698:
verifiable references to support this alternative POV, just opinion and speculation. Many other contributors have provided references that Latvia was indeed occupied, including mainstream encyclopedias such as
Britannica and Encarta. The article is not an arbitrary collection of loosely related events, but a tightly related sequence of occupations that occurred during WW2, in any case this point is not a POV-title issue but one of editorial style. Only one section is claimed to be OR not the whole article, so a section level OR tag is more appropriate. The article level tags are usually placed with no explanation or without sufficient explanation and certainly no verifiable references to an alternative POV are given. Some members have admitted their preference to AfD the article, but given difficulty in this approach, have resorted to vandalising the article via POV-title tagging. The article is a mess because of this continuing ongoing focus upon the title, which is probably the intent of this POV-title tagging, to stall progress in developing this article.
888:. I have already responded at length to Irpen's objections regarding the structure being a mess, I have clearly stated it is still a work in progress that has only thoroughly dealt with the first year of Soviet occupation. (There has also been discussion, since there is an article on the Nazi Occupation, that this would be devoted to the Soviet occupation alone for improved clarity.) I have also apologized for having to put in "why an occupation" because of all those who insist "occupation" is a POV term while providing not one single shred of evidence to support that position. I have posted requests on all three Baltic States discussion pages (where this sort of dispute has also occurred) inviting ANYONE with ANY evidence to the contrary that has ANY basis in fact to present it for discussion. There has been ZERO response.
892:
international community except by Russia, whose declaration by Russia's Duma I have cited. There is no other discussion of the alternate viewpoint, which, though I personally vehemently disagree with, would actually be quite informative: that is, why is it exactly that Russia denies the Soviet occupation? Especially when Lavrov was negotiating during the Soviet era with the Baltic S.S.R.s for the Soviet Union to declare its presence in the
Baltics an occupation? (Sadly, original research based on sources directly involved--and which I have NOT included.) And why is there no other discussion? Not because the article is a POV Great Patriotic War denier, it's because there's simply no further insight to be had, not even in my "Concise Encyclopedia of the Latvian S.S.R." So, what is the article specifically
1031:
were conscripted into the Waffen SS (or joined simply to fight against the
Soviets)--remember this was after the mass deportations executed by the Soviets. Your calling honoring/remembering Waffen SS as Nazi rehabilitation is simply misinformed. (The Eastern European Waffen SS were exonerated in the post-WWII trials.) As I indicated the article is in progress (and there is a Nazi occupation page--this article may be better off dealing with just the Soviet occupation). And about the Holocaust... my father-in-law was sent to warn their (Jewish) family friend to warn her... a teenager picking his way through fields of bodies reaching her house only to find her
666:. Its composition is a set of loosely related events arbitrary pasted together to create this article in its current shape thus making the history look even more tendentiously presented. Article's title is purposefully inflammatory. Article is full of original research and is unimprovable. The well explained tags are there to warn the reader about the article's problem. I would have AfDed that stuff but from experience AfD is usually decided based on the general validity of topic ignoring the article's having nothing to do with that. Article RfC was filed and the casual onlookers also offered changes, including the title change
1013:, he did not take a part in that agenda pushing. Still, I'm surprised by his statement. If he thinks that wording like "is the most persistent fabrication of Soviet propaganda" are NPOV, he should seriously reread the corresponding WP policies. What is also interesting is the fact that he could not find pre-1991 sources calling it an occupation (check the first three refs: all of them are post-1991 material). One also has to notice that slapping together two different periods like 1940-1941 and 1941-1944, thus lowering the significance of Nazi crimes, is a form of Holocaust denial that should not be tolerated on WP.
813:. It appears to confirm my second conclusion, that the article has become their battleground to serve a larger political agenda, in this case against the perceived injustices of the Baltic States. I don't think Knowledge (XXG) ought to become a platform for soapboxing and manipuation of past history to serve political expediencies of today. This is beyond a content dispute. Their POV tagging appears to be driven by their political views, this explains their chronic disregard for verifiable references to published sources. This case really ought to go to arbitration.
939:; unfortunately my Wikitime has been spent on more urgent matters of late for which I apologize; as well, my personal time has been severely limited over the past six to eight months; and quite frankly, I got tired of repeating this argument every few weeks with a new set of protagonists and took a Wikibreak from this issue after adding the "why occupation" section, consolidated from a umber of discussions
915:, which clearly find the Soviet presence an "occupation," even those references are shouted down as biased and inflammatory; and the wailing and gnashing of teeth over Latvia's Museum of Occupation as blatant POV incarnate is not to be believed (it would appear that even Soviet documents which clearly talk about occupying Latvia are now biased by the act of merely being held in Latvian hands)
711:, the intent of which is to reflect views held in common usage, by certain individuals who apply POV-title tags to promote a particular political view point that is not widely held. They offer no published source to support their implied alternative POV, which would be constructive in forming a consensus. Disinterested comment in
1674:
as defined on
Knowledge (XXG) contemplates inclusion of all significant perspectives that have been published by a reliable source. While majority perspectives may be favored by more detailed coverage, minority perspectives should also receive sufficient coverage. No perspective is to be presented as
1374:
Where have I denied the
Holocaust? Come now! Is Mr. Krohn saying that there cannot be an accounting of those deported to their deaths by the Soviet Union? In an action already planned before the U.S.S.R. invaded the Baltics? And the Museum of the Occupation of Latvia is "POV"? What matters is what is
1370:
of Latvia's ethnic
Russians are citizens. Hardly an ethnocracy. When Russian journalists abroad held their world convention in Latvia some years back, planning to expose Latvia's anti-Russian human rights "crimes," even representatives of the Duma confessed things were not as they had been portrayed.
