User talk:RumyantsevPolkovodets

Polish Soviet War

Hello, I'm messaging you because You've been constantly reverting my edits in the Polish-Soviet war except of going to the Talk page. Since I think it's pretty much obvious that it's a polish victory. Olek Novy (talk) 17:50, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

I did go to the talk page unlike you. The talk page clearly has 3 seperate threads discussing the outcome. ALL of them come to the conclusion that no clear victor came out of this war, the result should, according to the rules of wikipedia, be inconclusive or simply state "See aftermath" is the result can not be described as either victory X or inconclusive, which is the case here.

It is pretty obvious that the war ended with both sides compromising on the peace at best a Polish defeat at worst. RumyantsevPolkovodets (talk) 18:13, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

And how is it Inconclusive? The Poles achieved their goals of Defending their independence and the Kresy region. The Soviets failed to Establishe a Polish soviet republic and to Expand Communism towards europe. Olek Novy (talk) 18:16, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Again, this all was already discussed. Polish independence was never under a threat and was not even a goal of Poland. Poland, who started the war, had the goal of completely integrating the areas of the former PLC and cut off Russia from the Black Sea and Baltic Sea. It failed in that goal. It did not come even close. In addition, the Soviet goal was to simply aquire Ukraine and Belorus. They got by far most of it.

Where is your credible source for Lenin wanting to export communism? He literally recognized Polish independence even before the war.

The Soviets achieved far more goals than the Poles. Calling the war inconclusive is almost too generous. RumyantsevPolkovodets (talk) 18:48, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

The Soviets invaded four independent countries as a part of the westward offensive and woould most likely invade poland after capturing Belarus.

The Bolsheviks as the Main aggressor of the War lost. And what is you're problem? Olek Novy (talk) 18:53, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Do you seriously not see the difference between invading vital neighbouring states that were at war with the whites like Belorus and Ukraine vs. Poland, a nation that Lenin repeatedly recognized as independent, did everything to avoid war and that offered no major benefit to the Soviets?

What you are proposing is pure conjecture. You failed to provide a source for any of your claims so far.

The Poles were the main aggressors of the war and lost. And what is your problem? RumyantsevPolkovodets (talk) 20:18, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

"The beginning of the conflict between the Second Polish Republic and the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic was influenced by many factors, the most important of which seems to be Bolshevik Russia's desire to spread the revolution throughout Europe. However, the immediate reason for the start of hostilities was the withdrawal of the German Ober-Ost Army occupying the area from the Gulf of Bothnia to the Sea of ​​Azov, which was replaced by the Bolshevik Western Army as a result of bilateral agreements. As a result of her march, the Lithuanian-Belarusian Soviet Socialist Republic (the so-called Litbel) was proclaimed on February 27, 1919 - with authorities including many communists of Polish origin. On January 12, 1919, the Supreme Command decided to start reconnaissance inland to the Bug River, thus starting Operation "Target Wisła". Olek Novy (talk) 20:23, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Where is this from? Where is the source?

"In November and December, the German army started a retreat westwards. Demoralised officers and mutinous soldiers abandoned their garrisons en masse and returned home. The areas abandoned by the Central Powers became a field of conflict between local puppet governments created by Germany as part of its plans, local nationalist governments that sprung up after the withdrawal of the German forces, Poland, and the Bolsheviks wanting to incorporate these areas into Soviet Russia. Belarusian, Estonian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Ukrainian and even Cossack national governments were formed."

"A comprehensive historical analysis of the campaign against Poland was performed by Norman Davies in his book White Eagle, Red Star (1972). Davies mentioned the codename for this offensive: "Target Vistula"; however, it is not commonly used in historiography.

