you know with certainty where Edin Karamozov is at this moment? And you want everyone else to know? And he will always be there? And that's why it should be in Wikipedia? No? Then stop reverting.
Vmavanti (talk) 16:12, 5 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please have a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Weber. If you would like to overturn the decision reached there, please raise it at WP:DRV - don't just paste a bunch stuff over an article about a completely differnt Mark Weber. Thanks, -- Y not? 17:15, 30 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is a different individual with the same name, so I think there shouldn't be a problem. The previous one wasn't notable.--Aristophile (talk) 00:37, 31 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That was 12 years ago.--Aristophile (talk) 00:38, 31 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So we have a conundrum: a notable deleted, and non notable kept. We cannot start a new page with this name. It looks like changing the content is the only option.--Aristophile (talk) 00:57, 31 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The one I marked for deletion, let the "prod" process play out. As for the Holocaust one, there was consensus to delete at AfD... do you think that consensus should be revisited because you have new reliable sources? I don't have a view on that, you're welcome to pursue that if you think the conversation should be reopened. -- Y not? 13:41, 31 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear Lute88, I can see you had reverted my change in this article. Since I have started the discussion about this change on June 19 (Talk:Dark Eyes (Russian song)#Sindo Garay, more than two weeks ago), would you mind explaining the reason for your action there? Thank you in advance! Викидим (talk) 22:46, 7 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Lute88! Your additions to Our father is Bandera, Ukraine is our mother! have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — SamX [talk · contribs] 17:43, 26 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The text in question is anonymous, and thus in PD. Do you have any info otherwise?--Aristophile (talk) 19:09, 26 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Lute88,

I am not sure I understand your edits here and the subsequent revert. The numbers you put up appear neither in the provided sources, nor in the article you linked to, as the total number of Jews killed in Khmelitsky's campaigns. Please explain your edits on the talk page.

Thanks, Ynhockey ^(Talk) 23:45, 5 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK, in that case I left the main article link and only changed the casualty figures to what the sources actually say, including the source in the other article. —Ynhockey ^(Talk) 14:46, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Ilya Repin, 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) 17:51, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I fixed your cut/paste move. Next time, please use the "move" function, thanks — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:33, 16 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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) 00:24, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An automated process has detectedthat when you recently edited Ivan Iskra, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Renegade.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:49, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]