No edit summary |
Tag: Reply |
||
Line 67: | Line 67: | ||
::::::::::::She is not a reliable source, because what she writes is contradicted by actually reliable sources. She claims that [[Vytautas Landsbergis]] is an extreme nationalist, that [[simple speech]] doesn't exist, and that forced [[polonization]] never happened. All of which are absolutely incorrect statements. She is definitely an unreliable source and your claims are preposterous. [[User:Cukrakalnis|Cukrakalnis]] ([[User talk:Cukrakalnis|talk]]) 16:26, 20 January 2023 (UTC) |
::::::::::::She is not a reliable source, because what she writes is contradicted by actually reliable sources. She claims that [[Vytautas Landsbergis]] is an extreme nationalist, that [[simple speech]] doesn't exist, and that forced [[polonization]] never happened. All of which are absolutely incorrect statements. She is definitely an unreliable source and your claims are preposterous. [[User:Cukrakalnis|Cukrakalnis]] ([[User talk:Cukrakalnis|talk]]) 16:26, 20 January 2023 (UTC) |
||
:::::::::::::[[User:Cukrakalnis|@Cukrakalnis]] You either don't understand what she is saying, or deliberately misrepresenting her words. [[User:Marcelus|Marcelus]] ([[User talk:Marcelus|talk]]) 16:35, 20 January 2023 (UTC) |
:::::::::::::[[User:Cukrakalnis|@Cukrakalnis]] You either don't understand what she is saying, or deliberately misrepresenting her words. [[User:Marcelus|Marcelus]] ([[User talk:Marcelus|talk]]) 16:35, 20 January 2023 (UTC) |
||
::::::::::::::Putting things within a sentence into "" is a clear show that the person writing it disagrees with it. E.g. if somebody writes ''Polish "occupation" of Vilnius'', that means that they deny the Polish occupation of Vilnius or if they write ''they talked about "re-lithuanization" of the Poles'', that means they deny that such a thing as re-lithuanization exists. |
|||
::::::::::::::Clearly then, she denies forced polonization because she writes '...who in their time were "forcibly" Polonized' (...''którzy w swoim czasie zostali „przymusowo” spolonizowani''... p.234). As for her other claims: |
|||
::::::::::::::'Extreme nationalists such as Čepaitis and Landsbergis held the highest state positions' (<small>''Skrajni nacjonaliści, tacy jak Čepaitis czy Landsbergis, zajmowali najwyższe stanowiska państwowe.''</small> - p.236) |
|||
::::::::::::::'The aforementioned linguist belonged to the group of promoters of the thesis “local” and “simply”.' (<small>''Wspomniany językoznawca należał do grona propagatorów tezy „[[tutejszy]]” i „[[po prostu]]”.''</small> - p.234) |
|||
::::::::::::::'This "evidence", accusing Poles from the Lithuanian-Belarusian borderland of using the Belarusian language on a daily basis, could be used by the movement of Belarusian nationalists. Lithuanian linguists get lost in their theories, in which they endlessly analyze the issues of "Polonized Lithuanians" speaking "Belarusian" and undermine the right of Poles in Lithuania to be called indigenous.' (<small>''„Dowód” ów, zarzucający Polakom z pogranicza litewsko-białoruskiego posługiwanie się na co dzień językiem białoruskim, mógłby być wykorzystany przez ruch białoruskich narodowców. Litewscy językoznawcy gubią się w swoich teoriach, w których bez końca analizują kwestie „spolszczonych Litwinów” mówiących „po białorusku” i podważają prawa Polaków na Litwie do nazywania się ludnością autochtoniczną.''</small> - p.234) |
|||
::::::::::::::I understand what she is saying and I am not misrepresenting her words. [[User:Cukrakalnis|Cukrakalnis]] ([[User talk:Cukrakalnis|talk]]) 16:55, 20 January 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::::Regardless, [[Wikipedia:Cherrypicking|cherrypicking]] it with the intention of "proving" his anti-Polonism is still [[WP:SYNTH]]. As is "the mention of other nationalists" to show "his environment" and that "it says a lot about himself". There's even a scientific term for it: the [[association fallacy]] (and that's assuming Vilnija and the members selected by you are indeed anti-Polonic). A reliable source will have to make that connection, not you. –[[User:Turaids|Turaids]] ([[User talk:Turaids|talk]]) 16:37, 20 January 2023 (UTC) |
::::::::::::Regardless, [[Wikipedia:Cherrypicking|cherrypicking]] it with the intention of "proving" his anti-Polonism is still [[WP:SYNTH]]. As is "the mention of other nationalists" to show "his environment" and that "it says a lot about himself". There's even a scientific term for it: the [[association fallacy]] (and that's assuming Vilnija and the members selected by you are indeed anti-Polonic). A reliable source will have to make that connection, not you. –[[User:Turaids|Turaids]] ([[User talk:Turaids|talk]]) 16:37, 20 January 2023 (UTC) |
Revision as of 16:55, 20 January 2023
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
30 monographs
Any sources, that ALL his published academic books were monographs?81.7.89.225 (talk) 11:48, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
dieve duok jam bent 100 metu sulaukti —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.181.225.143 (talk) 15:59, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
Member of Vilnija?
