User talk:Volunteer Marek

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		"happy that we finally got a 'self-described neutral observer'" - that made me laugh. That was a positive add. Rockypedia (talk) 00:02, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

A beer for you!

I was wondering why I saw you clearing your talk page. Drmies (talk) 04:49, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Gandy orders a second round. Cheers to one of our best! Gandydancer (talk) 15:21, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

*hic* here's another :) sláinte! ——SerialNumber54129 15:27, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

	A Resilient Barnstar
	I’m very sorry to see the harassment you have faced. Stay strong Volunteer Marek! starship.paint (talk) 16:00, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Hevrin Khalaf

On 16 October 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Hevrin Khalaf, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:34, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Help needed in disupute regarding the text in aftermath section

Hi,

I have a dispute with another editor and I would appreciate your help. In an article about the 1941 unsusccessful attempt to capture Kruševac (Attack on Kruševac) within its aftermath secion I presented information what happened when eventually communists managed to capture Kruševac at the end of WWII. That section is tagged as off topic. I would appreciate your opinion there. Do you think that it deserves off topic tag? Best regards,--Antidiskriminator (talk) 12:04, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

I think that if you could get better sourcing then this info in some form could go in there. But you need more then there is now.01:31, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

A survey to improve the community consultation outreach process

Hello!

The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.

Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.

The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.

Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:45, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Hevrin Khalaf

On 19 November 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hevrin Khalaf, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Kurdish civil engineer and politician Hevrin Khalaf, who worked for tolerance among Christians, Arabs, and Kurds, was killed in the 2019 Turkish offensive into Syria? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hevrin Khalaf. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Hevrin Khalaf), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

valereee (talk) 00:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

SPI

Re: the Icewhiz SPI, I only looked at what was presented in the case. I’m fine with someone presenting a clear behavioural analysis (i.e. clear comparison of Diffs), even after my closing as I agree the account in question is not new.. TonyBallioni (talk) 08:06, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

@TonyBallioni: Has VM contacted you regarding Icewhiz? François Robere (talk) 09:43, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

He sent an email because I closed the SPI. I don’t consider contacting the CU who closed the recent SPI on someone who has been harassing you privately to be a violation of the intent of the IBAN, and heck, I’d actually encourage VM to get it lifted so we aren’t in this bizarro world where he can’t even mention the name of his harasser on-wiki when he has legitimate concerns. (I’ll go ahead and ping Worm That Turned and Premeditated Chaos in case they disagree with me on the first point.) TonyBallioni (talk) 12:21, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

I'll confirm that VM emailing a CU in this (or similar instances) would not be something I'd consider a breach of an IBAN. Worm^TT(talk) 12:56, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Worm That Turned: What conceivable purpose does this IBan serves now? Don't you think it should be amended away? Would you encourage VM to ask for such an amendment, per TB's comment above? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:15, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Piotrus, when one party of an iBan is removed from the encyclopedia, there is grounds to consider the removal of the iBan. Given the length of time that the iBan has been in place (read, not long), I'm not sure would personally support it's removal as I think there are still benefits to having the iBan in place. That said - I'm aware that other committee members do not agree with that point of view, and given Icewhiz's behaviour since the iBan came into force I might make an exception. I think taking this to ARCA would be a reasonable thing for VM to do. Worm^TT(talk) 13:47, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Arbitration motion regarding Antisemitism in Poland

The Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:

Remedy 2 of Antisemitism in Poland ("Icewhiz and Volunteer Marek interaction-banned") is renamed Icewhiz banned from interacting with Volunteer Marek and amended to read:

Icewhiz (talk · contribs) is indefinitely banned from interacting with or commenting on Volunteer Marek (talk · contribs) anywhere on Wikipedia (subject to the ordinary exceptions).

For the Arbitration Committee, CodeLyoko^talk 02:10, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Arbitration motion regarding Antisemitism in Poland

O'Rourke's Spanish-speaking abilities, etc.

