Welcome! -- Camptown 21:18, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
You wrote: "Nothing on talk page? hen put something on talk page instead of edit waring.)" Well, as you can see, I have started the discussion on the talk page some time ago: Talk:Estonia#Removing unreferenced claims. You did not realise that, I guess. People who revert my edits do not say anything on the talk page, they just revert. So, can you please revert your revert? Lantios 16:03, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
I think that because you are also mentioned there you may be interested about that User:Petri Krohn/Evidence.-- Staberinde 14:21, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
I have a strong suspicion, that you are communicating off-line with User:Digwuren, possibly making you a meatpuppet. The edit summary was meant as a warning, I would consider further reverts a violation of the WP:3RR, and would file a checkuser request. I have now filed the request at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Digwuren. The most relevant issues here are however Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Republic of Estonia (1990-1991) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Estonian SSR (independent). -- Petri Krohn 20:40, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
You have been
blocked from editing for violating Wikipedia policy by sockpuppeting see
Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Digwuren. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by replying here on your
talk page by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}}. You may also email the blocking administrator or any administrator from
this list instead, or mail unblock-en-l@mail.wikimedia.org.
Alex Bakharev
06:50, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Alexia Death ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
This jugement is unfair and incorrect. I have no connection to other three accounts. This name is a well established internet name as a quick google will reveal and I am willing to provide any proof requested. One look at the contribution histories of Erik Jesse and 3 Löwi(who is a contributing member since 2005) tells you that the only thing I have in common with them is nationality and interest in Estonian History. As for Klamber, he is the only new enough account to be someones sockpupet, but it is certainly not mine, as he joined day before me.
Please include a decline or accept reason.
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.
I have presented a request to David Gerard and Raul654 to review this checkuser. Digwuren 09:23, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
I belive that there is also a conflict of interest in the actions of admin
Alex Bakharev based on ethnical grounds and disagreement with our views and actions.--
Alexia Death
10:22, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
I am sorry for this. The review of the checkuser case Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Digwuren has shown that you are not the sockpuppet. VoA has unblocked you already. Please accept my apologies Alex Bakharev 15:07, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi Alexia Death, there is some discussion currently going on here, and I noticed you have {{ User anime}} on your userpage. If you are not too busy, I would appreciate it if you could drop some of your ideas on how to reform the portal on the aforementioned talk page. Thanks! « ANIMUM » 23:03, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Please stop inserting comments into the nomination. This is most disruptive. If you have procedural complaints, you are welcome to air them on the appropriate talk page. Furthermore, I don't know what category you talk about. If you are unhappy about it, just remove it, rather than disrupting the nomination. -- Ghirla -трёп- 08:04, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm pointing out that Ghirlandajo, not wanting the dots to be connected, has removed my comment above. Digwuren 09:46, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for this edit to Estonian Orthodox Church, and the edit summary: "DAB page is supposed to be NPOV. Ive said it once, and I say it agan: take it up in the articles.".
I fully agree.
Also, thanks for starting the Estonian national awakening article. -- Petri Krohn 18:03, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your interest in topics regarding the Baltic republics and the Soviet occupation. This interests has undoubtedly familiarised you with tactics and behaviour of Petri Krohn.
I have prepared a thorough overview of these tactics, along with references to related Wikipedia policy, and posted it to his userpage, requesting that he stop such activities, especially representing private alternative histories on Wikipedia as thought they were fact.
Unfortunately, he proceeded to delete the request mere seven minutes later, along with an inflammatory edit summary. I do not believe this to have been a proper reaction.
Please, if that will not be too inconvenient, take a look at the situation, evaluate it, and consider expressing your evaluation in the appropriate manner.
Many thanks, Digwuren 16:36, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
In response to calls to this effect on the talk page, I'm moving forward with the WP:RFC/U with only the last six weeks worth of edits fully classified. Please take a look at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Petri Krohn, which, after minor editing and addition of the most recent 'interesting' diffs, is supposed to become the main RFC around 21:00 UTC tonight. If there are reasons barring you from endorsing the current summary, I would like to learn about them as soon as possible so the main summary can be endorsed by as wide a coalition as possible.
Thanks in advance. Digwuren 15:36, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
You might be interested to know that Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Petri Krohn has been filed. Digwuren 20:08, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Greetings Alexia. Thank you for joining us. You appear to be the most interesting, not to say balanced and fair-minded person I have yet to encounter on Wikipedia. Welcome. Ellen sila lumen, omentielvo.