1030:
Can't find pre-1991 sources? None of those "first three" references are mine. The congressional resport is from long before 1991, I'll be glad to add as many sources through the entire period as you would like that call it an occupation. Abot the Waffen SS, Latvians (and
Eastern Europeans) in general
682:
If arbcom is to insert itself into this purely content dispute, its attention to the matter would be welcome, at least from me. Suggestions and objections at the talk are given in detail and arbcom members are invited to join the discussion. Maybe it's time for arbcom to change its traditional stance
1720:
6) Where user conduct issues seem to revolve around a single articles, and where there are a large number of editors involved, and those editors are not disruptive otherwise, it may make more sense to put the article itself on probation rather than individual editors. Administrators are empowered to
918:
as distasteful as I find it, I have taken care to cite the
Russian dissenting position clearly at the outset; the only reasonable official position--the declaration of the Russian Duma--is provided; and I have even refrained from making any POV observation that the Duma has not provided any evidence
715:
and the rfcs agree that title is NPOV. Exhaustive discussion has been made on talk page regarding the term "occupation". There seems to be a core group of three individuals who seem to be immune to all evidence and third opinion and seem intent on persuing a dogmatic position. Application of article
1688:
4) Articles should contain only material that has been published by reliable sources. Editors adding new material should cite a reliable source, or it may be challenged or removed by any editor. The obligation to provide a reliable source lies with the editors wishing to include the material, not
998:
on this article, and have been accusing everyone who did not agree with him as "vandal" (see history) and dismissing their arguments as "Soviet propaganda". Obviously, asking him to read the corresponding policies would have been of little effect. He is trying to present his own opinion (since he's
927:
of the Hague
Conventions on the rules of war, for example) to be included to shed light on the Russian position; instead, all that is heard is abject consternation that the word "occupation" is an insult to Russia, etc. etc., the Russians saved Latvia from Hitler, etc. etc.--conveniently forgetting
1223:, a propaganda tool of the Latvian government. True or not, the views expressed in the article are vital for the legitimicy of Latvian policy. Given the resources of the state, there is no scarcity of printed sources supporting this views. Opponent however see the whole Latvian state as an illegal
586:
I agree, that the article itself is becoming a mess: due to the dispute, whether the occupation took place or not, the article has been filled with proofs, why the events were recognised as occupation by most of the word. Once we have formally admitted the stance of
Western mainstream sources (i.e
1382:
The only attempt to compare or equate evils is being made by those who wish to push their POV that Latvia is a Russophobic anti-Semitic Nazi-rehabilitating super-ethno-nationalist neo-fascist state. I find the suggestion that I am pushing Holocaust revisionism utterly offensive, both on moral and
922:
were there any reputable evidence for the Russian official position, it would be presented--it is their position after all and it's important to understand even if it is in a minority of one; however, I have not located any such evidence; neither has anyone responded to my open invitation for any
891:
The Occupation of Latvia lasted from the first Soviet occupation through the entire Soviet era. The Soviet presences in Latvia were an occupation for their entire duration until the reestablishment of the Latvian Republic continuous with that established in 1918. This position is accepted by the
946:
I repeat my request: anyone who has any reputable evidence to the contrary that the Soviet Union did not "occupy" Latvia, please present it. That does not change, however, that the Soviet presence in Latvia was illegal, that Latvia neither legally nor voluntarily "joined" the Soviet Union, that
697:
Some members are committing tag abuse to vandalise the article because in their personal opinion the title is purposefully inflammatory. By tagging the title POV they are effectively pushing their own POV that occupation did not occur and are giving undue weight to their own POV. They offer no
1890:
2.1) The article at the locus of this dispute is placed on probation. Any editor may be banned from it, or from other reasonably related pages, by an uninvolved administrator for disruptive edits, including, but not limited to, edit warring, incivilty, and original research. The Arbitration
1362:
I am completely mystified by Petri Krohn's statement. Latvia did not join the U.S.S.R. voluntarily, that was the action of a puppet government "elected" where the results of the "election" were announced in Moscow before the election ended. (Virtually) none of the world's governments saw the
781:
or perhaps there is some other political agenda at play and this article is merely their battleground to sock it to those "nazi balts", who knows, but it is rather offensive, given tragic history Churchill characterised as that deadly comb that ran back, forth and back again over the Baltics
1285:- Why are the āplenty of sourcesā NOT CITED by any of my opponents? In fact, the statement by Petri is minority POV, of a tiny minority I'd say. Today, no serious source calls the Soviet takeover, forged elections and annexation as voluntary accession to the USSR. Petri's view suits the
1743:
article; these have been the subject of extensive and heated debate, which has failed to produce an outcome acceptable to all of the editors involved. Among other issues, the debate has focused around two related questions: whether the Soviet presence in Latvia was an occupation, and
986:
edit wars waged by 2 or 3 Baltic nationalists to push their agenda on Knowledge (XXG). Anyone who follows political news from this region closely (or even remotely) knows that there is currently a heavy return to nationalism in these three countries, bordering sometimes on Nazism and
679:. None of the suggestions were implemented. So, every reason to keep the warning tags are there since the changes that would have made an article more compliant were fiercely opposed. That the uninvolved users saw the article's deficiencies proves that the tag was well justified.
1251:
This RfA and the edit war that promted it does not seem to be about the content of the article. It is about about the POV-tags; the right of opponents of the content or name to tag the article. So far I have not contributed to the article. I have only reverted the deletion of the
910:
if Irpen wishes, I can footnote every last sentence from said reputable sources, his claim that the article is original research is completely, totally, and utterly baseless; sadly, the nature of the overall debate is that even when in I have quoted the Congressional Record of
1155:
The dispute here is not about whether Soviet rule in Latvia was occupation or not, but the arbitrary grouping and merging of different rules under one title of "occupation". This is a propaganda/POV pushing trick. What the creators of the article have done is like merging
1144:
into the Soviet Union as legal. After 1991 this has become one of the most contested issues in international politics and modern history. Whichever of these views is more correct, the issue requires a balanced coverage in a dedicated article with a neutral point of view.
1139:
There are plenty of sources that show to that Latvia was occupied by the Soviet Union in 1940. There are also sources that show that Latvia and Latvians voluntarily joined the Soviet Union in 1940. Until 1991 most of the worlds governments saw the incorporation of the
716:
level POV tags is meant to be constructive, however in this particular case it is being used destructively because the one applying the tag has indicated a preference that the article be deleted entirely, so I don't think they are approaching this issue in good faith.
