User talk:GizzyCatBella/Archives/2022/August

Icewhiz

Hi, I saw your ping on the SPI, but not until it had already been archived, so responding here. The CU data was quite strong indicating that PrisonerB is not Icewhiz. And when I looked at the behavioral evidence presented, I wasn't convinced there was anything that was strong enough to contradict the CU data. If they really are a sock, they will probably provide more evidence, and you can file a new case then. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:44, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

@RoySmith Thanks Roy. - GizzyCatBella🍁 17:56, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

thank you

thank you for helping to remove the cherry-picked/unsourced phrases on the Polish villages. I searched and it still exists in a lot of places. Jeff McRedmond (talk) 13:53, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Marcelus' unceasing problematic behaviour

Examples of this are:

• On August 10, Marcelus removed the compromise solution you had created on April 5 to solve a dispute that was happening between Marcelus and I in March/April.
• On August 4, Marcelus moved Antanas Chodakauskas to Antoni Chodakowski without discussion, despite such moves having caused controversy prior and thus necessarily needing to have discussions. Furthermore, there is no English-language source on either Google Books or Google Scholar where "Antoni Chodakowski" is used for the person, whereas the Lithuanian Antanas Chodakauskas is more prevalent, as I demonstrate on the article's talk page. In addition, Marcelus systematically replaced Lithuanian names with Polish ones - including renaming Antanas Smetona to Antoni Smetona and adding Polish-Lithuanian instead of Lithuanian nobleman, the latter without any sources.

I am writing this on your talk page, because you were involved in assuring that compromise on Poles in Lithuania, and because just like you, I want a definitive end to this, but Marcelus' behaviour precludes a peaceful resolution or any agreement, because he keeps breaking Wikipedia's rules and going against compromises he previously de facto accepted. Cukrakalnis (talk) 16:41, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

I’ll look at those - GizzyCatBella🍁 18:45, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Antoni Smetona was a mistake, I just replaced all metnions of "Antanas" with "Antoni", didn't notice there was Smetona also :) I didn't removie any compromise colution from Poles in Lithuania, I just still working on the article, and removed redundant, repetitive passages. Such was the mention in the chapter on independent Lithuania, that most Lithuanian Poles are of Lithuanian origin (so "in reality" "confused Lithuanians"), it was redundant and completely incompatible with this chapter. Besides, moreover it is a repetition of the nationalist anti-Polish theories of Lithuanian chauvinists such as Zinkevičius.Marcelus (talk) 19:08, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

The compromise solution were these words: some are of Lithuanian descent ([1]).

In an edit on August 10, Marcelus removed the final form of the compromise sentence, which was The situation of the Polish minority in Lithuania, with many of them having Lithuanian ancestry, has caused occasional tensions in Polish-Lithuanian relations during the late 20th and early 21st centuries (didn't include the numerous sources for brevity and clarity) The sentence was clearly relevant to the section "In independent Lithuania".

Intensely disliking the statements of a certain professor does not mean that the professor is what you deem him to be and you should refrain from such language considering MOS:LABEL: Value-laden labels (... various examples ...) may express contentious opinion and are best avoided unless widely used by reliable sources to describe the subject, in which case use in-text attribution.. Cukrakalnis (talk) 19:56, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

There was no compromise it was only proposed by GizzyCatBella, not something we agreed upon. Nonetheless this part is irrelevant for the chapter mentioned, as you can see the text is better without it. Zinkevičius is a chauvinistic pig and I won't pretend he isn't Marcelus (talk) 20:16, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

You not removing that excerpt in the following weeks after doing so repeatedly in a matter of days counts as a de facto agreement which ended that edit war. That sentence is relevant to the chapter and your denial of that is disappointing. Insulting and dehumanizing the internationally acclaimed Lithuanian professor Zigmas Zinkevičius reveals your unwillingness to follow Wikipedia rules and manual of style. Lack of such basic human courtesy shows your unsuitability to edit Wikipedia.--Cukrakalnis (talk) 21:33, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Say what you want, I didn't agree on anything. And this sentence isn't relevant. And Zinkevičius is what he is Marcelus (talk) 21:42, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

@Cukrakalnis - some are of Lithuanian descent - I’m %100 sure that’s true (logic). Do you have any source that say that? I think you do. - GizzyCatBella🍁 18:11, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Cukrakalnis PS - don’t use Zinkevičius to source that, use someone else. - GizzyCatBella🍁 18:13, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Indeed, there are sources for that (all of which were removed by Marcelus) -

• Budreckis, Algirdas (1967). "Etnografinės Lietuvos Rytinės ir Pietinės Sienos". Karys.
• Šapoka, Adolfas (2013). Raštai. Vol. I – Vilniaus Istorija (in Lithuanian). Vilnius: Edukologija.
• Clemens, Walter C. (1991). Baltic Independence and Russian Empire. St. Martin's Press. p. 150. ISBN 0-312-04806-8.

References

Cukrakalnis (talk) 09:27, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Hazard of overusing quotes

Hey Gizzy, I saw that a few of the articles you've worked on have too many lengthy quotations in the citations. While quotations are fine, some of the things I've seen are quite excessive–upwards of 200 words. Using too much of copyrighted material (WP:NFC) can get you in trouble. I'm here to ask you to remove these excessive quotations from what you've worked on (50 words is what I would consider a limit). Pointing to the right pages is enough to cite, and using {{rp}} is also good for referencing multiple different pages using the same base <ref>. SWinxy (talk) 21:53, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

@SWinxy 50 words is what I would consider a limit. What policy says 50 words limit quotations in the citations? - GizzyCatBella🍁 00:15, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

read this GizzyCatBella🍁 00:19, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

and this - GizzyCatBella🍁 00:25, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Not a hard limit, but having multiple hundred-word long quotations in articles is still excessive regardless of what my preference is. SWinxy (talk) 00:29, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Consider adding quoted material to the referenced citation directly, rather than adding the quoted text to the article. GizzyCatBella🍁 00:29, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

It says right there. I need to study that more. Will keep it in mind. - GizzyCatBella🍁 00:30, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Where do you see anything about quotations in the citations in the link you posted above? --> [2] - GizzyCatBella🍁 00:32, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

2. Excessively long copyrighted excerpts. SWinxy (talk) 01:14, 23 August 2022 (UTC)