User talk:Lovok Sovok

Yuvelirtorg VINITI ASU [Cybernetics]

Communist terrorism

I noticed that you recently voted against renaming the Communist terrorism article. Could you please provide a source that defines/explains what communist terrorism is. TFD (talk) 00:34, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

You should read the sources provided for Left-wing terrorism. They say that left-wing terrorism is also called "Marxist-Leninist terrorism". Although anarchism is also left-wing, it is grouped as "anarchist terrorism". Actions by left-wing special interest groups are classified as "special interest terrorism". This is the terminology used by experts on terrorism, and my opinion is that we should use their categories unless we can find experts that use different categories. TFD (talk) 21:24, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

I am not trying to be difficult. I think that we should avoid labelling individuals and groups as terrorism, but see nothing wrong with calling some acts as acts of terrorism. Where there is consensus in the literature, I see no reason to qualify statements. I see you have started the speical interest terrorism article, which I believe is important. It needs to be expanded and needs more sources. However the right and left wing articles need to be expanded as well. TFD (talk) 01:57, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Coup of June 1907

Recently you added a "citation needed" template into the article named "Coup of June 1907". I want to provide a reliable source. However, it is not clear which fact is called into question:

• June 16, 1907 is June 3, 1907 in the Russian Old Style.
• The dissolution of the State Duma and the change in electoral law in Russia took place.
• "Coup of June 1907" is the name given to this event.
• Something else.

Could you specify this? Any details are welcome. Ufim (talk) 04:02, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for reverting my problematic edit at Reliable Sources, and for your tactful edit summary. I'm not sure how that happened, but as you surmised it was unintentional. I put back my comment after the comment I was responding to, although I'm not sure whether someone might have added comments in the interim. Please let me know of any other problems, I really appreciate it. Best wishes, Postpostmod (talk) 16:05, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

If you want...

If you want to help, i'm working on a better, cleaner, more organized draft version here. I could always use another pair of eyes on it. And typing fingers (though five pairs of those, hopefully). Silverseren^C 02:06, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Legacy

It's okay that you're an idiot, but if you're not even able to give a good argument for why removing perfectly valid information you have no place on Wikipedia. Of course it's important to note if the belief in communism was retained during his rule, I mean seriously, the country was built on a dictatorship who repressed their own people behind the communist banner. How is that not important? Tell me, really tell me, cause it seems stupid! --TIAYN (talk) 21:17, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Personal insults are not valid proof. I happened live during these times, and ideals of communism was a matter of jokes, not belief. That's why I wrote "propaganda" in edit summary: "ideals of communism" was nothing but propaganda and "rule of the game" (i.e., hypocricy). Lovok Sovok (talk) 21:39, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

That's fine, but your statement here only proves your extreme POV. I'll add a reference, I have one (I ment plenty, so sorry)! --TIAYN (talk) 21:51, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

TIAYN looks like the one with POV issues here. 24.184.232.19 (talk) 21:53, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I just referenced it.... (and no, it's not in the lead) --TIAYN (talk) 22:01, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

That I could do, but It would have to wait. I'm currently working on the General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union article, when I'm finished with, which I will be by the end of the week I can take a look. I've never really thought of the topic, but you're right, it's very important! Thanks for the tips :) --TIAYN (talk) 22:03, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your help on the General Secretary article! :) Hey, I was wondering if you could review one of my FL candidates; the List of First Deputies of the Soviet Union article. A FL candidate needs three support to get approved, and my review currently have only, which it means it would because of lack of review consenues. So, could you do me another favour and review that article? --TIAYN (talk) 07:03, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

I've fixed the problem, the title is now "First Deputy Premier of the Soviet Union". --TIAYN (talk) 11:23, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

I've responded at the USSR Government page. Again, would you be able to vote for or against the First Deputy Premier of the Soviet Union article nominated for FL? --TIAYN (talk) 19:32, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Why would you revert several copyedits? I've checked through all of them if they've changed the original meaning, when they've done that I'VE fixed it. --TIAYN (talk) 05:01, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Dispute Resolution Process

Hello, Lovok Sovok. I've noticed that you have taken a step in the Dispute Resolution Process by posting in WQA. Please note that it is recommended that you advise the other party of your complaint filing so that they are aware of it, and so that they have a chance to respond.

If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Gerardw (talk) 21:58, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Warning others re vandalism

Hi, the usual way to deal with vandalism, is to issue warnings as per Wikipedia:Vandalism#Warnings Progressively increase from a level 1 to a level 4, then report to WP:AIV if the behaviour continues. Give them time in between warnings to read the message, and only up the level if vandalism persists after the issuing of the warning. That said, I don't think there's sufficient evidence that the incident you reported constituted vandalism. Cheers, Catfish Jim & the soapdish 19:24, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Lovok Sovok. You have new messages at Catfish Jim and the soapdish's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Catfish Jim & the soapdish 19:49, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Completely new abortion proposal and mediation

In light of the seemingly endless disputes over their respective titles, a neutral mediator has crafted a proposal to rename the two major abortion articles (pro-life/anti-abortion movement, and pro-choice/abortion rights movement) to completely new names. The idea, which is located here, is currently open for opinions. As you have been a contributor in the past to at least one of the articles, your thoughts on the matter would be appreciated.

The hope is that, if a consensus can be reached on the article titles, the energy that has been spent debating the titles of the articles here and here can be better spent giving both articles some much needed improvement to their content. Please take some time to read the proposal and weigh in on the matter. Even if your opinion is simple indifference, that opinion would be valuable to have posted.

To avoid accusations that this posting violates WP:CANVASS, this posting is being made to every non-anon editor who has edited either page since 1 July 2010, irrespective of possible previous participation at the mediation page. HuskyHuskie (talk) 20:06, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Steve Bell cartoon at From each according to his ability, to each according to his need

Perhaps you would explain you reason for deleting the Steve Bell cartoon [[1]] from the above article. I'm afraid I can't follow the cryptic "rm nn quote: no third-party refs, only direct quote" on your edit. Are you saying that the cartoon needs to be referred to by a 3rd party in order to be cited on Wikipedia? It comes from a reliable source, which is cited in the reference. --TraceyR (talk) 20:52, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the v. fast reply - my question was posted a mere 25 minutes ago! OK, I understand the point; it's a shame though, since the cartoon is a very clever (and apt) comment! --TraceyR (talk) 21:19, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Georgiy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to George and Georgios

Yegor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Georgios

Yury (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Georgios

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:54, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 14:22, 24 November 2015 (UTC)