53:
Please do not edit this page directly unless you wish to become a participant in this request. (All participants are subject to Arbitration Committee decisions, and the ArbCom will consider each participant's role in the dispute.) Comments are very welcome on the
999:
about the only one to contribute on the talk page) as "consensus" and apparently does not understand that while some sort of consensus is not reached, the tag has to stay as a warning for a casual reader. And by the way, content disputes are in no way vandalism.
471:, going around the question, whether Latvia was occupied by the USSR or not, I thought it wasn't a real content dispute. A couple of users, me included, have removed the POV-title tag and non-compliant tag added by some users, and even reported
1615:
70:
1706:
is prohibited. This includes a new synthesis of published material serving to advance a position; an argument is permissible only if a reliable source has published this argument in relation to the specific topic of the article.
777:, although I've never corresponded with him ever. God only knows why they find the description of Stalinist crimes committed during the occupation of Latvia so "inflammatory", millions of Russians suffered too. Perhaps they enjoy
1519:
per Dmcdevit and reading the actual article and talk history - this complaint doesn't go into it, but it doesn't look acceptable to me. We don't have to stick within the lines drawn by the complaint, if we don't want to.
1363:
incorporation of the Baltic States in the Soviet Union as "legal." I don't know whether Mr. Krohn is grossly misinformed or simply lying. A "contested issue"? Only by those pushing the neo-Soviet POV, I'm afraid.
66:
59:
1829:) have aggravated it by some form of poor behavior, such as engaging in personal attacks, assuming bad faith of the other editors involved, making attacks and accusations along national lines, or soapboxing.
1230:
I also object to the article on moral grounds. The article tries to equate the actions of the Soviet Union (and Soviet citizens in the Baltic Republics) with those of Nazi Germany. I see this as a form of
1171:
I do not think there is a place for an article in Knowledge (XXG) under the present title. In its present form it only serves as a tool for ethnic POV-pushing and associated hate speech. At best it is a
1502:
Decline. If there is a conduct issue, the disputants may bring a case addressing it alone if they wish. Otherwise, the matter as presently framed is primarily a content dispute outside our remit.
1075:
Anyone who follows political news from this region closely (or even remotely) knows that there is currently a heavy return to nationalism in these three countries, bordering sometimes on Nazism and
1327:- well, this part of Petri's argumentation really shows, that HE is using this dispute as a tool to promote his views about the Baltics. He seems to claim here that the USSR annexed the states in
1283:
There are plenty of sources that show to that Latvia was occupied by the Soviet Union in 1940. There are also sources that show that Latvia and Latvians voluntarily joined the Soviet Union in 1940
991:, such as monuments erected to local Waffen SS troopers, desecration of WWII war monuments, and so on. Unfortunately, some people are trying to push the corresponding agenda on Knowledge (XXG).
1198:
758:
groundless accusations of tendentious editing to minimise Nazi crimes but goes even further and the accuses contributors to the article of being Baltic nationalists pushing the agenda of
1969:
1) If the article is not substantially improved by continued editing the Arbitration Committee may impose editing restrictions on users whose editing is counterproductive or disruptive.
1293:
I do not think there is a place for an article in Knowledge (XXG) under the present title. In its present form it only serves as a tool for ethnic POV-pushing and associated hate speech.
907:
that qualifies as my personally stated viewpoint or as original research or, indeed, any kind of personally drawn conclusion whatsoever; I have been completely scrupulous in this regard
1982:
Log any block, ban or extension under any remedy in this decision here. Minimum information includes name of administrator, date and time, what was done and the basis for doing it.
1757:
2) A number of partiesāincluding Advocatus diaboli, Constanz, Ghirlandajo, Grafikm_fr, Petri Krohn, Lysy, Irpen, and Martintgāhave engaged in a revert war over the presence of the
838:ā (see below) are repeated. And if we come acquainted with Petris' other contributions on Baltic topic, we clearly see WHO might be using Knowledge (XXG) as tool to promote some
483:'s & others' acts would qualify as improper use of dispute tags. That's so because the side who doesn't accept the claim, that the USSR occupied Latvia, has not provided any
683:
on refusal get into the content disputes. If so, I have a dozen of much more important irreconcilable articles and I will be happy to bring them to the ArbCom's attention. --
572:ā. Are some Britannica articles then written by Holocaust deniers? Actually, I think that there are no reputable sources which would say Latvia was not occupied by the USSR.
406:
401:
1721:
block or ban editors from editing the article for misconduct like edit warring, incivility, original research, or other disruption relating to the article on probation.
1219:
and the right of the newly independent Baltic States to deprive citizenship from their ex-soviet citizens. The view expressed in this article is the one promoted by the
410:
624:. As it is, those who claim Latvia was not occupied, have NOT found ANY sources, they merely add tags, which they 'motivate' with their own inventions. I think this is
1844:
Note: All remedies that refer to a period of time, for example to a ban of X months or a revert parole of Y months, are to run concurrently unless otherwise stated.
393:
1597:
1585:
1576:
1560:
1551:
1542:
1533:
1510:
1497:
1478:
1461:
1439:
1420:
1470:
is proof enough that there is more than a content dispute here. Accept to look at conduct problems like edit warring and incivility (accusations of vandalism).
1035:. Consider your words before you accuse people of Holocaust denial. You still have said nothing to indicate in any way it was not an occupation by the Soviets.
1547:
Decline. Still essentially a content dispute, if a heated one; I'd prefer it if there was some evidence of a failed attempt at mediation before hearing this.
1272:(which was immediately removed). This is the reason I am included in this dispute. On this tag-issue I believe repeated removal of POV-tags is vandalism. --
55:
350:
545:(which is legally false, since the annexation was illegal), āwere SSRs on their own rights, their representants sieged in the Supreme Sovietā and ā
596:
whether the events described in the article can be referred to as āSoviet occupationā and whether the article conforms to Knowledge (XXG) policies
254:
1920:
3) The parties are strongly encouraged to enter into a mediation arrangement regarding any article content issues that may still be outstanding.