STEALTH RANGER 09:02, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Alexia, your request is rather uninformative, I think you're likely to be disappointed in the amount of interest in it. A little advice from a noticeboard pro: say what the specific problem is. Tell them where to look (=the RFC talkpage, and which sections there). Mention my name, preferably in the heading. And move it from WP:AN to WP:ANI. Bishonen | talk 09:06, 21 June 2007 (UTC).
Before I changed it back to "some" instead of "most" I wanted to consult you. Why do you think "most" of its NATO and EU allies support the idea of occupation rather than "some", the sources I've seen have been almost always the US asserting the "occupation", therefore I thought "some" was appropriate as rarely do other countries comment on it. The onus is on you to prove that "most" of the NATO and EU countries support the idea of occupation.-- Ilya1166 04:40, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
The picture is very nice, you should use it. Yoosq 09:35, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
I think that Estonia-related stub templates could use better images then just land flags. {{ Estonia-geo-stub}} has a nice .svg flag-map of Estonia, that looks very nice - I actually used the same image for {{ WikiProject Estonia}}. I tried to make an image for general Estonia stub template - Image:Estonia general stub.svg - but, alas, as you can clearly see, I am not an artist... So, perhaps if you have time and are willing to do this, could you please see about images for {{ Estonia-stub}} and {{ Estonia-bio-stub}}? I don't know what to use for generic stub - my version looks just flat ugly, replace it if you can - but perhaps for bio stub, image of a "generic" man in flag colors or something like this? DLX 05:14, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
The faces look great, but i feel the flag looks better; it represents not only the country, but the proud spirit of its fine people. apart from that, it is internationally known and respected, and is long established. The Faces, great as they are, look like the logo for a company or special interest group. Keep the Flag flying, Estonia ! STEALTH RANGER 08:51, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Your attack on me on ANI, ""To general public - Bishonen was the admin who rejected the RfC above so she has a little insight to the troubles of Ghirla" is unexpected and strange. I don't understand what you mean by it at all. What I did about the Petri Krohn RfC was post this warning on it, on June 20:
"Since my warnings about deleting this RFC to Digwuren on his user talk, and on the talkpage of this page, don't seem to have really penetrated, I feel I should repeat them more visibly here. This RFC will be deleted unless some real attempt at dispute resolution is made within 48 hours of posting it. Please see the instructions at the top of this page, and the discussion here. Don't post any comments in this section, please. Take it to talk. Bishonen | talk 17:56, 20 June 2007 (UTC)."
I thought I was being helpful–specifically, helpful to the posters of the RfC, who presumably would be interested in not having the RfC deleted. Then I made a few minor posts on the RfC talkpage, the last one on June 21. That's it. After that, Dr Kiernan took over and tried to use the page for mediation. But, dissatisfied with the attitude of the people involved, he deleted the RfC on Jun 27. This was a week after I'd had anything whatsoever to do with it. But in your ANI narrative, something quite different happened: I "rejected"(?) the RfC, so I must have "little insight" about Ghirla. (? What did Ghirla have to do with the RfC?) Do you have any explanation? Don't bother to tell me you didn't know, didn't remember, don't have access to the deleted RFC, etc. I'll take that as read and it doesn't impress me. Oh, or that you're not a native speaker. I'm not a native speaker either, but I don't think it entitles me to make claims at random. Bishonen | talk 17:51, 11 July 2007 (UTC).
Well said Sir. You have my support.
STEALTH RANGER 11:02, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Domo Arigato, Pretty Boy
STEALTH RANGER 12:32, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
I would greatly appreciate it if now, that there has been a call for diffs for assessment for blocks, if you would provide yours about my behavior. It really need the feedback.
