This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |
Hi and Happy New Year! I noticed your mass revert for the contributions of 79.116.211.230 to Free Dacians article. Too bad he didn't sign in as a user... I reviewed the changes and noticed bad spellings and issues, but there were some pertinent sections there. Could you please explain the rationale? Thanks. I am running the Wikipedia:WikiProject Dacia. If you have an interest in the topic, please join.-- Codrin.B ( talk) 19:18, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
again? I suggest he pick flower-names for a change... Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 22:08, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
I was hoping that you might be kind enough to express your opinion at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Turkish_Republic_of_Northern_Cyprus_Representative_Office_in_New_York and: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Foreign_relations_of_Northern_Cyprus Many thanks in anticipation, Nipsonanomhmata ( talk) 18:40, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
Could you please help me with the Essence–Energies distinction (Eastern Orthodox theology) article? I need help with clarifying things that are being said there and at History of Eastern Orthodox Christian theology. Thanks LoveMonkey ( talk) 00:12, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
Is this article worth keeping? Yiannis Melanitis. Have tried to save it. Nipsonanomhmata (Talk) 23:31, 29 January 2011 (UTC) Thanks. Have also just rescued Michael Kefalianos. But still think that this is a mugs game. Nipsonanomhmata (Talk) 03:57, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
I have blocked that user indef. However, I'm not going to oversight or delete the edit because, however, offensive and racist it was, it isn't potentially libelous and doesn't constitute a BLP vio. Daniel Case ( talk) 15:05, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
He keeps on erasing the whole article of the European temperature record.It's been going on forever and this user has only created the account yesterday and since then he is on the Athens wiki article 24/7.Can I please ask for protection of the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Weatherextremes ( talk • contribs) 13:28, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
I've protected Athens for now. This really does look like a content dispute, so be cautious about reverting - being right is never an excuse... :) I've warned the other editor not to continue reverting once protection expires and to work it out on the talk page. Let me know if there are further issues. Dreadstar ☥ 17:12, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Us doctors have to stick together eh?♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:01, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
The Rosetta Barnstar | ||
For excellence in translation at
Yiannis Melanitis. You have more than earned this appropriate translation relic. Nipsonanomhmata (Talk) 13:12, 19 February 2011 (UTC) |
But sometimes you just gotta be crude. Half Shadow 09:26, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
User talk:Saunasolmu - you had previously given this user a warning - just a FYI that he had previously blanked the account's user talk page, so has actually vandalized and then engaged in disruption, after a level-4 warning and multiple other warnings. In addition, this account is almost certainly a sock of User:DavidYork71. Cheers, -- Cirt ( talk) 16:23, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
What's going on with this guy? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 12:56, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your note - I appreciate your taking the time to leave it. No hard feelings - I know how volatile editing on high visibility pages can be and this is clearly a sensitive topic I've blundered into, but I am firmly convinced that WP needs to discuss this since it is a major action on Obama's part and is being so widely covered as such that I was amazed to see no mention of it in this article. Happy editing! Jgui ( talk) 14:46, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Before you tag an image redirect for deletion, you must check and fix any uses of the image. Eg. special:whatlinkshere/File:Kuelapruins2.jpg.jpg. — RHaworth ( talk · contribs) 10:35, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
First, Dr.K., let me assure you there was no chance of a wrong interpretation, and even if there had been one, my first impulse is always to clarify misunderstandings. Second, yes, I am definitely of a monarchical inclination. Speaking as an outsider with regard to Greece (though much the same is true of Romania), it seems to me that the monarchy gave the country a certain respectability on the European stage that it might otherwise have lacked, as well as providing a degree of stability above the constantly feuding parties. True, the early Otto was essentially a puppet for Bavarian influence, and of course Constantine's behavior during World War I was inexcusable, but by and large the Kings supported and encouraged the people's aspirations rather than defying them. Wouldn't you say that in the last century, the best time for Greece was in the 1950s through the mid-'60s? Of course that probably has more to do with General Papagos and Karamanlis (before he turned traitor), but still, the two Glücksburgs then reigning certainly didn't hurt matters either. - Biruitorul Talk 06:01, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
The
WikiProject Greece Newsletter Issue XII (VIII) – March 2011 | |
| |
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece/Outreach#Delivery options. |
..for helping out while I was on a wiki-break. Hohenloh + 00:11, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
fair enough, i have added the deleted and added the appropriate references, and this theory is recognised, so please do not remove it again!!! please!
the reason to why it is elusive on the web at the moment is because the theory (the erraou theory, on Lucid dreaming) is relatively new, so give it time, and I assure you that it will become more known, so please do the kind thing and let it spread.
kind regards,
Sam Erraou, Representative for KCL college, Creative ideas institute, London, United Kingdom — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swe41 ( talk • contribs) 18:27, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Mate, please, just let this one go.