1016:
Finally, I would like to point out that any attempt by me, Irpen, or other users like User:Grant65, were boycotted by Constanz and Martintg. --
862:! It seems that everyone who doesn't agree with Petri's ideas about the Baltics will get his own part! I really think we need arbitration here.
1386:
Again, I invite Mr. Krohn and anyone else to actually produce the sources they speak of that support their assertions Latvia was not occupied.
510:ā is clearly not an accepted thesis in Western history writing. As it is proved on talk, the term occupation is widely used in this context:
206:
158:
110:
81:
17:
1891:
Committee reserves the right to appoint one or more mentors at any time, and the right to review the situation in one year, if appropriate.
1186:
1093:
588:
468:
397:
1179:
302:
1190:
1149:
344:
1653:
in their dealings with other users. Insulting and intimidating other users harms the community by creating a hostile environment.
928:
that the very occupation of Latvia by the Soviet Union was the result of Hitler and Stalin dividing up Eastern Europe between them
1951:
1907:
1871:
1103:
248:
45:
636:
09:28, 27 January 2007 (UTC) Could someone please explain me, how can a dispute be resolved, if one side refuses to recognise
1740:
1194:
389:
200:
152:
104:
1633:
962:
is "inflammatory." I would submit that vehement denial and constant POV tagging of facts is the true "inflammatory" action.
942:
now that this is potentially heading for arbitration I would welcome the opportunity to close this issue once and for all.
1100:
User:Martintg is currently an obvious single purpose account whose only purpose it to help Constanz wage his revert wars.
947:"annexation" does not terminate "occupation," or that the legal and sovereign government of Latvia continued to function
730:
in the motive of others and fling all manner of baseless accusations and conspiracy theory hoping it will stick. We have
1529:
1435:
1854:
1) The parties named above as having acted poorly in this dispute are admonished to avoid such behavior in the future.
1744:
whetherāregardless of the answer to the first questionāthe article's current title and scope are appropriately chosen.
1393:
1355:
1276:
1266:
1243:
1176:
of material covered in other articles. The article should be deleted. Most of the material could be moved or merged to
1125:
1042:
1024:
969:
870:
817:
789:
720:
702:
687:
652:
606:
296:
557:
1507:
1152:
together with Nazi war crimes, under a common title of "occupation", precludes any neutral writing on the subject.
526:
Although Irpen admited, that āhere is no doubt that annexation was illegal from the POV of the international lawā
1286:
487:, that would undermine the accepted opinion. Also, it has not been clearly explained, in what way is the article
368:
272:
951:
in exile until the reestablishment of said sovereign authority on Latvian territory, all of which make it the
741:
claiming the article is tendentious, over emphasizing Soviet atrocities while saying nothing of Nazi crimes
80:, if necessary in the future, but closed cases should not be edited otherwise. Please raise any questions at
356:
1771:
260:
224:
176:
128:
583:
and is now, thus, POV. However, this would be original research, since once again, no sources were given.
1761:
1594:
1590:
Accept, though it really should go without saying that obviously we won't be looking at content issues.
1572:
1539:
1503:
1417:
1315:
1256:
1232:
1216:
855:
338:
1650:
1173:
587:
that Latvia was occupied), also opinion of the majority of people who have expressed their opinion on
1489:
612:
PS. Some users have claimed, as if this were a pure content dispute. However, one should note that a
242:
212:
164:
116:
1303:
himself who wishes to use Knowledge (XXG) as a tool to promote his own views of Baltics (like here:
1567:
1548:
1348:
1118:
863:
774:
734:
claiming that failing to whitewash the facts of Stalinist crimes is tantamount to Holocaust denial
645:
629:
599:
320:
93:
778:
575:
When directly asked, why should the title used in Britannica be called 'POV-title' here, then e.g
1475:
1352:
1122:
1089:
867:
649:
633:
603:
194:
146:
98:
783:
1113:
FAILED TO CITE HIS SOURCES, WHICH COULD HINT THAT LATVIA WASN'T OCCUPIED. Why is he hiding his
1049:
Grafikm fr's statement is a perfect illustration to his own disputing style on Latvia article:
727:
308:
1671:
708:
641:
1591:
1525:
1431:
1414:
1336:
1300:
1273:
1240:
1133:
1076:
988:
831:
799:
763:
731:
712:
676:
333:
1703:
1654:
1183:
839:
1484:
1236:
1202:
1165:
1110:
1017:
976:
810:
751:
576:
503:
498:
It has been proved on the talk page, that mainstream Western sources regard the events as
480:
290:
237:
1081:
1056:
983:
663:
625:
613:
538:
1556:
Accept to examine user conduct that is keeping the content dispute from being resolved.
1379:. The "occupation" is not some after-the-fact contrivance, as he and others are stating.
58:, and will be read, in full. Evidence, no matter who can provide it, is very welcome at
1311:
1212:
1157:
827:
1114:
1003:
637:
617:
534:
484:
1557:
1471:
1458:
1450:
1389:
1141:
1067:- actually, Graf's position has only been supported by 2 or 3 revert warriors. There
1038:
1010:
965:
814:
786:
770:
745:
717:
707:
This is beyond a mere content dispute. The issue concerns the abuse of the spirit of
699:
189:
141:
1296:
773:
in the process, while I am presented as a single purpose account in conspiracy with
1161:
994:
User:Constanz has been edit warring on this article for quite a moment now. He was
851:
1483:
Accept per Dmcdevit, in order to examine the conduct issues surrounding the case.
427:
1582:
1521:
1427:
1344:
1323:
1224:
1085:
835:
806:
755:
738:
684:
556:
Instead of recognizing the sources presented by the other side (or citing the
514:
499:
476:
285:
65:
Arbitrators will be working on evidence and suggesting proposed decisions at
1299:
also serve āethnic POV-pushing and associated hate speechā? Or perhaps it's
1065:
waged by 2 or 3 Baltic nationalists to push their agenda on Knowledge (XXG).