Was he a member of Vilnija? Some sources indicate he shares their views (for example, he has written a positive review (intro?) to a book published by Vilnija: [1], [2]), but I am having trouble finding reliable sources for him being a member of that organization. Perhaps somebody could do a search in Lithuanian language to check this claim? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:10, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
- Vilnija in this case means this, and no that book was published by Petro ofsetas. Stop making OR involving BLP? M.K. (talk) 17:24, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
- A reliable and Lithuanian scholar, Algis Kasperavičius, has noted (pdf above) that Šimelionis is a "known activist of the Vilnija organization". In any case, I am asking if there are any reliable Lithuanian sources linking Zinkevicius to Vilnija, as a member or supporter? A google search for Zinkevičius+Vilnija produces quite a few hits, if mostly in Lithuanian language. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:46, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
- So far you failed to provided source for the book published by Vilnija etc. and I am not interested in Šimelionis in this page. I already explained that Vilnija is common Lithuanian word, plus it used as synonym for the Vilnius region; so no, google hits Z+V, so far gives, exactly this, rather then so called "organization". M.K. (talk) 12:07, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
- A reliable and Lithuanian scholar, Algis Kasperavičius, has noted (pdf above) that Šimelionis is a "known activist of the Vilnija organization". In any case, I am asking if there are any reliable Lithuanian sources linking Zinkevicius to Vilnija, as a member or supporter? A google search for Zinkevičius+Vilnija produces quite a few hits, if mostly in Lithuanian language. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:46, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Zigmas Zinkevičius. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added
{{dead link}}
tag to http://www.ipc.lt/wg/php/wg.php?zs=24&zn=58 - Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070310234948/http://zinkevicius.dtiltas.lt:80/bibliografija/bibliografija.htm to http://zinkevicius.dtiltas.lt/bibliografija/bibliografija.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:35, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
The section of "Anti-Polonism"
This section was obviously written without caring about WP:NPOV. Marcelus wants to smear the leading Lithuanian linguist of recent times due to Marcelus disliking parts of his work. Marcelus has a grudge against this dead man already for quite some time, considering that Marcelus said Zinkevičius is a chauvinistic pig and I won't pretend he isn't
on 11 August 2022 [3]. Cukrakalnis (talk) 21:17, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- Of course I have, because he was chauvinistic pig, and that's what this part is proving, with sources Marcelus (talk) 22:03, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- You openly admit that you want to smear the leading Lithuanian linguist. This automatically invalidates any edits you might make about him and the topics he wrote about, because you are literally blinded by your hate of him. Cukrakalnis (talk) 22:10, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- Of course not, I don't like him because of the things he did and wrote. Are you able to provide other sources or not? Marcelus (talk) 22:14, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- You answered with Of course I have to
This section was obviously written without caring about WP:NPOV. Marcelus wants to smear the leading Lithuanian linguist of recent times due to Marcelus disliking parts of his work. Marcelus has a grudge against this dead man already for quite some time, considering that Marcelus said Zinkevičius is a chauvinistic pig and I won't pretend he isn't on 11 August 2022 [3].
