Ktokolvek5
Hello, Ktokolvek5, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay.
- Please sign your name on talk pages, by using four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically produce your username and the date, and helps to identify who said what and when. Please do not sign any edit that is not on a talk page.
- Check out some of these pages:
- If you have a question that is not one of the frequently asked questions below, check out the Teahouse, ask me on my talk page, or click the button below. Happy editing and again, welcome! Rasnaboy (talk) 18:17, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Do a search on Google or your preferred search engine for the subject of the Wikipedia article that you want to create a citation for.
- Find a website that supports the claim you are trying to find a citation for.
- In a new tab/window, go to the citation generator, click on the 'An arbitrary website' bubble, and fill out as many fields as you can about the website you just found.
- Click the 'Get reference wiki text' button.
- Highlight, and then copy (Ctrl+C or Apple+C), the resulting text (it will be something like
<ref> {{cite web | .... }}</ref>, copy the whole thing). - In the Wikipedia article, after the claim you found a citation for, paste (Ctrl+V or Apple+V) the text you copied.
- If the article does not have a References or Notes section (or the like), add this to the bottom of the page, but above the External Links section and the categories:
==References==
{{Reflist}}
Sorry for this oversight
editAugust 2020
edit
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Nonviolence has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.
- ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
- For help, take a look at the introduction.
- The following is the log entry regarding this message: Nonviolence was changed by Ktokolvek5 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.852901 on 2020-08-12T08:44:28+00:00
Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 08:44, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
- {{notifinv||Robynthehode]]
I published summary of my previous post which seems too long to you.
Czechoslovakia's non-violent defense against the Soviet occupation
editTo help you with this issue I am posting here to give some advice. I have reverted your addition of the Czechoslovakia's non-violent defense against the Soviet occupation in the article Nonviolence because I think it is WP:UNDUE for a general article on nonviolence. That article is about the underlying philosophy and ideas of nonviolence not specific nonviolent resistance campaigns. I have previously directed you to the article Non-violent resistance but this is a summary article and therefore may not be useful for the purposes of an in depth treatment of this subject as you seem to want. This, therefore, leaves you with creating a new article. Please see WP:YFA for advice. Importantly you should not revert my edit on the nonviolence article without first going to the talk page of that article and discussing why you think the in depth post you made should be included and getting consensus for that WP:CONSENSUS. Reverting my edit is against Wikipedia policy see WP:BRD, WP:WAR, WP:3RR. If you want advice please ask. Thanks Robynthehode (talk) 08:22, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
- I have again reverted your edit at Nonviolence. You are now edit warring and against Wikipedia process policy - WP:WAR and WP:BRD. I have given you every opportunity to discuss your changes at the article talk page and achieve consensus for changes. You cannot keep just adding similar text to the article. Please do not do this again as I will will be forced to report you to an admin Robynthehode (talk) 13:19, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
- Robynthehode, you deleted my article.
This article discusses the possibility of using nonviolence against a military invasion. You want to take it from the article on nonviolence to another article where hardly anyone would read it.
The pretext of disproportion does not hold water. I shortened my text but, on the Internet, the length of a chapter does not matter. If you don't want to read it, you can skip it with a single click. It's not like a book printed on paper.
Now, you've just deleted a summary of my text so quickly that you probably haven't bothered to read it. What is your motivation?
In countries that called themselves communists - where I lived until I was 28 - censorship was pervasive, vigilant and severe. But its rules were clear, almost immutable, so we could get around them.
Wikipedia is a formidable project, founded on democracy but, curiously, I come up against multiple censors, sometimes fierce, whose motivations are diverse and not always decipherable.
With total disregard for freedom of opinion. Where did the First Amendment to the US Constitution go?
New article and recent edits
editYour recent creation of the article Non-violence at the state level and other edits related to it have serious issues. I have tagged the article with a list of issues that I think are relevant. I have also reverted some of your other edits with reasons given in the edit summary. However, your overall editing would seem to contravene WP:SPA and WP:NOTADVOCACY and would encourage you to seek input from other editors. Wikipedia is a collaborative project and considering our previous discussions on other talk pages I would have thought you would have appreciated that. I don't want to revert other edits so I urge you to discuss the new article and its issues at that article's talk page before proceeding with further additions there and elsewhere. Robynthehode (talk) 13:21, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
"Civilian-based defense was more or less unsuccessfully used against the Soviet Union's Invasion of Czechoslovakia" is an opinion that is not supported by any source.
In my article Non-violence at the state level I bring a lot of references that allow us to doubt this opinion. So it seems to me that we have to admit the discussion and leave it open. In addition, the idea that a country can defend itself against a foreign army was admitted by two military journals, in France and in Germany (the references are cited in the article), it is therefore useful to submit it to the 'opinion. --Ktokolvek5 (talk) 13:37, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
Civilian-based defense This article forgets the war of the Soviet Union against Czechoslovakia. When 600,000 soldiers invade a country, it's a war, right? even if in the end the number of dead and wounded is limited to a few hundred. I quoted it. You deleted that paragraph. Why and by what right? --Ktokolvek5 (talk) 13:49, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
- As a fellow editor I have every right to delete or change material in articles that I think is factually incorrect or does not comply with Wikipedia policy. I can, of course, be wrong. But that is what Wikipedia is - a collaborative project where editors discuss, correct, have their edits reverted, reinstated and so on. So to the substantive part of this. Is there a source that has unequivocally stated that the invasion of Czechoslovakia was a war. If not you can't include that in your article or other articles. Remember Wikipedia is not about what we, as editors, think is true (see WP:TRUTH) but what is supported by reliable sources WP:RS. Sources must directly support information included in articles otherwise it is original research WP:OR. Also worth reading is WP:SYNTH. I think your new article is not well written, includes a mass of unencyclopaedic content. I think you should have left the content in your sandbox and asked other editors for help especially as English is, seemingly, not your first language. I tagged your article with various issue tags because I want to help improve your article if possible and get it to a standard fit for Wikipedia. Surely that is your goal as well. So please read in depth Wikipedia guidelines and policy and work with other editors. Thanks Robynthehode (talk) 15:20, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply.