913:
official findings of the United States government's congressional committees
565:
726:
I wonder how successful mediation would be when one side basically doesn't
1366:
Latvia deprive people of citizenship? I regret to inform Mr. Krohn that a
1347:) by a user whose dispute merely relies on his own analysis of the events!
1117:?! How is it possible for someone to pursue NPOV without citing sources?
1185:. The remaining material should be moved to (if not already covered in)
1675:
the "truth"; all perspectives are to be attributed to their advocates.
1426:
Reject; agree that this is a content dispute and not ripe for arbcom.
662:
Purely a content dispute. The article is a mess, a textbook example of
518:
1341:
see that you too have been harassed by the "ethnofacist" POV pushersā
759:
1739:
1) The dispute revolves around the title, scope, and content of the
785:. Frankly I don't see how mediation will moderate their behaviour.
529:, he and other people of his view have still argued, that the term
82:
Knowledge (XXG):Requests for arbitration#Requests for clarification
1790:
3) A number of the parties to the dispute, including Grafikm_fr (
1371:
They all enjoyed their outing in JÅ«rmala and then left for home.
1332:
1328:
802:'s views expressed in his "heart of the matter" statement below
491:. However, this seems to qualify as content dispute, not abuse.
1006:) whose only purpose it to help Constanz wage his revert wars.
1002:
User:Martintg is currently an obvious single purpose account (
1634:
assume good faith in the absence of evidence to the contrary
1331:, because the Baltic states passed āNurember style lawsā in
1061:- since when is reflecting majority POV tendentious editing?
822:
Absolutely! The citizenship laws passed in 1990s (labelled
1581:
Accept. To look into behaviour, not the content issues. -
1239:
by equating them to real or imagined crimes of others. --
1088:
didn't take place (that's what Graf SHOULD be proving)? A
1199:
Battle of Narva - Battle of the Tannenbergstellung (1944)
886:
As one of the authors, having combined two prior articles
1295:- I ask again - does the article with the same title in
616:
requires grounded opinions by both disputing sides, i.e
1827:
1824:
1821:
1818:
1815:
1812:
1809:
1806:
1803:
1800:
1797:
1794:
1791:
1467:
1407:
1340:
1318:
and the right of the newly independent Baltic States...
1304:
1068:
995:
859:
847:
843:
803:
767:
749:
742:
735:
672:
669:
667:
580:
569:
561:
550:
546:
542:
527:
522:
511:
507:
488:
472:
456:
450:
446:
441:
423:
419:
415:
374:
362:
326:
314:
278:
266:
230:
218:
182:
170:
134:
122:
533:
must not be used. So far, they have not presented any
1408:
Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter (8/4/0/0)
568:
arguments: to admit Soviet occupation is said to be ā
1205:, etc... (The first two definitely need expansion.)
748:clearly states that the Nazi section is incomplete
958:I fail to see how one can insist that presenting
1102:- I think this sentence would well characterise
923:reputable content which can be cited (not their
846:ā, Petri's opponents are accusations of being ā
1619:(vote counts and comments are there as well)
1449:to investigate bad behavior (not content.) --
1343:. Very strong statements (even if we exclude
8:
1934:Article probation revocation (February 2022)
591:, we can start removing unnecessary proofs.
77:
1973:Passed 7 to 0 at 23:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
1924:Passed 8 to 0 at 23:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
1900:Passed 7 to 1 at 23:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
1878:The following discussion has been closed.
1866:
1858:Passed 8 to 0 at 23:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
1833:Passed 8 to 0 at 23:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
1781:Passed 8 to 0 at 23:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
1748:Passed 8 to 0 at 23:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
1725:Passed 7 to 1 at 23:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
1711:Passed 8 to 0 at 23:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
1693:Passed 8 to 0 at 23:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
1679:Passed 8 to 0 at 23:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
1661:Passed 8 to 0 at 23:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
1640:Passed 8 to 0 at 23:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
901:all the sources for the article are listed
673:compared the article's guardians' approach
547:All this hardly qualifies as "occupation"ā
62:. Evidence is more useful than comments.
1945:case ("Article probation") is rescinded.
1649:2) Knowledge (XXG) users are expected to
594:In view of this, ArbCom is asked to rule
1938:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Requests for arbitration
1092:very characteristic to the dispute on
564:irrelevant to the subject, or express
541:: Baltic states are said to have been
1339:'s other contributions on the topic:
1055:This article is a perfect example of
982:This article is a perfect example of
560:), occupation deniers sometimes link
69:and voting on proposed decisions at
7:
1310:The heart of the matter here is the
1211:The heart of the matter here is the
1187:Occupation of Latvia by Nazi Germany
834:as the real cause, accusations of ā
1538:Accept to look at editor conduct.
1221:Museum of the Occupation of Latvia
1180:Museum of the Occupation of Latvia
824:rather liberal in European context
24:
1689:with those seeking to remove it.
1235:. It denies the unique nature if
1191:Latvian Soviet Socialist Republic
1150:Latvian Soviet Socialist Republic
905:absolutely nothing in the article
842:: a āBaltic gangā is said to be ā
581:āwas crafted during the Cold Warā
508:Baltic states joined USSR in 1940
467:When I first saw the dispute on
1954:on 02:05, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
1910:on 02:05, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
1632:1) All editors are expected to
854:was also severy criticised (on
570:modern form of Holocaust denial
49:on 02:05, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
30:on 01:18, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
1741:Occupation of Latvia 1940-1945
1195:Occupation of Baltic Republics
562:Russia's propaganda statements
390:Occupation of Latvia 1940-1945
1:
1453:23:16, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
1209:And now to my personal views:
442:Knowledge (XXG):Third opinion
1651:behave reasonably and calmly
1598:22:19, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
1586:21:43, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
1577:05:04, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
1561:16:22, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
1552:17:42, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
1543:11:54, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
1534:05:09, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
1511:04:45, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
1498:02:28, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
1479:01:16, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
1462:01:04, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
1440:20:39, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
1421:19:11, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
1394:01:55, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
1356:08:56, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
1277:03:26, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
1244:02:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
1148:Grouping the actions of the
1126:12:12, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
1043:04:02, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
1025:18:05, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
970:07:13, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
871:09:08, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
818:03:56, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
790:11:01, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
721:23:49, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
703:21:08, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
688:14:43, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
653:09:30, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
607:10:32, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
38:on 23:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
1604:Temporary injunction (none)
579:claims the term occupation
549:, also interpretation with
537:, but have performed their
1999:
1684:Verifiability and sourcing
1413:Decline. Content dispute.
