firebrick Jimbo Wales (2005) [17]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
dark jungle green Jimbo Wales (2005) [18]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
dark green Jimbo Wales (2005) [19]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
dark blue Jimbo Wales (2005) [20]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
dark candy apple Jimbo Wales (2005) [21]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
dark magenta Jimbo Wales (2005) [22]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
cyber yellow Jimbo Wales (2005) [23]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
corn silk Jimbo Wales (2005) [24]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
cornell red Jimbo Wales (2005) [25]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
crimson glory Jimbo Wales (2005) [26]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
cool black Jimbo Wales (2005) [27]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
catalina blue Jimbo Wales (2005) [28]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
carmine red Jimbo Wales (2005) [29]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
carmine red Jimbo Wales (2005) [30]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
carmine red Jimbo Wales (2005) [31]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
carmine red Jimbo Wales (2005) [32]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
carmine red Jimbo Wales (2005) [33]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
carmine red Jimbo Wales (2005) [34]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
castleton green Jimbo Wales (2005) [35]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
carmine Jimbo Wales (2005) [36]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
caput mortuum Jimbo Wales (2005) [37]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
byzantium Jimbo Wales (2005) [38]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
bulgarian rose Jimbo Wales (2005) [39]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
cadmium yellow Jimbo Wales (2005) [40]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
bluebonnet Jimbo Wales (2005) [41]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
blue pantone Jimbo Wales (2005) [42]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
bitter lime Jimbo Wales (2005) [43]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
alabama crimson Jimbo Wales (2005) [44]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
dark powder blue Jimbo Wales (2005) [45]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
cornell red Jimbo Wales (2005) [46]: "We make the Internet not suck." - Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
"What actually happens here are AE admins playing on the side of smarter violators simply because they play by the rules. (deletedsentence) Sorry for speaking in terms of information wars, but I think this is exactly what happens here, and this is the "war" Wikipedia can never win, meaning it will always be used for promoting some kind of political propaganda. This problem can be alleviated by supporting long-term contributors against the rules per WP:IAR. I am making this comment only because I do not edit any longer in this subject area." deleted partial statement of My very best wishes #FFFDD0
From my reading this appeal & the original blocking & reversal discussion, this vestigial sanction is analogous to Fruit of the poisonous tree (lingering penalty from an overturned bad decision by an administrator the "fruit"). In real world, sanctions don't last ad infinitum, and in any case these IMO R clearly punitive, contrary to stated purpose4 sanctions. Parole & even probation expire. Kindalike judgment was overturned but judge neglected to vacate the sentence.
Jimbo Wales (2005) [47]: "We make the Internet not suck."
Paavo273 (2014): "Lack of accountability and oversight of administrators makes Wikipedia suck."
Lvivske appears IME to be one of few mainstays in building Ukraine-related content in the encyclopaedia, e.g., encyclopaedia, e.g., [48] and
[49]. The few times our paths have crossed (he edits a lot more articles and creates a lot more content than I or most editors), Lvivske has been very helpful, e.g., I was working on an article when the founder of this site himself one day edited it. I mentioned this fact on the talk page and asked generally for some info. The very next day, Lvivske provided THIS. Another time I and some other editors were frustrated an article was so out of date it hardly even mentioned the reality on the ground in Ukraine. I posted this talk comment and Lvivske was the first to respond with a helpful and encouraging link, which may have been a catalyst 4transforming the article. I could cite many other examples where Lvivske is both a major sourced-content contributor and a help to less involved, less knowledgeable editors.
I’ve seen last few months what Alex Bakharev par2 & Volunteer Marek Rtalking about. Someone has to actually write quality content and volume in order 4 the subject area 2B covered in something approaching encyclopaedic format. Paavo273 (talk) 21:28, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
New comment: I agree w/ the now lined out deleted remarks of User:My very best wishes. ‘Was elegantly stated, too. IC wikilawyering--esp. disregard4 core purpose of Wikipedia. In admin. Callanec's 1st diff, he points to Lvivske's UNcontroversial correcting obvious error. ‘Seems more interested in sticking it 2Lvivske than having a factually accurate encyclopaedia2 "administer." Hamstring your core editors in their subject areas and see what happens… It ‘BE happening. IC wikilawyering in admin. Sandstein's & DP's remarks2. AFAIK WP has no statute of limitations for correcting neglected reversible error. This isn’t court, Yer Honors.
"What actually happens here are AE admins playing on the side of smarter violators simply because they play by the rules. (deletedsentence) Sorry for speaking in terms of information wars, but I think this is exactly what happens here, and this is the "war" Wikipedia can never win, meaning it will always be used for promoting some kind of political propaganda. This problem can be alleviated by supporting long-term contributors against the rules per WP:IAR. I am making this comment only because I do not edit any longer in this subject area." deleted partial statement of My very best wishes
What actually happens here are AE admins playing on the side of smarter violators simply because they play by the rules. This is the reason I agree with Alex and Marek that restriction should be lifted. On the other hand, I am sure the restriction will be soon reinstated because even an experienced editor (like Lvivske) will quickly be "eliminated" by his content opponents if they want. Sorry for speaking in terms of information wars, but I think this is exactly what happens here, and this is the "war" Wikipedia can never win, meaning it will always be used for promoting some kind of political propaganda. This problem can be alleviated by supporting long-term contributors against the rules per WP:IAR. I am making this comment only because I do not edit any longer in this subject area.