I am not trying to purposely undermine wikipedia, but i feel that it needs these new plausbile theories, please just let this ONE theory remain, just this once...what harm will it do.
In fact, just give it a month, and i assure you, the references i put up after that will be genuine, since by this point the theory would have spread sufficiently enough for it to be a recognised theory.
Please my friend, just let this one issue go, and i assure you, you will not regret it, as it soon will be a recognised theory, you just need to give it time to spread across the web.
Please.
Kind Regards,
Sam Erraou — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swe41 ( talk • contribs) 18:40, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for bringing these issues to my attention. I will be more careful next time I try to edit something as major as this on Wikipedia. Have a good day! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.130.71.57 ( talk) 17:21, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
I apologise for any inconvenience/harassment on my behalf, and i assure you this will not happen again.
However, the Wiki:ANI case was really not your place to intervene, was it not?
regards Swe41 ( talk) 16:36, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
User_talk:Swe41#Blocked, blocked for this -- Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 17:38, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
I have fixed my Citing. Is it O.K now? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheMainEditor ( talk • contribs) 01:23, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
So? If there is no standard, then why did you revert it? -- Stultiwikia text me 00:10, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for a quick and decisive intervention. I guess I should have moved to request a page protection after the first couple of reverts, but I hoped they (or rather he) would get the message or at least discuss. Cheers, and best to you. Constantine ✍ 19:39, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
My apologies for troubling you with this. I just wanted your opinion/advice on the following. I've worked quite hard to develop the article Human_rights_in_Northern_Cyprus. The only way that I can think of to avoid POV-based placement of historical events/references is by having strict chronological order. I don't know what Wikipedia rules are concerning chronological order but I think that it makes sense to record older events first (with a general introduction at the top). The article has been subject to edits where references from generalist annual reports about human rights (over a specific calendar year) are placed at the top of each section. Since they usually only report about one calendar year it is usually a clean bill of health for specific human rights (that ignore all that has gone before). Personally, I find this quite offensive (and I try very hard not to be offended by it or to say so). Is chronological order a fair approach? If it is, how should it be policed? Since chronological order is regularly and deliberately ignored. I'm finding that it is a high-maintenance article and I really do not enjoy editing it but it is an important article. Nipsonanomhmata (Talk) 22:36, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for catching the copyvio there. Steven Walling 03:15, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi Dr. K, could you provide some insight into the discussion on this issue on Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis' page? I don't want to get into a revision war with the other editor, so I thought I'd ask for another educated opinion on the matter (I've left the same message on the talk page of Tvoz, too.) Thank you! FrostySnows ( talk) 16:25, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello friend, please take a look at this. It is a dicussion on de-jure versus de-facto names. Your advise is welcome. Neftchi ( talk) 19:11, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for catching my mix-up over here: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=ODB&action=historysubmit&diff=431089203&oldid=431088937
Found that a full minute before I realized my own mistake.
Cheers! P1h3r1e3d13 ( talk) 23:02, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Have you had any dealings with self-published books as sources? If so, what exactly are the restrictions(if any) on such sources? Thanks. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 06:02, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello Dr. K.
I see you've been keeping any eye on "Dominique Strauss Kahn sexual allegation assault case".
A user, apparently an experienced editor, has taken it upon himself/herself to delete the "By feminists and anti-sexists" subsection of "French reaction" saying it's a soapbox and has no place in the article. I've been restoring, although I haven't contributed to this section, beyond copy-editing it occasionally and wikilinking some of its names, nor have I commented on the section. He/she has now used Twinkle to overcome the 3RR rule. Is that legitimate and can you help if it's not?