1377:proven by Soviet documents
1287:Great Soviet Encyclopedia
1881:Please do not modify it.
1267:Totally-disputed-section
925:personal interpretations
848:ethnofascist POV pushers
1965:Continuing jurisdiction
1614:All numbering based on
1455:Reject. What they said.
919:to support its position
840:personal points of view
78:#Log of blocks and bans
1978:Log of blocks and bans
1811:), Advocatus diaboli (
1522:Matthew Brown (Morven)
1428:Matthew Brown (Morven)
1069:has been twice as many
830:) are brought here by
766:in his statement below
1777:tags on the article.
1672:Neutral point of view
1666:Neutral point of view
1657:are not acceptable.
1468:the article's history
1403:Preliminary decisions
1316:denaturalization laws
1233:Holocaust revisionism
1217:denaturalization laws
1197:(another POV title),
1033:beheaded by the Nazis
881:Statement by Vecrumba
693:Statement by Martintg
463:Statement by Constanz
1943:Occupation of Latvia
1823:), and Petri Krohn (
1565:Decline per Kirill.
1466:Accept. A glance at
1109:And once again, the
1104:Graf's recent edits'
996:blocked once for 3RR
931:as I have indicated
644:(e.g majority POV)?
521:and similar sources
436:Requests for comment
1227:. I tend to agree.
1071:of their opponents.
935:, the article is a
558:alternative sources
551:some factual errors
543:members of the USSR
76:You may add to the
1950:Passed 11 to 0 by
1850:Parties admonished
1616:/Proposed decision
1390:PÄters J. Vecrumba
1106:relation to Irpen.
1090:straw man argument
1057:tenditious editing
1039:PÄters J. Vecrumba
984:tenditious editing
966:PÄters J. Vecrumba
896:-compliant about?
856:his Wiki talk page
805:is also shared by
658:Statement by Irpen
618:verifiable sources
485:verifiable sources
473:admin noticeboards
71:/Proposed decision
1897:
1896:
1863:Article probation
1846:
1716:Article probation
1704:Original research
1698:Original research
1628:Assume good faith
1496:
1383:personal grounds.
1084:' prove that the
850:ā. And yes, poor
728:assume good faith
620:must be cited by
539:own argumentation
535:reputable sources
500:Soviet occupation
1990:
1883:
1867:
1842:
1776:
1770:
1766:
1760:
1735:Locus of dispute
1730:Findings of fact
1655:Personal attacks
1540:Charles Matthews
1493:
1487:
1392:
1271:
1265:
1262:tag and added a
1261:
1255:
1077:Holocaust denial
1041:
1022:
989:Holocaust denial
968:
937:work in progress
860:for his articles
764:Holocaust denial
744:, while in fact
677:Holocaust denial
431:
413:
378:
351:deletedĀ contribs
330:
303:deletedĀ contribs
282:
255:deletedĀ contribs
234:
207:deletedĀ contribs
186:
159:deletedĀ contribs
138:
111:deletedĀ contribs
88:Involved parties
44:Case amended by
1998:
1997:
1993:
1992:
1991:
1989:
1988:
1987:
1980:
1967:
1962:
1936:
1931:
1918:
1879:
1865:
1852:
1840:
1788:
1774:
1768:
1764:
1758:
1755:
1737:
1732:
1718:
1700:
1686:
1668:
1647:
1630:
1625:
1611:
1606:
1491:
1410:
1405:
1387:
1289:, but not here.
1269:
1263:
1259:
1253:
1237:Nazi war crimes
1203:Courland Pocket
1166:The Great Satan
1137:
1036:
1018:
980:
963:
883:
695:
660:
614:content dispute
465:
438:
404:
388:
336:
288:
240:
192:
144:
96:
90:
50:
39:
31:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1996:
1994:
1985:
1979:
1976:
1966:
1963:
1961:
1958:
1957:
1956:
1935:
1932:
1930:
1927:
1917:
1914:
1913:
1912:
1895:
1894:
1885:
1884:
1875:
1874:
1864:
1861:
1851:
1848:
1839:
1836:
1787:
1784:
1754:
1751:
1736:
1733:
1731:
1728:
1717:
1714:
1699:
1696:
1685:
1682:
1667:
1664:
1646:
1643:
1629:
1626:
1624:
1621:
1610:
1609:Final decision
1607:
1605:
1602:
1601:
1600:
1588:
1579:
1563:
1554:
1549:Kirill Lokshin
1545:
1536:
1513:
1500:
1481:
1464:
1443:
1423:
1409:
1406:
1404:
1401:
1399:
1397:
1396:
1384:
1380:
1372:
1364:
1359:
1358:
1307:
1290:
1158:George W. Bush
1136:
1130:
1129:
1128:
1107:
1097:
1072:
1062:
1051:
1050:
1046:
1045:
979:
973:
960:verified facts
944:
943:
940:
929:
920:
916:
908:
882:
879:
878:
877:
876:
875:
874:
873:
828:Boris Meissner
793:
792:
694:
691:
659:
656:
628:or soapboxing.