I regret that you did not comment on my article while it was in my sandbox
You are right that I do not have a good command of English, but before publishing my article I had two American women reread it (my daughter and my granddaughter). Obviously, when I modify it because my knowledge evolves or to respond to your remarks, I make mistakes in English. I can have the whole corrected when we agree on the final text.
I am very surprised by your request for proof that the invasion of Czechoslovakia was a war. How else to call the invasion of a country by 600,000 soldiers? Russian General Gretcho, whom I quote, did not call it a "tourist visit", Brezhnev no more, who I quote also.
Response to your criticisms:
"This article may need to be rewritten to comply with Wikipedia's quality standards. (October 2020)"
I have read quality standards and tried to meet your request.
"This article is written like a personal reflection, personal essay, or argumentative essay that states a Wikipedia editor's personal feelings or presents an original argument about a topic. (October 2020)"
I have read a lot of texts which express, at least in part, the opinion that the Soviet Union did not achieve its objectives by war and had to pursue them by political means (especially with the help of the "pro-Soviet" Czech and Slovak Communists). I have put these references together in one article. This corresponds to the rule: « Although Wikipedia is supposed to compile human knowledge, » Hope you can remove this remark.
"This article possibly contains original research. (October 2020)"
As far as Wikipedia articles compile human knowledge, they are all personal research. I did not invent anything (except the question at the end, “N.B”.) even if the knowledge I am quoting sheds light on the history of the occupation of Czechoslovakia differently from its mainstream explanation. Hope you can remove this remark.
"This article's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia. (October 2020)" "This article may lend undue weight to certain ideas, incidents, or controversies. (October 2020)"
You are expressing your personal opinion. It would be good to explain it more in detail. Maybe it's justified, maybe not. She can remain open to discussion.
"This article needs additional citations for verification. (October 2020)"
The article includes many reliable sources. Some are in French or Czech, languages you may not be familiar with, but that doesn't make it any less serious. Please specify what you would like to further document. Otherwise, please, remove this remark.
By answering my question “Why and by what right?” you write: « As a fellow editor I have every right ». I know, you have right. But may I repeat my question « why » ?
I hope you have nothing against the idea that one country can defend itself against another country's military attack by nonviolent means, at least under certain circumstances. Czechoslovakia did it and avoided tens of thousands of injuries and deaths. His experience has been buried in hastily written superficial comments, but its true reality deserves to be known.
Even if you have reservations about this text, it does not justify that you delete the links which I add to other articles dealing with non-violence. Please keep the discussion open.
- {{notifinv||Robynthehode]]
N.B.:
I am very surprised by your request for proof that the invasion of Czechoslovakia was a war. How else to call the invasion of a country by 600,000 soldiers? Russian General Gretchko, whom I quote, did not call it a "tourist visit", Brezhnev no more, who I quote also.
You don't want this war to be mentioned in the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-war_movement Do you have a specific reason for favoring the renown of Russia?
The United States is slaughtering entire populations on their soil, in South America, in the Middle East, they would like to do battle with North Korea, Iran, maybe India (by arming Pakistan), Russia, China ... without ever, or almost, having declared war.
Opposite, there are Indians addicted to money and alcohol or other helpless peoples. The US military are delighted to see them shoot tanks with shotguns. What would they do if the countries they attack found that, like Czechoslovakia in the Soviet invasion of 1968, they can defend themselves by nonviolent means, disarm their adversary, demoralize him and perhaps be even civilize it?
The USSR did not achieve its objectives by military means but several months later by political means, in particular thanks to the collaboration of the Czech and Slovak "orthodox" communists. The Soviet army left the country with its tail low.
At the same time, on August 21, 1968, the decomposition of the Soviet Union began in Prague, more precisely in Moscow's Red Square, with the demonstration of seven opponents of this occupation. Their act of unthinkable courage caused waves for years and contributed to an evolution of Russia which resulted in the fall of the Berlin Wall. The consequences of the invasion of Czechoslovakia were still felt in 2015 when the Slovak Embassy in Moscow felt it necessary to protest against the falsification of this story by a broadcast on state television.
Moved Non-violence at the state level to draft-space
editHi Ktokolvek5, I wanted to let you know that I moved the article you created to Draft:Non-violence at the state level, because there are multiple issues that need to be addressed, especially its essay-like tone and structure, before it can be moved back to article-space. Please see Wikipedia:Drafts for more information and Help:Your first article for tips. ~EdGl talk 04:13, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
User:Ktokolvek5 (User talk:EdGl)
I'm giving up. "I did what I could, let him do better whoever can." Stanislavsky.
--2A01:CB00:7CD:0:2173:1260:AAE4:E89D (talk) 09:04, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia and copyright
edit
Hello Ktokolvek5, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your additions to Anti-war movement have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.
- You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
- Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
- We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. All other images must be made available under a free and open license that allows commercial and derivative reuse to be used on Wikipedia.
- If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
- Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.
It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 13:46, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
Concern regarding Draft:Non-violence at the state level
edit Hello, Ktokolvek5. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Non-violence at the state level, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:02, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Non-violence at the state level
edit
Hello, Ktokolvek5. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Non-violence at the state level".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Eternal Shadow Talk 15:39, 12 July 2021 (UTC)