Norman Davies in his book claims that "Target Vistula" ("Цель – Висла" or similar) was the Soviet codename of the offensive. This term, however, is mostly absent in Polish and Soviet historiography of the period. In that association, one may notice the title "An Expedition beyond Vistula" (Pokhod za Vislu) of Tukhachevsky's memoirs about his Polish campaign."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_westward_offensive_of_1918%E2%80%931919

Notice how even in your own unsources quote there is no mention of any intention of invading Poland either. RumyantsevPolkovodets (talk) 20:28, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

I suggest reading these pdf files:[1] [2] Olek Novy (talk) 20:34, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

I suggest you try finding peer reviewed sources that also list their own sources and stop sending me random unrecognized Polish articles that I can not read. RumyantsevPolkovodets (talk) 20:36, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

You're only source said nothing about the Poles losing the war. Olek Novy (talk) 20:56, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

1. Last I checked I was not providing sources for the outcome of the war but the goals of the nations among others

2. Your "sources" did not say anything about Poland winning either RumyantsevPolkovodets (talk) 21:05, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

If you want a source about Poland winning here it is: https://polska-zbrojna.pl/home/www/234?t=Bolszewika-gon-gon-gon-setna-rocznica-wielkiego-zwyciestwa#:~:text=Wojna%20polsko%2Dbolszewicka%20niew%C4%85tpliwie%20zako%C5%84czy%C5%82a,nad%20Wis%C5%82%C4%85%20w%201920%20roku. Olek Novy (talk) 21:42, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Again, not a source and not even in English. I am still waiting for a source RumyantsevPolkovodets (talk) 21:43, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

https://www.britannica.com/summary/Russo-Polish-War-1919-1920#:~:text=The%20decisive%20Polish%20victory%20resulted,for%20the%20nascent%20Soviet%20Union. Olek Novy (talk) 21:45, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Where does it say Polish victory RumyantsevPolkovodets (talk) 07:25, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Do you know how to read? Olek Novy (talk) 14:10, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Do you? The word victory is not even in the article RumyantsevPolkovodets (talk) 14:36, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

dont make me laugh Olek Novy (talk) 14:49, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Ok you definetly have to be trolling. Even moving the goal post did not help your narrative. RumyantsevPolkovodets (talk) 14:54, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

You defintly must be trolling you cant even read the sources i send you. Olek Novy (talk) 14:56, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

You definetly are trolling. You are sending in Polish sources knowing I can not read Polish and the one English source you send in proves you wrong. RumyantsevPolkovodets (talk) 15:03, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Pushing your POV again Olek Novy (talk) 15:12, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Pushing your own POV again, I see RumyantsevPolkovodets (talk) 15:16, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Like i didnt send you a english source for the summary of the War. Olek Novy (talk) 15:17, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Like you didn't send me a summary of the war that literally said the same thing I said RumyantsevPolkovodets (talk) 15:19, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

February 2024

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Polish–Soviet War, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Discuss changes on talk page and gain consensus.  // Timothy :: talk  19:05, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for making personal attacks towards other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Izno (talk) 22:46, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

February 2024 edit warring

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Polish–Soviet War. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]

Please read WP:EW, WP:ONUS and WP:CONSENSUS and cease edit warring to change the above infobox.

 // Timothy :: talk  22:56, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics - Infoboxes

You have recently edited a page related to discussions about infoboxes and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template. Please also read the talk header section of pages in this topic area for possible additional information and editing restrictions. It does not appear that this notice has been posted to your talk page. If it has already been left already by another editor, please let me know. If you have questions, please request help at the Teahouse.  // Timothy :: talk  23:03, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics - Eastern Europe or the Balkans

You have recently edited a page related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template. Please also read the talk header section of pages in this topic area for possible additional information and editing restrictions. It does not appear that this notice has been posted to your talk page. If it has already been left already by another editor, please let me know. If you have questions, please request help at the Teahouse.  // Timothy :: talk  23:04, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

RumyantsevPolkovodets (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Hypocritical Block

The reason this block is not justified is that the user who was vandalizing the wiki page in question refused to engage in a proper discussion in the talk section and kept insulting/mocking me while not getting blocked for it. I do not have an issue with being blocked as long as the user responsible for this mess is blocked as well and the wiki page is reverted to the proper state. RumyantsevPolkovodets (talk) 08:27, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Decline reason:

See WP:NOTTHEM. Your request should only discuss your actions and what you will do differently. You are blocked for personal attacks/harassment. That's what you should be talking about. 331dot (talk) 08:49, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This is quite literally what I was talking about. I was the one being harrassed and the harrassing person was not blocked. Can you give me a example on me harassing you?