 |
|
 | This user is aware of the designation of the following as contentious topics:
|
Occupation of the Baltic states
[edit]Sveiki! I saw you did this saying it did not reflect the source. I think it is correct. From the book:
"The very large capital investments made by the Soviet Union in the postwar era were an indication of the importance attached by the economic planners to the Baltic region as a source of energy resources and a wide range of industrial and agricultural products."
"It must always be kept in mind, however, that the Baltic peoples had to pay a high price for the forms of modernisation favoured by their Soviet masters. The initial priorities of Soviet economic policy in Estonia were the reactivation of manufacturing industry and the expansion of the oil shale industry. The latter had been one of the most successful industrial enterprises of independent Estonia. After the war it was 'developed forcefully and wastefully' by the Soviets, mainly as a source of energy for Leningrad."
TamsaVakaras (talk) 20:40, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- TamsaVakaras: 1) It wasn't me who reverted that change. 2) The paragraphs you quote indeed mention that there was an intent to use the Baltics as a source of energy, but I don't think we can conclude that it was solely and the only purpose. So, we can tune the wording to reflect that. I suggest you bring this up in the talk page of the article itself, quoting these paragraphs (again); feel free to also make a change to the article, pointing out that you presented the citations in the talk page. -- Mindaur (talk) 20:55, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oh I made a mistake, I thought you made all of the edits. I will do as you suggest. TamsaVakaras (talk) 15:38, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
February 2025
[edit]
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to IPS/UPS, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Please stop edit warring with User:DA HK on the IPS/UPS article. Take it to the Talk page and develop consensus first before making such major changes to the article. N2e (talk) 14:57, 17 February 2025 (UTC) N2e (talk) 14:57, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- @N2e: I already engaged in the relevant article's talk page. I suggest you bring your point there. -- Mindaur (talk) 15:03, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you for your comment. I have edited the Talk page, and made the same suggestion there. Discuss/debate the article improvement on the Talk page, and gain consensus, before making major reversions to the main page; especially, before doing so three times with large reversions in just a few hours. N2e (talk) 15:21, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 18
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lithuanian Riflemen's Union, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lithuanian.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:57, 18 March 2025 (UTC)
Notice of Fringe Theories Noticeboard discussion
[edit]
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Great Lithuanians. Thank you. -- Pofka 19:33, 12 October 2025 (UTC)
Introduction to contentious topics
[edit]You have recently edited a page related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia's norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
- adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
- comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
- follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
- comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
- refrain from gaming the system.
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.
I expect you were already aware of this, but don't appear to have ever received a formal notice. signed, Rosguill talk 21:53, 26 October 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, I have
{{ds/aware}}at the top of my talk page, but no problem. -- Mindaur (talk) 22:11, 26 October 2025 (UTC)