Hullo, Volunteer Marek: I am curious as to whether you read the referenced Miami Herald article which was deleted by another user. The New York Times article claims in passing that O'Rourke is fluent in Spanish while discussing his politics; the Miami Herald article, however, is entirely devoted to the question of various presidential candidates' Spanish-speaking abilities, and it analyzes in depth their grammar, accents, and so forth. What is it that gives the Times' passing opinion greater weight than the Herald's detailed analysis? NicholasNotabene (talk) 22:30, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Hullo, Volunteer Marek, this is NicholasNotabene again. I see that you have also deleted text and references regarding Rep. O'Rourke's activities as a teenager and his subsequent public apology, as an adult, for those activities.

The explanation you gave for the deletion is: "undue, dude was 15."

That is essentially a non-response. The material you deleted was in a section of article titled "Childhood and teenage years." That is why the text was in that section.

It was significant enough material that O'Rourke felt compelled to publicly apologize for his actions and to characterize his writings as "really hateful, really bad stuff."

It was significant enough activity for author Joseph Menn to write, in a 2019 Reuters article, "It’s unclear whether the United States is ready for a presidential contender who, as a teenager, stole long-distance phone service for his dial-up modem, wrote a murder fantasy in which the narrator drives over children on the street, and mused about a society without money."

The recounting of O'Rourke's activities as a minor are pertinent to concerns over his fitness as a candidate for high office, whether the presidency, a Senate post, or some other federal or state-level elective office. Therefore, the facts should not be simply deleted.

NicholasNotabene (talk) 02:15, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Hullo, Volunteer Marek, I see you have not troubled to respond to my previous messages, so I'll add one last one before I sign off. You write: "Cladeal is right, this was discussed previously and this was the consensus." It is interesting to see that your "consensus" outweighs articles published by, among, the Houston Chronicle and the Washington Post. Facts be damned, the "consensus" has spoken. Henceforth I will not bother to look for the facts of any matter on Wikipedia, as they have been banished by the mysterious and all-powerful "consensus." NicholasNotabene (talk) 09:37, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Cheers

Damon Runyon's short story "Dancing Dan's Christmas" is a fun read if you have the time. Right from the start it extols the virtues of the hot Tom and Jerry This hot Tom and Jerry is an old-time drink that is once used by one and all in this country to celebrate Christmas with, and in fact it is once so popular that many people think Christmas is invented only to furnish an excuse for hot Tom and Jerry, although of course this is by no means true. No matter what concoction is your favorite to imbibe during this festive season I would like to toast you with it and to thank you for all your work here at the 'pedia this past year. Best wishes for your 2020 as well VM. MarnetteD|Talk 20:44, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Io Saturnalia!

		Io, Saturnalia!
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:41, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Hello Volunteer Marek: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 18:36, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Ilhan Omar

Your edit summary for this this revert is difficult to understand. You cite WP:DUE for inclusion of a line with multiple sources and then justify that with your personal assessment about the controversy itself and not the source coverage. I'd also like to hear how "Support for boycott efforts" is POV. Care to explain? Thanks. Wikieditor19920 (talk) 14:02, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Lack of Understanding

Hello, I would like to ask why you reverted my edit as pertaining to the article

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_for_Germany

I gave my reasons which were I believe more than justified and yet you reverted the edit seemingly for no reason. The article itself is a biased and subjective one. I am not trying to make it more biased but rather to make sure it remains neutral. I was justified in my want and rules of this site support my actions. Alekaa20025 (talk) 00:34, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Please read the archive of the talk page. Volunteer Marek 05:24, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in the intersection of race/ethnicity and human abilities and behaviour. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Template:Z33 Doug Weller talk 16:19, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

You've got mail - Research Interview Request

Hello, Volunteer Marek. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Etchubykalo (talk) 01:08, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Institute of National Remembrance

Your recent editing history at Institute of National Remembrance shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. ShoooBeeDoo (talk) 21:18, 22 January 2020 (UTC)