User talk:Miacek

This user has a zero tolerance policy towards trolls on Wikipedia.

3RR at Party for Freedom

Your recent editing history at Party for Freedom shows that you are in danger of breaking the three-revert rule, or that you may have already broken it. 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. Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a block.

If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You may still be blocked for edit warring even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly.

At least I give an explanation for my reverts. Do you revert according to your moods now?

Edit warring

Your recent editing history at David Horowitz Freedom Center shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. // Liftarn (talk)

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.

Arbitration discretionary sanctions alert

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 all edits about, and all pages related to, (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed, 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.

Template:Z33

This relates to your editing of Incel and its talk page. Sandstein 21:39, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't edit war, source my edits, explain my views in great detail at talk, why this warning?Miacek (talk) 21:40, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Among other issues, adding material to an article referenced to a screenshot hosted on a site titled "sluthate.com" is so serious a violation of policies including WP:V (as has been explained to you at Talk:Incel), that I strongly advise you to stop editing this topic area until you have a better practical understanding of our core policies. Sandstein 21:43, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't find this highly relevant post on any other website, also, this site is just another wiki (despite its controversial name). I've thoroughly enjoyed some of its articles there. Moreover, you're not uninvolved in this matter. Miacek (talk) 21:45, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikis (including Wikipedia itself) are categorically not reliable sources; see WP:SPS. I never claimed to be editorially uninvolved. Sandstein 21:48, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Miacek, re to this. Yes, I did check a couple of your edits and they happened to be completely unsourced. Was it a problem? If so, I do not care and will edit something else. Note that you did follow my edits on a number of pages, and I did not mind because you acted in a good faith to improve content. My very best wishes (talk) 16:37, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I followed you to this to improve the content rather than to blindly revert, as we have similar interests (Russia, USSR) and I find many of your contributions very useful. However, it is not OK just to follow an editor to pick up a fight, it was night in Estonia already, I was planning to go to sleep and so I did not add sources to Prostitution in the United States hoping someone else would do so, also elementary facts like this (what about just googleing instead of reverting?) don't even need citations, wouldn't you agree?Miacek (talk) 16:50, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All right. Actually, I was a little surprised by your comment. I agree though that the law in the US is not perfect. It should be made like in Sweden, i.e. to punish the "Johns". My very best wishes (talk) 03:41, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised that anyone with your (and my) background has so unlibertarian views on such an issue. Why should only Johns suffer? Women in a free society have it so much easier to get one night stands anyway, it is kind of balancing when dudes can buy sex.Miacek (talk) 09:57, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in my personal opinion, such "dude" is a rapist, not mentioning that what he does is disgusting. My very best wishes (talk) 13:34, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, people can have various opinions on what is "disgusting". Some say modern women engaging in the cock carousel are disgusting, others say miserable incels using escorts are disgusting. All depends on the respective viewpoint, I guess.Miacek (talk) 16:51, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am pretty much a conservative man. Read the Bible. But I know: you are really not the person you pretend to be around here. My very best wishes (talk) 15:48, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So you believe I'm a GRU man in disguise? Not that I care too much, I'll switch (see last comments here)) to Estonian and Russian wikis (I wanna improve my Russian). Well, anyway, I'm more liberal than conservative. The Old Testament is generally a pretty nasty book. I've always wondered how those gay people accommodate the blatant hatred of homosexuality in Old Testament with their own lives. But then again Ecclesiastes is a superb book. You've seen this small article [1]? Lack of sources but matter-of-fact. In English Wiki we have a hatepage with cherrypicked anti-incel anecdotes. All attempt to saanitize it, such as add some causes, suicide rate, whatever - to no avail. Wikipedia is developing more and more into an American liberal counterpart to the "Trustworthy Encyclopedia". Equally trustworthy, I daresay. Всего доброго. Miacek (talk) 16:32, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh no, I do not believe that. It is just very difficult for me to believe that you used "sluthouse" as a valid reference.My very best wishes (talk) 18:45, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it was very stupid of me to link it, but well in Estonian or Russian Wiki I simply would've been reverted and that's all. The thing was, some essential aspects of the more radical incels' hate-filled messages had been left out, when I simply referred to them, I got reverted because "no source". Well, I needed something, the alternative was E. Rodger's 'Manifesto' (it's actually widely cited in the releveant article) but I didn't really want to dig into this horror again. Anyway, I'm not planning to ever ask for the ban to be lifted. Because, guess what? I don't want to waste any more of my time! When I re-joined in April it was because I hoped to reduce my substance abuse by doing so and indeed, I managed to cut down by sth like 90%. But of course ended up editing all day and night Wikipedia and coming close to losing my job because of that. Is that any better?! Therefore the block is completely a net positive. I don't want to work in that place anyway. Initially when it was only about topic ban, well I tried to argue I was definitely useful in the LGBT topic, completely deserted before I came. No-one cared. And it's not only about political views. No matter how much I disagreed with Paul, he's a sophisticated man and here to build an encyclopedia. But what about some others? Who never start an article, launch complaints and follow you around to blindly revert you and provoke conflicts. No, not for me anymore.Miacek (talk) 19:20, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I got it. My very best wishes (talk) 20:49, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Just want to say thanks for your many positive contributions to the discussion. Hope to see you back someday. Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 23:32, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thank you for your kind words! Anyway, I got so badly addicted to Wikipedia (made more edits in April-May than sometimes in a whole year!) that it's really net positive to abstain. Well, especially if I can edit Estonian wiki anyway and - despite this being completely minor one among the variety of topics I'm interested in - the LGBT topics in et wiki are completely deserted and badly need extra work. Regards, Miacek (talk) 09:11, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good bye and good luck in real life! BTW, that your Old Testament comment above... According to Christian doctrine, there is no real contradiction between Old and New Testaments ("Не отменить я пришел, а исполнить." [2]). But for a layperson God indeed seem to be different in the Old Testament. It is about him Omar Khayyam wrote this:

Ловушки, ямы на моем пути.
Их Бог расставил. И велел идти.
И все предвидел. И меня оставил.
И судит тот, кто не хотел спасти!

Наполнив жизнь соблазном ярких дней,
Наполнив душу пламенем страстей,
Бог отреченья требует: вот чаша —
Она полна: нагни — и не пролей!

Ты наше сердце в грязный ком вложил.
Ты в рай змею коварную впустил.
И человеку — Ты же обвинитель?
Скорей проси, чтоб он Тебя простил!

And this is definitely not a Christian concept. This applies to wikiediting too. Have a happy life. My very best wishes (talk) 17:17, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Omar Khayyam is one of my favourite poets, I discovered him more than ten years ago (in a curious way, I was re-reading Radzinsky's biography of Stalin and there was some mentioning of Menzhinsky's "sybaritic" inclinations during his latter years: he was learning Old Persian in order to read Khayyam in the original. So I thought, why not try it out myself and I liked it very much).

Увы, не много дней нам здесь побыть дано,
Прожить их без любви и без вина - грешно.
Не стоит размышлять, мир этот стар иль молод:
Коль суждено уйти - не все ли нам равно?

Хоть сотню проживи, хоть десять сотен лет,
Придется все-таки покинуть этот свет.
Будь падишахом ты иль нищим на базаре, -
Цена тебе одна: для смерти санов нет.

Btw, saw the following one once on your page, it was news to me. Very contemporary I'd say:

Как каменный лес, онемело,
Стоим мы на том рубеже,
Где тело - как будто не тело,
Где слово - не только не дело,
Но даже не слово уже.

Cheers, Miacek (talk) 13:23, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the last one - see this. As about Khayyam, I created this page, he also made wonderful poetry translation of the book from Old Testament you mentioned [3]. And he also wrote this[4]:

Вперёд, вперёд, свободные рабы,
достойные Ходынки и Трубы!
Там, впереди, проходы перекрыты.
Давитесь, разевайте рты, как рыбы.
Вперёд, вперёд, истории творцы!
Вам мостовых достанутся торцы,
хруст рёбер и чугунная ограда,
и топот обезумевшего стада,
и грязь, и кровь в углах бескровных губ.
Вы обойдётесь без высоких труб.

That is contemporary. My very best wishes (talk) 03:29, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Обкомы, горкомы, райкомы..." В Эстонию они не вернутся уже НИКОГДА. Чего я однако боюсь - это некая "Великая пролетарская культурная революция", которая происходит например в Швеции, а также в некоторых других странах Запада уже десятки лет и конца не видно. Есть такие люди и в маленькой Эстонии - у них теперь даже партия есть! Это люди, как мы видим на примере Швеции, - готовы на все. Уничтожить карьеру хорошего ученого, заклеймить "фашистом" ("расистом", "сексистом", "ультраправым") и следовательно сделать изгоем каждого, который осмеливается думать немного иначе (например что люди - уже по природе разные, а не стопроцентно равные). Такое хунвэйбинство - мне неприемлемо. А вижу это на Западе - все больше и больше и больше.Miacek (talk) 13:15, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]