I hope this isn't a troublesome request. FightingMac ( talk) 01:03, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello Dr.K. I hope you will approve of this change in the translation of the ESA motto. I see you've done a lot of work on this article. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 04:27, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |
Hi and Happy New Year! I noticed your mass revert for the contributions of 79.116.211.230 to Free Dacians article. Too bad he didn't sign in as a user... I reviewed the changes and noticed bad spellings and issues, but there were some pertinent sections there. Could you please explain the rationale? Thanks. I am running the Wikipedia:WikiProject Dacia. If you have an interest in the topic, please join.-- Codrin.B ( talk) 19:18, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
again? I suggest he pick flower-names for a change... Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 22:08, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
I was hoping that you might be kind enough to express your opinion at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Turkish_Republic_of_Northern_Cyprus_Representative_Office_in_New_York and: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Foreign_relations_of_Northern_Cyprus Many thanks in anticipation, Nipsonanomhmata ( talk) 18:40, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
Could you please help me with the Essence–Energies distinction (Eastern Orthodox theology) article? I need help with clarifying things that are being said there and at History of Eastern Orthodox Christian theology. Thanks LoveMonkey ( talk) 00:12, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
Is this article worth keeping? Yiannis Melanitis. Have tried to save it. Nipsonanomhmata (Talk) 23:31, 29 January 2011 (UTC) Thanks. Have also just rescued Michael Kefalianos. But still think that this is a mugs game. Nipsonanomhmata (Talk) 03:57, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
I have blocked that user indef. However, I'm not going to oversight or delete the edit because, however, offensive and racist it was, it isn't potentially libelous and doesn't constitute a BLP vio. Daniel Case ( talk) 15:05, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
He keeps on erasing the whole article of the European temperature record.It's been going on forever and this user has only created the account yesterday and since then he is on the Athens wiki article 24/7.Can I please ask for protection of the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Weatherextremes ( talk • contribs) 13:28, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
I've protected Athens for now. This really does look like a content dispute, so be cautious about reverting - being right is never an excuse... :) I've warned the other editor not to continue reverting once protection expires and to work it out on the talk page. Let me know if there are further issues. Dreadstar ☥ 17:12, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Us doctors have to stick together eh?♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:01, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
The Rosetta Barnstar | ||
For excellence in translation at
Yiannis Melanitis. You have more than earned this appropriate translation relic. Nipsonanomhmata (Talk) 13:12, 19 February 2011 (UTC) |
But sometimes you just gotta be crude. Half Shadow 09:26, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
User talk:Saunasolmu - you had previously given this user a warning - just a FYI that he had previously blanked the account's user talk page, so has actually vandalized and then engaged in disruption, after a level-4 warning and multiple other warnings. In addition, this account is almost certainly a sock of User:DavidYork71. Cheers, -- Cirt ( talk) 16:23, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
What's going on with this guy? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 12:56, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your note - I appreciate your taking the time to leave it. No hard feelings - I know how volatile editing on high visibility pages can be and this is clearly a sensitive topic I've blundered into, but I am firmly convinced that WP needs to discuss this since it is a major action on Obama's part and is being so widely covered as such that I was amazed to see no mention of it in this article. Happy editing! Jgui ( talk) 14:46, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Before you tag an image redirect for deletion, you must check and fix any uses of the image. Eg. special:whatlinkshere/File:Kuelapruins2.jpg.jpg. — RHaworth ( talk · contribs) 10:35, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
First, Dr.K., let me assure you there was no chance of a wrong interpretation, and even if there had been one, my first impulse is always to clarify misunderstandings. Second, yes, I am definitely of a monarchical inclination. Speaking as an outsider with regard to Greece (though much the same is true of Romania), it seems to me that the monarchy gave the country a certain respectability on the European stage that it might otherwise have lacked, as well as providing a degree of stability above the constantly feuding parties. True, the early Otto was essentially a puppet for Bavarian influence, and of course Constantine's behavior during World War I was inexcusable, but by and large the Kings supported and encouraged the people's aspirations rather than defying them. Wouldn't you say that in the last century, the best time for Greece was in the 1950s through the mid-'60s? Of course that probably has more to do with General Papagos and Karamanlis (before he turned traitor), but still, the two Glücksburgs then reigning certainly didn't hurt matters either. - Biruitorul Talk 06:01, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
The
WikiProject Greece Newsletter Issue XII (VIII) – March 2011 | |
| |
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece/Outreach#Delivery options. |
..for helping out while I was on a wiki-break. Hohenloh + 00:11, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
fair enough, i have added the deleted and added the appropriate references, and this theory is recognised, so please do not remove it again!!! please!
the reason to why it is elusive on the web at the moment is because the theory (the erraou theory, on Lucid dreaming) is relatively new, so give it time, and I assure you that it will become more known, so please do the kind thing and let it spread.
kind regards,
Sam Erraou, Representative for KCL college, Creative ideas institute, London, United Kingdom — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swe41 ( talk • contribs) 18:27, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Mate, please, just let this one go.