WP:NPOV is a core content policy of Wikipedia. You openly stated that you are going against it and you are justifying going against Wikipedia's core content policies. Cukrakalnis (talk) 22:24, 15 January 2023 (UTC)- Now read this: WP:NOOBJECTIVITY,
the NPOV policy says nothing about objectivity
. You need to be more specific where is the issue with NPOV. I have conviction that I described his views in neutral way. My personal opinon about him didn't affect it, it's only the reason why I decided it should be described. There is nothing wrong to write articles about persons whose actions we don't like personally. As a matter of fact is the reason why we should describe them Marcelus (talk) 22:32, 15 January 2023 (UTC)- Your conviction appears to be heavily clouded by your personal opinion of the subject of this article. Even for a third party bystander like me, there are two problems in the first sentence alone: presenting one person's opinion ("it seems to me...") as fact ("Zinkevičius is known for his nationalist views, which often influence his scientific work") and reinterpreting Boroch's criticism of Zinkevičius' "lack of objectivity, mixing ideology and scientific facts" as "anti-Polonism". How many of the other sources actually explicitly call Zinkevičius views and actions "anti-Polish" and how much of that is your own personal intepretation and WP:SYNTH? Since you don't seem to be able to tell the difference it would be a good idea for you to provide quotes from the other sources as well. –Turaids (talk) 13:16, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Turaids hi, I reworded the section also added opinion of Theodore R. Weeks, he is main anglosaxon expert on Lithuanian history. Marcelus (talk) 14:10, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
he is main anglosaxon expert on Lithuanian history.
That is absolutely not the case - nobody calls him that. Furthermore, his work revolves more around Poland than Lithuania [4], [5]. He is also apparently called Tadeusz in Poland and his email is literally tadeusz@siu.edu. Cukrakalnis (talk) 14:40, 20 January 2023 (UTC)- There are no sources that call Zinkevičius anti-Polish or anti-Polonist, etc., so the section "Anti-Polonism" and the category "anti-Polish" has to go, because it's WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. Cukrakalnis (talk) 14:47, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
- That still sounds like a more general criticism of Zinkevičius's work, most of which, including the exact points made by the very same Boroch and Jundo-Kaliszewska, is already in the Reception and legacy section. How about a simple Criticism subsection under the Reception and legacy? The second and third sentences, which are now the first and second sentences respectively, have several problems as well. Zinkevičius being a member of Vilnija has been previously disputed by other editors due to what seems to be a lack of reliable sources, which is why I asked for the quotes to make sure the source actually says that and it's not just more synthesis of published material. And of all the numerous organizations Zinkevičius has been a part of I still don't see the point of listing his "collaborators" from Vilnija specifically. There's an article for that: Vilnija (organization), which, by the way, calls Zinkevičius a supporter of the organization, not a member. –Turaids (talk) 15:15, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
Including the exact points made by the very same Boroch and Jundo-Kaliszewska, is already in the Reception and legacy section
, well they are but only because @Cukrakalnis was trying to bury them, so he moved it to the main part deleting things that were uncomfortable for him. His membership was disputed before Jundo-Kaliszewska's publications, she clearly calls him "the most prominent activist". I do not insist, but I think that the mention of other nationalists with whom he collaborated shows his environment, so it says a lot about himself. Marcelus (talk) 15:36, 20 January 2023 (UTC)- Bury them? By including them in the article? Come on. I wasn't deleting them because they
were uncomfortable for him
, but because your additions broke several of Wikipedia's policies and were definitely guided by your hatred of him (I checked the definition of hatred and your attitude is exactly that). - If Jundo-Kaliszewska calls him the "the most prominent activist", then she is 100% wrong. The Universal Lithuanian Encyclopedia's article (in Lithuanian) about the Vilnija organization does not even name him amongst their "Prominent members of the society" (at the very bottom, [6]), although it lists less notable people like "J. Aukštaitis, N. Balčiūnienė, K. Garšva, P. Gaučas, A. Petruškevičius, G. Ručinskienė, J. Tonkūnas, V. Žilius." If Zinkevičius was a member, he would have been 1000% mentioned, but he is not. And there are no other sources mentioning that Zinkevičius was a member. Ergo, she is wrong. I checked the article [7] which was supposed to prove that Zinkevičius was their supporter and you know what's there actually? Only the mention that he was presenting his scientific research to them, not any statements that he was their supporter. Cukrakalnis (talk) 15:55, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
- ULE list of members is far from being complete. Jundo-Kaliszewska calls hims "the most prominent activist", it's a reliable source so this discussion is pointless. Marcelus (talk) 16:16, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
- It is impossible that Kazimieras Garšva, the organization's leader, would forget to mention Lithuania's foremost linguist of recent times when writing about his organization in an encyclopedia entry.