*Strongly oppose -- While "revolution" may carry for some certain POV connotations, this suggestion is IMO exponentially worse. There is and was a huge amount more going on than VY's overthrow.
As some, including journalistic sources, have said, this is/was a struggle for the soul of UA. Overall, POV v. NPOV is a slippery thing. What may seem objective to one may be just the opposite to another. (Not entirely different from one man's terrorist is another's patriot.) alkdsjf;alsdjfkas;l a;ldkjfa;ldkfjasd;lk ads;lkfjasd;lkjasd;flkj a;lkdjasdl;fkjasd;lkjfa a;lsdjfkas;dlkfjas;dlkjfas;ldkfja;lsdkfja;lsfjkdas;ljkfda;lskjfdas;lfjdkas;lkjd klajds;lfjsadlfkjsadf;lkjsadf;lkasjdf;lksajdf;lkasjfd;lsakdjf;sladkjfas;ldkfjas;ldkfjas;ldkfjas;ldfjkas;ldkfjas;ldkfjas;ldkfjas;dlkfjsad;lkjf
small Georgia-font a b c x y z IMO a better choice would be to merge this article back to Euromaidan as tagged at the top of this article. I think we can all agree, unless you've followed UA news the last few months, EM carries no POV connotations at all. It's a blank slate, as in, "WTF is Euromaidan?" As I have noted elsewhere, VY was democratically elected, but there's not much else democratic about him or his regime. There is a well-established ECONOMIC tyranny at least, that rank and file Ukrainians have not been able to throw off. It didn't originate with VY, but it sure GREW.
The sources support, and I hope we can all agree, this guy got very very rich beyond any government salary he ever earned. Paavo273 (talk) 23:33, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
I do not at all question User:Charles Essie's GF. (Neither do I question, in many cases, the GF of the neo-Bolshevists, Putinists, and neo-Stalinists who tirelessly exploit the anyone-can-edit format of WP to Bolshevize English Wikipedia as a whole.) CE's point comparing VY to Morsi in Egypt is well-taken, but there are huge differences along with the similarity, e.g., this is largely a political and economic matter, whereas at least as I understood the Egypt "overthrow," it was more of a religion/freedom of expression thing.
Tom Joad: "I'll be all around in the dark - I'll be everywhere. Wherever you can look - wherever there's a fight, so hungry people can eat, I'll be there. Wherever there's a cop beatin' up a guy, I'll be there. I'll be in the way guys yell when they're mad. I'll be in the way kids laugh when they're hungry and they know supper's ready, and when the people are eatin' the stuff they raise and livin' in the houses they build - I'll be there, too." Steinbeck, The Grapes of Wrath
A sample from my tangle with the WP Sovietist elite, presented here for your edification on its one-year anniversary
A. I have been abused by Admin Future Perfect at Sunrise and this process. New allegations "walls of text" (my single copying of a discussion exactly on point from another talk site to try stimulate discussion that wasn't happening at CW talk) and "blindly copied" and "filibustering" are the latest in a long list of various false allegations made to kill my attempt at meaningful engagement on the merits--including OR, synthesis, tag teaming, dubious source, canvassing, sock puppet (‘had to look that one up), etc.
B. I and other users trying to provide balance and proportion to the infobox result--which is all this is about--have been attacked, threatened, ridiculed, and finally squelched. Just f/ex.,
YMB29: (to another user) "You still lack knowledge about this topic. It looks like you are only here to annoy me". -YMB29 (talk) 17:44, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
Paul Siebert: "Regarding [other user's] proposal, that is nonsense. All (or almost all) wars end with armistice or peace treaties. Playing Captain Obvious with the only goal to conceal the truth (namely, that the USSR won) is hardly acceptable."
Fut.Perf.: (to another user) "Please stop the bickering. Yes, it's "our" policy – it is mine, it is yours, and it is also Paul Siebert's, because we are all Wikipedians, for better or worse, so we all have the right to call it "ours". Now please either say something constructive on the topic, or say nothing at all." Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:13, 8 February 2013 (UTC
I propose, esteemed learned administrators, that these and so very much else on CW talk page in the last ten days and last seven YEARS demonstrate nothing like good faith or an effort to resolve a disagreement; on the contrary, it is the embodiment of the spirit of totalitarianism and terror in action.
WP "Newspeak," part of AdminFP's lingo to refer to power he asserted over editorial content and eliminating whatever fledgling opposition existed to the Soviet view is apropos word choice as it is an allusion to Orwell's depiction of the quality of information exchange in the Soviet Union.
QUERY: When did the Soviet version of history become the mainstream one and the only accepted one at WP? I am NOT against inclusion of the Soviet viewpoint, and it is well-represented in the CW article, but why is that the one favored as mainstream? Why the short circuiting of discussion on the merits and now of democratic process? I don't think this is what the great one himself had in mind for his People's Encyclopaedia.
Specifically rel the recent assertions "(Since the diaries you are referring to are in Finnish or Russian, they hardly can be used to support even descriptive statements, because the ability to read Russian or Finnish is a special knowledge for an ordinary English Wikipedia user.)" "...[A]ny attempts to revert me based on "no consensus" will be reported." Specifically general WikiBullying Form #2 (fifth line) "giving the perception of power aimed at the entire Wikipedia community at large." Best,
