User talk:Kozlovesred

Welcome![edit]

Hi there! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for your contributions to the 2005 New York City transit strike article, keep up the good work. I hope you like it here and stick around. If you want, you can drop us a note at Wikipedia:New user log to introduce yourself.

A few tips before you start doing a lot of editing:

You might want to take a look at the welcome page. The Wikipedia tutorial also gives a lot of basic info that will help get you oriented on Wikipedia. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or Wikipedia:Where to ask a question.

When you post something on a talk/discussion page, you can sign your name by using three tildes (" ~~~ ") for your username and four (" ~~~~ ") for your username and a timestamp.

Remember to provide an edit summary when editing.

If you ever find yourself with nothing to do on Wikipedia, have a look at the Community Portal, you'll find that there's always something happening.

If you have any questions at all, or comments, don't hesitate to write to me on my talk page.

Happy editing! - Akamad ^{Merry Christmas to all!} 00:42, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

please help revert ultramarine's terribly pov and selectivly factual edits when you see them, he is becoming a terrible pov problem on every communist, soviet, russian, and economy related article. Solidusspriggan 14:41, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, one can tell where his sympathies lie with his name: ultramarine. You probably well know yourself that the Marines are one of, if not THE, most reactionary groupings in the US military! (Kozlovesred)

Agreed, I will help you in your righteous actions in stopping ultramarine's evil ways. his constant edit warring, POV edits, et cetera destroy the beauty of many of the good articles here. GeorgeSears

Kronstadt Rebellion and new sections?[edit]

Emma Goldman criticism and Trotsky's rebuke. Put them both together in a 'philosophical aftermath' type section. ~~I agree it is too POV to have floating quotes separate from context/text (but a quotes section should be just fine)~~. Compositon of Kronstadt rebellion could possibly have own section with views by historical figures including the Lenin and Trotsky. -- max rspct leave a message 22:46, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ultramarine[edit]

I hate ultramarine.Solidusspriggan

Sorry, I was rebuilding my computer, what has there been some attacks on the Lenin article? And has ultramarine been giving you trouble recently? Solidusspriggan 19:44, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Velvetism?[edit]

You may be interested in this: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Velvetism Camillus (talk) 14:14, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Leon Larsson[edit]

Hej, hej. I just wrote a small new article, Leon Larsson, but I feel the language quality of it is lacking. I think someone with native english skills should look over it and edit the necessary parts. So, if you want to and have time, I would be glad. Thanks. Bronks 15:26, 5 May 2006 (UTC) Thanks. Bronks 10:19, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comrade, I'm glad to see you're back. Don't let them block you again. If you want to, feel free to read thise 3 articles I've been working a lot with, on the 3 main Swedish communist leaders: Ture Nerman, Zeth Höglund and Karl Kilbom (the last one still under production.) Yours / Bronks 22:39, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I checked out WSWS, but I don't think I had seen it before. You can reach me at bronkzzz@hotmail.com

as per 172, I am following Wikipedia blocking policy on disruption per Wikipedia:Disruption. You're not getting blocked because of your political orientation per se, your ideology is only relevant insofar as it seems to be the motive for your disruptive behavior. PMA 04:59, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have already reported you, and have asked the senior administrators not only to prevent you from blocking me, but to seriously discuss rescinding your ability to block other users. Your methods don't belong on Wikipedia, but in a police state. I will continue until I see justice against your anti-democratic behavior. Kozlovesred 05:09, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What the hell is a senior administrator? And how did you report him if you're blocked and can't edit outside of your talk page? --Rory096 05:16, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I assumed the administrators I emailed were senior. Maybe I was wrong. But notice that my email isn't blocked, unlike Wikipedia. Kozlovesred 05:22, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. --Rory096

I don't know what you're talking about. And I don't know who you are. And I would stay cool, IF I WAS PERMITTED TO EXERCISE MY DEMOCRATIC RIGHT TO EDIT. Kozlovesred 05:22, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have absolutely no right to edit. You have the right to fork and the right to leave. Good day. --Rory096 05:29, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have absolutely no right to edit? What is this? Stalinist Russia? I'm reporting you as well. This is ridiculous. Kozlovesred 05:39, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Wikipedia is not a democracy; no one has a "democratic right to edit." The role of administrators is to protect constructive editors working on an encyclopedia, and to show disruptive users the door. 172 | Talk 05:52, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive? Can you at least tell me how I was disruptive so I can discontinue it in the future? Kozlovesred 06:21, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

admitted political bias, lack of regard for opposing views and editors, stated intention to "guard" articles related to socialism/communism from opposing views and editors, incivility to other editors and administrators

--Rory096 20:09, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Again, can you at least tell me how I was disruptive? I haven't received any examples, only the complaint again. And "you have absolutely no right to edit. You have the right to fork and the right to leave" is supposed to be "civil?" Kozlovesred 22:45, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The comment "you have absolutely no right to edit. You have the right to fork and the right to leave" is not uncivil; it is a clear, factual statement. No one has the right to edit Wikipedia. In fact, this topic was discussed earlier, leading to the rejection of the "Wikipedia:User Bill of Rights." 172 | Talk 04:50, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

God, I feel like I'm in that movie "Brazil." And what's more, all the right-wing ideologues from the Lenin article! How absolutely delightful! Kozlovesred 05:03, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have been unblocked[edit]

However I suggest you read, understand, and apply Wikipedia:Five pillars otherwise you will end up being banned from wikipedia one way or another.Geni 17:15, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have read and understood and am seeking to apply the Five Pillars, as correctly suggested. But I am still blocked by PMA from editing. Kozlovesred 17:23, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

you got hit by an autoblock should be clear now.Geni 18:05, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kronstadt rebellion[edit]

Please tone down your edit summeries. It is better not to accuse other users of dissruption in them. You also tried to instert the phrase "pointed out". Generaly "claimed", "stated" or "argued" are more in keeping with NPOV.Geni 01:25, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. I will no longer accuse other users of disruption in edit summaries. But I didn't insert "pointed out." It was already there for quite some time, because it was a fact. There was a different social composition between the two uprisings. I will research this further tomorrow. Kozlovesred 02:05, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV doesn't really care. There are two views. They should be presented in the form person l claims z basec on C D E. Person 2 claims z based on y x w. Which one is correct is not something NPOV allows us to state.Geni 03:10, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point. Kozlovesred 07:14, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice one [1]. . Though Cliff paragraph looks unconnected really. If we can get all the sides in and expand the article maybe get it on Mainpage sometime. -- max rspct leave a message 02:29, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Lenin_05d.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Lenin_05d.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:58, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 13:39, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]