Expectantly, Alexia Death 16:23, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Let me give you the same advice I gave to another editor recently: [5]. Short version: content editing is the way; ANI bickering rarely helps and often hurts.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 11:23, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi Alexia, just letting you know that the article Estophilia has been undeleted but has been nominated for AfD. Martintg 10:03, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Some jackass did an edit of your page when I left the computer for a minute. I'll make sure I log out every time from now on so that it can't be repeated. Some people have nothing better to do I guess. America's Wang 20:52, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
I got an email from our friend Gerog: "Kes te olete? Ma olen sunnitud helistama teie tegevuse asjus Floridasse, Wikipedia peakorterisse.". Thanks for your help.... Yandman 09:54, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
NB Direct translation:
"Who are you? I am forced to call Wikipedia headquarters in Florida due to you actions"
Sorry for getting you involved in this piece of political crap.-- Alexia Death 10:25, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Welcome! -- Camptown 21:18, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
You wrote: "Nothing on talk page? hen put something on talk page instead of edit waring.)" Well, as you can see, I have started the discussion on the talk page some time ago: Talk:Estonia#Removing unreferenced claims. You did not realise that, I guess. People who revert my edits do not say anything on the talk page, they just revert. So, can you please revert your revert? Lantios 16:03, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
I think that because you are also mentioned there you may be interested about that User:Petri Krohn/Evidence.-- Staberinde 14:21, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
I have a strong suspicion, that you are communicating off-line with User:Digwuren, possibly making you a meatpuppet. The edit summary was meant as a warning, I would consider further reverts a violation of the WP:3RR, and would file a checkuser request. I have now filed the request at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Digwuren. The most relevant issues here are however Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Republic of Estonia (1990-1991) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Estonian SSR (independent). -- Petri Krohn 20:40, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
You have been
blocked from editing for violating Wikipedia policy by sockpuppeting see
Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Digwuren. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by replying here on your
talk page by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}}. You may also email the blocking administrator or any administrator from
this list instead, or mail unblock-en-l@mail.wikimedia.org.
Alex Bakharev
06:50, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Alexia Death ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
This jugement is unfair and incorrect. I have no connection to other three accounts. This name is a well established internet name as a quick google will reveal and I am willing to provide any proof requested. One look at the contribution histories of Erik Jesse and 3 Löwi(who is a contributing member since 2005) tells you that the only thing I have in common with them is nationality and interest in Estonian History. As for Klamber, he is the only new enough account to be someones sockpupet, but it is certainly not mine, as he joined day before me.
Please include a decline or accept reason.
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.
I have presented a request to David Gerard and Raul654 to review this checkuser. Digwuren 09:23, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
I belive that there is also a conflict of interest in the actions of admin
Alex Bakharev based on ethnical grounds and disagreement with our views and actions.--
Alexia Death
10:22, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
I am sorry for this. The review of the checkuser case Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Digwuren has shown that you are not the sockpuppet. VoA has unblocked you already. Please accept my apologies Alex Bakharev 15:07, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi Alexia Death, there is some discussion currently going on here, and I noticed you have {{ User anime}} on your userpage. If you are not too busy, I would appreciate it if you could drop some of your ideas on how to reform the portal on the aforementioned talk page. Thanks! « ANIMUM » 23:03, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Please stop inserting comments into the nomination. This is most disruptive. If you have procedural complaints, you are welcome to air them on the appropriate talk page. Furthermore, I don't know what category you talk about. If you are unhappy about it, just remove it, rather than disrupting the nomination. -- Ghirla -трёп- 08:04, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm pointing out that Ghirlandajo, not wanting the dots to be connected, has removed my comment above. Digwuren 09:46, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for this edit to Estonian Orthodox Church, and the edit summary: "DAB page is supposed to be NPOV. Ive said it once, and I say it agan: take it up in the articles.".
I fully agree.
Also, thanks for starting the Estonian national awakening article. -- Petri Krohn 18:03, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your interest in topics regarding the Baltic republics and the Soviet occupation. This interests has undoubtedly familiarised you with tactics and behaviour of Petri Krohn.
I have prepared a thorough overview of these tactics, along with references to related Wikipedia policy, and posted it to his userpage, requesting that he stop such activities, especially representing private alternative histories on Wikipedia as thought they were fact.
Unfortunately, he proceeded to delete the request mere seven minutes later, along with an inflammatory edit summary. I do not believe this to have been a proper reaction.
Please, if that will not be too inconvenient, take a look at the situation, evaluate it, and consider expressing your evaluation in the appropriate manner.
Many thanks, Digwuren 16:36, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
In response to calls to this effect on the talk page, I'm moving forward with the WP:RFC/U with only the last six weeks worth of edits fully classified. Please take a look at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Petri Krohn, which, after minor editing and addition of the most recent 'interesting' diffs, is supposed to become the main RFC around 21:00 UTC tonight. If there are reasons barring you from endorsing the current summary, I would like to learn about them as soon as possible so the main summary can be endorsed by as wide a coalition as possible.
Thanks in advance. Digwuren 15:36, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
You might be interested to know that Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Petri Krohn has been filed. Digwuren 20:08, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Greetings Alexia. Thank you for joining us. You appear to be the most interesting, not to say balanced and fair-minded person I have yet to encounter on Wikipedia. Welcome. Ellen sila lumen, omentielvo.
