User talk:Detektyw z Wilna

Corruption in Lithuania

Detektyw, do you know why Lithuania has risen in Transparency International's corruption perception index, when Lithuanian citizens claim to experience more corruption now, than 5 years ago? 82.221.111.11 (talk) 13:38, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

No ideaDetektyw z Wilna (talk) 13:24, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

References

Minor edits

Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typo corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thanks, Renata (talk) 19:30, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Regarding statistics and argumentation

Please provide arguments before deletion - even better discuss first. For example the case with installed wind capacity and usage - you have deleted the statement about LT installed wind capacity, claiming it contradicts to EU LT wind usage statistics. I might have a capacity installed, but I can use it partially - so usage and installed capacity statements are not mutually exclusive.(revision 832650135) Removal of OECD data with education data (revision 832650350) is more than unacceptable. Please be more carefull removing data with reliable sources in the future.

Ke an (talk) 07:55, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

@Detektyw z Wilna: @Pofka:As the discussions and good faith led to nowhere, I applied to Wikipedia arbiters There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. -- Ke an (talk) 10:35, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Korupcija Lietuvoje

Sveikas, nesusišnekam. :D Tai geriau padiskutuokim čia, o ne ten darykim edit war. Ką aš ten noriu pasakyti yra tai, kad 2008 net 54% sakė, kad Lietuvoje korupcijos situacija yra švelniai tariant *ūdina, bet 2016 jau tik 22% sakė, kad yra visiškas *ūdas ir viskas didėja. Čia ir yra paslėpta mano mintis, kad 32% iš jų jau sakė, kad nėra taip blogai ir jau rinkosi kitus švelnesnius variantus. Atkreipk dėmesi į tai, kad varianto "nepakito" procentas nuo 13% per 2008 apklausą pakilo iki 31% 2016-ųjų apklausoje, o 2014 tokių buvo net 35%, tai matant kad "labai išaugo" varianto kiekvienais metais procentas krenta ir stabiliai didėja "nepakito" procentas - galima preziumuoti, kad būtent šį variantą ir pradėjo rinktis tie labiausiai besipiktinę situacija. Nepakito/šiek tiek augo variantų procentų augimas ir yra tas "better situation than it was in 2008". -- Pofka (talk) 13:51, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

How would you suggest to solve it? The tiny paragraph in question in its current form, might be hard hitting, but it is fair and accurate. Detektyw z Wilna (talk) 16:56, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Pofka, let's make a deal

@Pofka: Apart from misrepresenting my quotes, fabricating or twisting some facts to suit your message against me, you have also accused me of a variety of indecent conduct. Let's see if you are prepared to stand up for your words. I offer you a deal:

1. If an investigation into my account reveals any clear evidence of Russian troll factory or sockpuppeting, I quit Wikipedia, add a public note on my account's visitor page and publicly (on Wikipedia) praise you for "catching a troll" (in your own words)
2. If an investigation into my account does not reveal any clear evidence of Russian troll factory or sockpuppeting, you are gonna publicly say "I'm sorry" to me for groundless accusations and fact-twisting. Let's make this deal, what do you say?

Detektyw z Wilna (talk) 15:43, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

@Detektyw z Wilna: Investigations are meant to investingate. Good luck with it. -- Pofka (talk) 16:07, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Why did you ping me at ANI about something I never did?

I did mention to the editor you seem to be feuding with that you were discussing it at the Teahouse. When you bring up an issue that you are discussing with other editors, you need to inform them. But I have no horse in this race. Doug Weller talk 16:29, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

* @Doug Weller: I am sorry, won't do it again. I simply saw Pofka ping you in a discussion about me, and simply did the same when I replied. Detektyw z Wilna (talk) 21:22, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Dispute resolution

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Alexis Jazz (talk) 10:05, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

DRN

Hello Detektyw. I have closed the DRN case you filed regarding Corruption in Lithuania, because there has not been enough discussion on the article talk page. Extensive discussion is required before the DRN can accept a case. Biblio (talk) 22:48, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for this note, @Biblioworm:. How can there be any discussion when the other party keeps reverting and does not engage in any discussion? Should we accept destructive edits? Should we wait for the other editor to reply? As it looks right now, it might take an eternity. Detektyw z Wilna (talk) 22:56, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

I understand your point. However, DRN has no authority to compel participation in a case. It is a strictly voluntary process. If the other party is not willing to discuss on a talk page, they will probably not participate in a DRN case either. Non-responsiveness is a conduct issue and must be dealt with via other venues, such as the incidents section of the administrators' noticeboard. Biblio (talk) 16:48, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Alexis Jazz (talk) 23:15, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

I've suggested you should be blocked for continued edit warring at Corruption in Lithuania after you gave up participating in the April DRN discussion. You can respond if you wish. EdJohnston (talk) 02:20, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Eastern Europe, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Robert McClenon (talk) 17:35, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Edit warring at Corruption in Lithuania

You've been warned per the result of the edit warring complaint. You may be blocked if you make any further reverts at Corruption in Lithuania unless you get a prior consensus for your change on the article talk page. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 03:22, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Detektyw z Wilna. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Detektyw z Wilna. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)