I am not trying to purposely undermine wikipedia, but i feel that it needs these new plausbile theories, please just let this ONE theory remain, just this once...what harm will it do.
In fact, just give it a month, and i assure you, the references i put up after that will be genuine, since by this point the theory would have spread sufficiently enough for it to be a recognised theory.
Please my friend, just let this one issue go, and i assure you, you will not regret it, as it soon will be a recognised theory, you just need to give it time to spread across the web.
Please.
Kind Regards,
Sam Erraou — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swe41 ( talk • contribs) 18:40, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for bringing these issues to my attention. I will be more careful next time I try to edit something as major as this on Wikipedia. Have a good day! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.130.71.57 ( talk) 17:21, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
I apologise for any inconvenience/harassment on my behalf, and i assure you this will not happen again.
However, the Wiki:ANI case was really not your place to intervene, was it not?
regards Swe41 ( talk) 16:36, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
User_talk:Swe41#Blocked, blocked for this -- Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 17:38, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
I have fixed my Citing. Is it O.K now? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheMainEditor ( talk • contribs) 01:23, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
So? If there is no standard, then why did you revert it? -- Stultiwikia text me 00:10, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for a quick and decisive intervention. I guess I should have moved to request a page protection after the first couple of reverts, but I hoped they (or rather he) would get the message or at least discuss. Cheers, and best to you. Constantine ✍ 19:39, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
My apologies for troubling you with this. I just wanted your opinion/advice on the following. I've worked quite hard to develop the article Human_rights_in_Northern_Cyprus. The only way that I can think of to avoid POV-based placement of historical events/references is by having strict chronological order. I don't know what Wikipedia rules are concerning chronological order but I think that it makes sense to record older events first (with a general introduction at the top). The article has been subject to edits where references from generalist annual reports about human rights (over a specific calendar year) are placed at the top of each section. Since they usually only report about one calendar year it is usually a clean bill of health for specific human rights (that ignore all that has gone before). Personally, I find this quite offensive (and I try very hard not to be offended by it or to say so). Is chronological order a fair approach? If it is, how should it be policed? Since chronological order is regularly and deliberately ignored. I'm finding that it is a high-maintenance article and I really do not enjoy editing it but it is an important article. Nipsonanomhmata (Talk) 22:36, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for catching the copyvio there. Steven Walling 03:15, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi Dr. K, could you provide some insight into the discussion on this issue on Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis' page? I don't want to get into a revision war with the other editor, so I thought I'd ask for another educated opinion on the matter (I've left the same message on the talk page of Tvoz, too.) Thank you! FrostySnows ( talk) 16:25, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello friend, please take a look at this. It is a dicussion on de-jure versus de-facto names. Your advise is welcome. Neftchi ( talk) 19:11, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for catching my mix-up over here: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=ODB&action=historysubmit&diff=431089203&oldid=431088937
Found that a full minute before I realized my own mistake.
Cheers! P1h3r1e3d13 ( talk) 23:02, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Have you had any dealings with self-published books as sources? If so, what exactly are the restrictions(if any) on such sources? Thanks. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 06:02, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello Dr. K.
I see you've been keeping any eye on "Dominique Strauss Kahn sexual allegation assault case".
A user, apparently an experienced editor, has taken it upon himself/herself to delete the "By feminists and anti-sexists" subsection of "French reaction" saying it's a soapbox and has no place in the article. I've been restoring, although I haven't contributed to this section, beyond copy-editing it occasionally and wikilinking some of its names, nor have I commented on the section. He/she has now used Twinkle to overcome the 3RR rule. Is that legitimate and can you help if it's not?
I hope this isn't a troublesome request. FightingMac ( talk) 01:03, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello Dr.K. I hope you will approve of this change in the translation of the ESA motto. I see you've done a lot of work on this article. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 04:27, 2 June 2011 (UTC)