STEALTH RANGER 09:02, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Alexia, your request is rather uninformative, I think you're likely to be disappointed in the amount of interest in it. A little advice from a noticeboard pro: say what the specific problem is. Tell them where to look (=the RFC talkpage, and which sections there). Mention my name, preferably in the heading. And move it from WP:AN to WP:ANI. Bishonen | talk 09:06, 21 June 2007 (UTC).
Before I changed it back to "some" instead of "most" I wanted to consult you. Why do you think "most" of its NATO and EU allies support the idea of occupation rather than "some", the sources I've seen have been almost always the US asserting the "occupation", therefore I thought "some" was appropriate as rarely do other countries comment on it. The onus is on you to prove that "most" of the NATO and EU countries support the idea of occupation.-- Ilya1166 04:40, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
The picture is very nice, you should use it. Yoosq 09:35, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
I think that Estonia-related stub templates could use better images then just land flags. {{ Estonia-geo-stub}} has a nice .svg flag-map of Estonia, that looks very nice - I actually used the same image for {{ WikiProject Estonia}}. I tried to make an image for general Estonia stub template - Image:Estonia general stub.svg - but, alas, as you can clearly see, I am not an artist... So, perhaps if you have time and are willing to do this, could you please see about images for {{ Estonia-stub}} and {{ Estonia-bio-stub}}? I don't know what to use for generic stub - my version looks just flat ugly, replace it if you can - but perhaps for bio stub, image of a "generic" man in flag colors or something like this? DLX 05:14, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
The faces look great, but i feel the flag looks better; it represents not only the country, but the proud spirit of its fine people. apart from that, it is internationally known and respected, and is long established. The Faces, great as they are, look like the logo for a company or special interest group. Keep the Flag flying, Estonia ! STEALTH RANGER 08:51, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Your attack on me on ANI, ""To general public - Bishonen was the admin who rejected the RfC above so she has a little insight to the troubles of Ghirla" is unexpected and strange. I don't understand what you mean by it at all. What I did about the Petri Krohn RfC was post this warning on it, on June 20:
"Since my warnings about deleting this RFC to Digwuren on his user talk, and on the talkpage of this page, don't seem to have really penetrated, I feel I should repeat them more visibly here. This RFC will be deleted unless some real attempt at dispute resolution is made within 48 hours of posting it. Please see the instructions at the top of this page, and the discussion here. Don't post any comments in this section, please. Take it to talk. Bishonen | talk 17:56, 20 June 2007 (UTC)."
I thought I was being helpful–specifically, helpful to the posters of the RfC, who presumably would be interested in not having the RfC deleted. Then I made a few minor posts on the RfC talkpage, the last one on June 21. That's it. After that, Dr Kiernan took over and tried to use the page for mediation. But, dissatisfied with the attitude of the people involved, he deleted the RfC on Jun 27. This was a week after I'd had anything whatsoever to do with it. But in your ANI narrative, something quite different happened: I "rejected"(?) the RfC, so I must have "little insight" about Ghirla. (? What did Ghirla have to do with the RfC?) Do you have any explanation? Don't bother to tell me you didn't know, didn't remember, don't have access to the deleted RFC, etc. I'll take that as read and it doesn't impress me. Oh, or that you're not a native speaker. I'm not a native speaker either, but I don't think it entitles me to make claims at random. Bishonen | talk 17:51, 11 July 2007 (UTC).
Well said Sir. You have my support.
STEALTH RANGER 11:02, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Domo Arigato, Pretty Boy
STEALTH RANGER 12:32, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
I would greatly appreciate it if now, that there has been a call for diffs for assessment for blocks, if you would provide yours about my behavior. It really need the feedback.
Expectantly, Alexia Death 16:23, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Let me give you the same advice I gave to another editor recently: [5]. Short version: content editing is the way; ANI bickering rarely helps and often hurts.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 11:23, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi Alexia, just letting you know that the article Estophilia has been undeleted but has been nominated for AfD. Martintg 10:03, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Some jackass did an edit of your page when I left the computer for a minute. I'll make sure I log out every time from now on so that it can't be repeated. Some people have nothing better to do I guess. America's Wang 20:52, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
I got an email from our friend Gerog: "Kes te olete? Ma olen sunnitud helistama teie tegevuse asjus Floridasse, Wikipedia peakorterisse.". Thanks for your help.... Yandman 09:54, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
NB Direct translation:
"Who are you? I am forced to call Wikipedia headquarters in Florida due to you actions"
Sorry for getting you involved in this piece of political crap.-- Alexia Death 10:25, 25 July 2007 (UTC)