User talk:Lokyz/Archive Oct 2007

Translation

The translation of "ekonominiais sunkumais". A direct translation would be "economic hardships", but in English, an individual person's money problems would usually (not always) be described as "personal financial problems" rather than as "economic". What I'm wondering is whether the author of the bio was purposefully referring to the effects of the Great Depression/crop failures in Lithuania at the time, which would have affected not only him but his friends and extended family, or if the usage of "ekonominiais sunkumais" in this case is customary when referring to a single person.

In checking the usage of this phrase I did a Google search on ""economic hardships" site:.nytimes.com", and the first few pages referred to groups rather than individuals.

PS I really enjoyed doing Rimantas Sakalauskas, and plan to fill in some more prize recipients soon. Iki, Novickas 15:22, 30 August 2007 (UTC) Thanks! Novickas 17:01, 30 August 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Expulsion of Poles

Where exactly did I fail to provide such reference? It's fairly easy to obtain, just let me know. Oh, and as a sidenote, the situation in Belarus differed significantly from the situation in Lithuania and Ukraine. //Halibu tt 12:44, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No it did not, it was a standart agreement, and I did ask for an academical citation, not another tygodnik. Read for example this: D. Sula, Dzialalnosc przesiedleñczo-repatriacyjna Pañstwowego Urzêdu Repatriacyjnego w latach 1944–1951, Lublin, 2002.--Lokyz 13:29, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Vaizgantas

One of us should take a stab at translating the pen name? Novickas 15:51, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that's very interesting. BTW how about links to the museum websites - there's one near Panevezys [1] as well as in Kaunas [2]. Novickas 16:02, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Elderate articles

The Gričiupis statistics (population, area) were pretty straightforward but I'm having some trouble with Panemune [3], which has a somewhat more creative format. Please advise. Novickas 20:29, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They are very nice images! I was just hoping that you would check the statistics when I'm done, in case I misread something. Best wishes, Novickas 20:52, 16 September 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Search engine

Hey there! I noticed the thing on your userpage saying you were un-happy about this whole search engine business. I think you are under a major misunderstanding. Wikia Search, the search engine your are doubtless referring to, is completely un-affiliated with, and un-related to Wikipedia. It is just the silly press who say things like "Wikipedia to launch search engine", in reality the only connection between them is that Jimmy Wales is the founder of both, nothing beyond that. I hope this clears up your confusion. Cheers! --Mschel 16:14, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Žemaičių Kalvarija

Thank you very much for expanding Žemaičių Kalvarija. Keep the great work! Pleckaitis 17:58, 18 September 2007 (UTC) [reply]

DYK

On 19 September, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Juozas Tumas-Vaižgantas, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri 19:46, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Prussian Lithuanians

Why do you think this article is not neutral? I was specially avoiding German in-line references. Someone may say: "hey, that's German POV". I have much more references with such expressions that probably won't fit for majority of Lithuanians. For items you think are doubtfull mark as "fact" or "dubious". Imortant facts? Now explain how in Old Prussian area appeared Lithuanian speaking population? Yes, this article was written in a hurry, I agree, there are errors. If you don't like, then rewrite. --Vulpes vulpes 13:42, 20 September 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Re Name of Lithuania

It seems to me that the entire new addition should be deleted - with a copy to the talk page, so that it can discussed sentence by sentence if necessary. It's completely unreferenced. Some considerations: I have to leave in, like, 5 minutes; whoever does it will get jumped on; but the longer it stays the harder it will be to revert to its current referenced version. So I guess I'm going to ask you to do it..bukit angelas... for WP support you can cite Wikipedia:Verifiability "The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged should be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation" and at [4] "There seems to be a terrible bias among some editors that some sort of random speculative "I heard it somewhere" pseudo information is to be tagged with a "needs a cite" tag. Wrong. It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced." Best wishes, Novickas 16:42, 23 September 2007 (UTC) Ačiū, Novickas 14:33, 24 September 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Henrikas Juškevičius

There is a photo of him at a Unesco website, which falls into United Nations public domain, if you would like to upload it [5] Novickas 15:06, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, there used to be a "United Nations Public Domain" category in the upload choices, but it's gone. Uploaded anyway into Image:Juskevicius 2.jpg. Hopefully if someone sends a disapproving message they will include the info on why this is no longer a valid category. Novickas 15:40, 25 September 2007 (UTC) [reply]

how i work

I have never consistently supported any one person's view on these articles. I'm not about to rewrite them. The only way to go that is acceptable at WP is that the different parties discus sit on the talk page until they agree. In my experience, on any topic, compromise is almost always the best way to find such an agreement. this is intended as encouragement for you to continue to discuss with each other, not with me. (posted to Piotrus also) DGG (talk) 00:49, 28 September 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Tool reversion

Please do not accuse established editor of vandalizing Wikipedia without a good reason as you did here This practice is considered incivil, and without assumption of good faith. Further use of such auto reversion tools inappropriately may cause removal of the tools and/or a block. --D_arkF_alls ^talk 02:52, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]