This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lithuania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Lithuania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LithuaniaWikipedia:WikiProject LithuaniaTemplate:WikiProject LithuaniaLithuania articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles
That sentence you removed had nothing important; it was outside of Lithuania and anthems are booed all of the time. I am trying to find more about the Soviet anthem, but I been assured by Lithuanian editors that all information was added. As for adding that template, hmm...that seems to be a first. But glad you liked it.
User:Zscout370(Return Fire)18:45, 28 October 2007 (UTC)reply
Well, not that TEMPLATE, obviously. Just hidden text or a footnote making it clear that it's out of copyright and why. That template, as one of the official commons statements regarding copyright, is useful to summarise the legal position.
I have just modified 5 external links on
Tautiška giesmė. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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: 5 June 2024).
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.
@
Ke an:@
Jeromi Mikhael: I saw your posts at the Teahouse and ANI. This is just a guess, but what I think Ke an meant was that the event was not important enough to the general article to have a photo, in addition to being mentioned in the text. The article already had quite a few pictures, and was looking a bit cluttered; as you can see, Ke an has also deleted another pic as well ( and used the same word, significant when they did).
@
Ke an and
Curdle:Well, no one would believe that the anthem has been the anthem of Lithuanian SSR for 6 years. I add the picture to prove it. I am learing more about the usage of the anthem in the Lithuanian SSR, so maybe the picture would appear again in a new section. I just found a new article containing about the issue that cited some sources, so maybe that would help resolve the dispute. In maximum of 5 days the new information will be put on the article.
Thanks for your suggestions, Ke an. Hope that pleases you! Thanks for an invaluable learning about the etiquettes in Wikipedia!
@
user:CASSIOPEIA Can you explain
this edit? There is a process to demote recognized Good Articles (
WP:GAR), it's not enough to change the article rating in Wikiproject assessment. I am not disagreeing that the article does not meet the GA status, but if you want to demote the article, you need to go through the process so that the article is consistently removed from every GA-related list.
Renata (
talk)
16:47, 28 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Renata3 As per the assessment criteria, I think it is not a GA grade, however, I did said might be other editors disagree with my assessment. I am not an interest editor for this page. Should you want to revert my assessment, kindly go ahead. Thank you.
CASSIOPEIA(
talk)17:39, 28 July 2018 (UTC)reply
If
you are reading and using info from
this document, then you need to cite that document. Citing archival document implies that you are actually going into the Lithuanian Special Archives and reading the documents yourself, when you are actually relying on Maciūnas' work and interpretation of those documents. Don't cite primary sources cited by the work you are using or sources you haven't seen - cite the secondary work you are using. See also:
WP:SAYWHERE.
Renata (
talk)
01:50, 31 July 2018 (UTC)reply