610:
609:
592:
584:
573:
554:
524:
506:'s idea that ā
464:
461:
460:
459:
454:
444:
437:
434:
433:
432:
385:
384:
383:Various others
380:
379:
331:
283:
235:
187:
139:
89:
86:
42:
34:
26:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1995:
1986:
1983:
1977:
1975:
1974:
1970:
1964:
1959:
1955:
1953:
1948:
1947:
1946:
1944:
1940:
1933:
1928:
1926:
1925:
1921:
1915:
1911:
1909:
1906:Rescinded by
1904:
1903:
1902:
1901:
1893:
1892:
1887:
1886:
1882:
1877:
1876:
1873:
1870:Rescinded by
1869:
1868:
1862:
1860:
1859:
1855:
1849:
1847:
1845:
1837:
1835:
1834:
1830:
1828:
1825:
1822:
1819:
1817:), Martintg (
1816:
1813:
1810:
1807:
1804:
1801:
1798:
1796:), Constanz (
1795:
1792:
1786:Poor behavior
1785:
1783:
1782:
1778:
1773:
1763:
1752:
1750:
1749:
1745:
1742:
1734:
1729:
1727:
1726:
1722:
1715:
1713:
1712:
1708:
1705:
1697:
1695:
1694:
1690:
1683:
1681:
1680:
1676:
1673:
1665:
1663:
1662:
1658:
1656:
1652:
1644:
1642:
1641:
1637:
1635:
1627:
1622:
1620:
1618:
1617:
1608:
1603:
1599:
1596:
1593:
1589:
1587:
1584:
1580:
1578:
1574:
1570:
1569:
1564:
1562:
1559:
1555:
1553:
1550:
1546:
1544:
1541:
1537:
1535:
1531:
1527:
1523:
1518:
1514:
1512:
1509:
1505:
1504:The Uninvited
1501:
1499:
1494:
1486:
1482:
1480:
1477:
1473:
1469:
1465:
1463:
1460:
1456:
1452:
1448:
1444:
1442:
1441:
1437:
1433:
1429:
1424:
1422:
1419:
1416:
1412:
1411:
1402:
1400:
1395:
1391:
1385:
1381:
1378:
1373:
1369:
1365:
1361:
1360:
1357:
1354:
1350:
1346:
1342:
1338:
1334:
1330:
1326:
1325:
1319:
1317:
1313:
1308:
1305:
1302:
1298:
1294:
1291:
1288:
1284:
1281:
1280:
1279:
1278:
1275:
1268:
1258:
1250:
1246:
1245:
1242:
1238:
1234:
1228:
1226:
1222:
1218:
1214:
1210:
1206:
1204:
1200:
1196:
1192:
1188:
1184:
1182:
1181:
1175:
1169:
1167:
1163:
1159:
1153:
1151:
1146:
1143:
1142:Baltic States
1135:
1132:Statement by
1131:
1127:
1124:
1120:
1116:
1112:
1108:
1105:
1101:
1098:
1095:
1091:
1087:
1083:
1080:- Does this '
1079:
1078:
1073:
1070:
1066:
1063:
1060:
1058:
1053:
1052:
1048:
1047:
1044:
1040:
1034:
1029:
1028:
1027:
1026:
1023:
1021:
1014:
1012:
1011:User:Vecrumba
1007:
1005:
1000:
997:
992:
990:
985:
978:
975:Statement by
974:
972:
971:
967:
961:
956:
954:
950:
941:
938:
934:
930:
926:
921:
917:
914:
909:
906:
902:
899:
898:
897:
895:
889:
887:
880:
872:
869:
865:
861:
857:
853:
849:
845:
841:
837:
833:
829:
825:
821:
820:
819:
816:
812:
808:
804:
801:
797:
796:
795:
794:
791:
788:
784:
780:
776:
772:
768:
765:
761:
757:
753:
750:
747:
743:
740:
736:
733:
729:
725:
724:
723:
722:
719:
714:
713:Third Opinion
710:
705:
704:
701:
692:
690:
689:
686:
680:
678:
674:
670:
668:
665:
657:
655:
654:
651:
647:
643:
639:
635:
631:
627:
623:
619:
615:
608:
605:
601:
597:
593:
590:
585:
582:
578:
574:
571:
567:
563:
559:
555:
552:
548:
544:
540:
536:
532:
528:
525:
523:
520:
516:
512:
509:
505:
501:
497:
496:
495:
492:
490:
489:non-compliant
486:
482:
478:
474:
470:
462:
458:
455:
452:
448:
445:
443:
440:
439:
435:
429:
425:
421:
417:
412:
408:
403:
399:
395:
391:
387:
386:
382:
381:
376:
373:
370:
367:
364:
361:
358:
355:
352:
349:
346:
343:
340:
335:
332:
328:
325:
322:
319:
316:
313:
310:
307:
304:
301:
298:
295:
292:
287:
284:
280:
277:
274:
271:
268:
265:
262:
259:
256:
253:
250:
247:
244:
239:
236:
232:
229:
226:
223:
220:
217:
214:
211:
208:
205:
202:
199:
196:
191:
188:
184:
181:
178:
175:
172:
169:
166:
163:
160:
157:
154:
151:
148:
143:
140:
136:
133:
130:
127:
124:
121:
118:
115:
112:
109:
106:
103:
100:
95:
92:
91:
87:
85:
83:
79:
74:
72:
68:
63:
61:
57:
51:
48:
47:
40:
37:
32:
29:
19:
1984:
1981:
1972:
1971:
1968:
1949:
1942:
1937:
1923:
1922:
1919:
1905:
1899:
1898:
1889:
1888:
1880:
1857:
1856:
1853:
1843:
1841:
1832:
1831:
1789:
1780:
1779:
1772:noncompliant
1756:
1753:Dispute tags
1747:
1746:
1738:
1724:
1723:
1719:
1710:
1709:
1701:
1692:
1691:
1687:
1678:
1677:
1669:
1660:
1659:
1648:
1639:
1638:
1631:
1613:
1612:
1573:bananabucket
1566:
1516:
1454:
1446:
1425:
1398:
1376:
1367:
1321:
1309:
1292:
1282:
1248:
1247:
1229:
1220:
1208:
1207:
1177:
1170:
1162:Adolf Hitler
1154:
1147:
1138:
1099:
1074:
1064:
1054:
1032:
1019:
1015:
1008:
1001:
993:
981:
959:
957:
952:
948:
945:
936:
932:
924:
912:
904:
900:
893:
890:
885:
884:
852:Edward Lucas
823:
779:Balt baiting
706:
696:
681:
661:
621:
611:
595:
530:
493:
475:, believing
466:
371:
365:
359:
353:
347:
341:
323:
317:
311:
305:
299:
293:
275:
269:
263:
257:
251:
245:
227:
221:
215:
209:
203:
197:
179:
173:
167:
161:
155:
149:
131:
125:
119:
113:
107:
101:
75:
64:
52:
43:
41:
35:
33:
27:
25:
1960:Enforcement
1415:Paul August
1345:namecalling
1337:Petri Krohn
1274:Petri Krohn
1241:Petri Krohn
1134:Petri Krohn
955:of Latvia.