- She is not a reliable source, because what she writes is contradicted by actually reliable sources. She claims that Vytautas Landsbergis is an extreme nationalist, that simple speech doesn't exist, and that forced polonization never happened. All of which are absolutely incorrect statements. She is definitely an unreliable source and your claims are preposterous. Cukrakalnis (talk) 16:26, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Cukrakalnis You either don't understand what she is saying, or deliberately misrepresenting her words. Marcelus (talk) 16:35, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
- Putting things within a sentence into "" is a clear show that the person writing it disagrees with it. E.g. if somebody writes Polish "occupation" of Vilnius, that means that they deny the Polish occupation of Vilnius or if they write they talked about "re-lithuanization" of the Poles, that means they deny that such a thing as re-lithuanization exists.
- Clearly then, she denies forced polonization because she writes '...who in their time were "forcibly" Polonized' (...którzy w swoim czasie zostali „przymusowo” spolonizowani... p.234). As for her other claims:
- 'Extreme nationalists such as Čepaitis and Landsbergis held the highest state positions' (Skrajni nacjonaliści, tacy jak Čepaitis czy Landsbergis, zajmowali najwyższe stanowiska państwowe. - p.236)
- 'The aforementioned linguist belonged to the group of promoters of the thesis “local” and “simply”.' (Wspomniany językoznawca należał do grona propagatorów tezy „tutejszy” i „po prostu”. - p.234)
- 'This "evidence", accusing Poles from the Lithuanian-Belarusian borderland of using the Belarusian language on a daily basis, could be used by the movement of Belarusian nationalists. Lithuanian linguists get lost in their theories, in which they endlessly analyze the issues of "Polonized Lithuanians" speaking "Belarusian" and undermine the right of Poles in Lithuania to be called indigenous.' („Dowód” ów, zarzucający Polakom z pogranicza litewsko-białoruskiego posługiwanie się na co dzień językiem białoruskim, mógłby być wykorzystany przez ruch białoruskich narodowców. Litewscy językoznawcy gubią się w swoich teoriach, w których bez końca analizują kwestie „spolszczonych Litwinów” mówiących „po białorusku” i podważają prawa Polaków na Litwie do nazywania się ludnością autochtoniczną. - p.234)
- I understand what she is saying and I am not misrepresenting her words. Cukrakalnis (talk) 16:55, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Cukrakalnis You either don't understand what she is saying, or deliberately misrepresenting her words. Marcelus (talk) 16:35, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
- Regardless, cherrypicking it with the intention of "proving" his anti-Polonism is still WP:SYNTH. As is "the mention of other nationalists" to show "his environment" and that "it says a lot about himself". There's even a scientific term for it: the association fallacy (and that's assuming Vilnija and the members selected by you are indeed anti-Polonic). A reliable source will have to make that connection, not you. –Turaids (talk) 16:37, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
- ULE list of members is far from being complete. Jundo-Kaliszewska calls hims "the most prominent activist", it's a reliable source so this discussion is pointless. Marcelus (talk) 16:16, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
- Bury them? By including them in the article? Come on. I wasn't deleting them because they
- @Turaids hi, I reworded the section also added opinion of Theodore R. Weeks, he is main anglosaxon expert on Lithuanian history. Marcelus (talk) 14:10, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
- Your conviction appears to be heavily clouded by your personal opinion of the subject of this article. Even for a third party bystander like me, there are two problems in the first sentence alone: presenting one person's opinion ("it seems to me...") as fact ("Zinkevičius is known for his nationalist views, which often influence his scientific work") and reinterpreting Boroch's criticism of Zinkevičius' "lack of objectivity, mixing ideology and scientific facts" as "anti-Polonism". How many of the other sources actually explicitly call Zinkevičius views and actions "anti-Polish" and how much of that is your own personal intepretation and WP:SYNTH? Since you don't seem to be able to tell the difference it would be a good idea for you to provide quotes from the other sources as well. –Turaids (talk) 13:16, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
- Now read this: WP:NOOBJECTIVITY,
- You answered with Of course I have to
- Of course not, I don't like him because of the things he did and wrote. Are you able to provide other sources or not? Marcelus (talk) 22:14, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- You openly admit that you want to smear the leading Lithuanian linguist. This automatically invalidates any edits you might make about him and the topics he wrote about, because you are literally blinded by your hate of him. Cukrakalnis (talk) 22:10, 15 January 2023 (UTC)