903:; there is
800:Petri Krohn
754:reiterates
732:Petri Krohn
494:In my view
449:(commented
334:PetriĀ Krohn
36:Case Closed
28:Case Opened
1939:Remedy 2.1
1929:Amendments
1623:Principles
1515:Change to
1485:Flcelloguy
1445:Change to
1335:! Compare
1324:ethnocracy
1297:Britannica
1225:ethnocracy
1086:occupation
953:occupation
933:and tagged
836:ethnocracy
798:I believe
769:offending
737:. We have
622:both sides
577:Grafikm fr
553:in it etc.
531:occupation
515:Britannica
504:Grafikm fr
481:Grafikm fr
369:blockĀ user
363:filterĀ log
321:blockĀ user
315:filterĀ log
273:blockĀ user
267:filterĀ log
238:GrafikmĀ fr
225:blockĀ user
219:filterĀ log
177:blockĀ user
171:filterĀ log
129:blockĀ user
123:filterĀ log
1916:Mediation
1820:), Lysy (
1762:POV-title
1375:true and
1312:Nuremberg
1257:POV-title
1213:Nuremberg
1094:talk page
1059:edit wars
844:harassing
771:Vercrumba
746:Vercrumba
566:straw man
469:talk page
375:blockĀ log
327:blockĀ log
279:blockĀ log
231:blockĀ log
183:blockĀ log
135:blockĀ log
67:/Workshop
60:/Evidence
56:Talk page
1838:Remedies
1645:Courtesy
1592:James F.
1568:Blnguyen
1558:FloNight
1472:Dmcdevit
1459:jpgordon
1451:jpgordon
1368:majority
1349:Constanz
1322:illegal
1174:POV fork
1119:Constanz
1082:argument
1004:contribs
864:Constanz
826:by e.g.
815:Martintg
787:Martintg
775:Constanz
718:Martintg
700:Martintg
646:Constanz
630:Constanz
600:Constanz
513:, incl.
345:contribs
297:contribs
249:contribs
201:contribs
190:Martintg
153:contribs
142:Vecrumba
105:contribs
94:Constanz
1941:of the
1115:sources
1020:Grafikm
1009:As for
977:Grafikm
949:de jure
811:Grafikm
756:Irpen's
752:Grafikm
709:WP:NPOV
642:WP:NPOV
519:Encarta
457:WP:RfC
407:protect
402:history
1952:motion
1908:motion
1872:motion
1595:(talk)
1583:SimonP
1517:Accept
1447:Accept
1314:style
1215:style
1164:under
760:Nazism
502:, and
447:WP:RfC
411:delete
46:motion
1506:Co.,
1492:note?
1333:1990s
1320:and:
1301:Krohn
832:Petri
807:Irpen
739:Irpen
685:Irpen
664:WP:TE
626:WP:OR
477:Irpen
428:views
420:watch
416:links
286:Irpen
16:<
1767:and
1508:Inc.
1353:Talk
1329:1940
1249:P.S.
1178:The
1160:and
1123:Talk
1111:user
868:Talk
809:and
762:and
671:and
650:Talk
640:and
638:WP:V
634:Talk
604:Talk
589:talk
479:'s,
451:here
424:logs
398:talk
394:edit
357:logs
339:talk
309:logs
291:talk
261:logs
243:talk
213:logs
195:talk
165:logs
147:talk
117:logs
99:talk
1702:5)
1670:3)
1388:ā
1037:ā
964:ā
894:non
675:to
598:.
73:.
1826:,
1814:,
1808:,
1805:,
1802:,
1799:,
1793:,
1775:}}
1769:{{
1765:}}
1759:{{
1636:.
1575:)
1532:)
1490:A
1457:--
1438:)
1351:-
1306:)?
1270:}}
1264:{{
1260:}}
1254:{{
1201:,
1193:,
1189:,
1168:.
1121:-
866:-
858:)
648:-
632:-
602:-
517:,
426:|
422:|
418:|
414:|
409:|
405:|
400:|
396:|
84:.
1571:(
1530:C
1528::
1526:T
1524:(
1495:)
1488:(
1476:t
1474:Ā·
1436:C
1434::
1432:T
1430:(
1418:ā
1096:!
453:)
430:)
392:(
377:)
372:Ā·
366:Ā·
360:Ā·
354:Ā·
348:Ā·
342:Ā·
337:(
329:)
324:Ā·
318:Ā·
312:Ā·
306:Ā·
300:Ā·
294:Ā·
289:(
281:)
276:Ā·
270:Ā·
264:Ā·
258:Ā·
252:Ā·
246:Ā·
241:(
233:)
228:Ā·
222:Ā·
216:Ā·
210:Ā·
204:Ā·
198:Ā·
193:(
185:)
180:Ā·
174:Ā·
168:Ā·
162:Ā·
156:Ā·
150:Ā·
145:(
137:)
132:Ā·
126:Ā·
120:Ā·
114:Ā·
108:Ā·
102:Ā·
97:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.