Some days my patience is sorely tried... Jayjg (talk) 20:36, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
I think the speedy was declined improperly by the person who tagged it. Can this still be a speedy or should I take it to AfD. Bgwhite ( talk) 23:55, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Purplebackpack89 claim on Danjel abusing Twinkle is this but Danjel did request that Purplebackpack89 stay off, understandably so, his talk page. Bidgee ( talk) 00:26, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
There is a user changing wording of a couple of direct quotes here. Gooolog ( talk) 01:34, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
did this because typo made sentence hard for me to read -- obviously revert if you object me to tweaking your comment. Nobody Ent 01:53, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm working on moving around the refs for
Miss Millie, and retrieved dates of today are showing up. I'm not deliberately adding them, and I'm just cutting and pasting from what was there - not adding cite templates. WTF?
Ladyof
Shalott
02:02, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
|others=
" for, I believe, the first and only time
a few months ago. •
MANdARAX •
XAЯAbИAM
08:52, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
← Bg, I think you may have to revert a lot more vandalism if you expect your user page to get vandalized. Still, it's shocking that it hasn't been. If Dr. M's doppelgänger doesn't do it, maybe I will. As for that threat, it almost looks like a joke, although it clearly isn't. That user's page contains a very unfunny joke; I've seen others who have the same joke on their user page brought to ANI because of it. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 03:58, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Apache warrior. Best quote from the article, "Apache Warrior began watching pornography consistently starting in 1985 when he was in college." Only the first ref backs up anything. See it while it is "hot", because it is being speedy deleted. Bgwhite ( talk) 04:36, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
You have read James Tod but may not be aware that in the past he has been removed as a source from articles due to issues regarding WP:RS. The biographical article makes that evident, of course. I am having a spot of bother at Ror with reference to the use of Tod, and it involves Ror Is King, with whom both of us had dealings last November that ended up at WP:ANI. Within the last few days, general sanctions have been put into place for Indian subcontinent caste/community articles, per this, and I tried to make the user aware of them here. Their response, aside from reverting me again, was to go a bit daft on my talk page. "Daft" because, as in November, they have completely misunderstood how we operate. What do I do next? I did open a discussion at Talk:Ror#James Tod prior to their last revert, pointing out the numerous references contained in James Tod that demonstrate his unreliability. What do I do next? I am unfamiliar with the operation of general sanctions etc. - Sitush ( talk) 14:34, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm not aware of the sanctions bit for caste articles (but I'll look in a moment) and don't know how that would affect this article (I don't know much about sanctions in the first place). Who was involved in the discussion that led to the sanctions? Who brought down the hammer? Ask them, I'd say... And where's Spaceman Spiff when you need him? Good luck Sitush--there's not much I can do for you right now but wish you well. Drmies ( talk) 20:21, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Well, you were right. RIK went mad at James Tod, adding unsourced quotations etc that were of-topic. I have left a note for them. - Sitush ( talk) 03:46, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
...for your contribution to the article weasel! Chrisrus ( talk) 17:59, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
I was not engaged in an edit war. I only altered the page two times. I did not break the rules, as there is no established talk for the subject upon which i was editing on the modern history of syria page. I7laseral ( talk) 05:00, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
[2]. At least they read their own message, then. But what about all the WikiLove that's undoubtedly coming their way? Drmies ( talk) 05:08, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Drmies thanks for your notce in Talk:2011–2012 Syrian uprising. I can see you instantly realized what fallacy he was citing, that "I can find lots of 'experts' who say [nonsense] therefore I can ignore your peer reviewed mulpile scholarly references" Can you briefly clarify this "WP:RSN"? Is that the place to get mediation so third parties can conclude, basically, "Columbia University and Simon Fraser University and Boston University professors publishing in peer reviewed scholarly journals and in their books citing original materials, are not the same as 'self appointed 'scholars' who say UFOs took Elvis" so I7laseral should stop deleting the fact (CIA involvement in 1949 coup in Syria) he keep deleting depiste 4-5 sources/references?"?
I personally don't need advice on whether Columbia University, etc, scholars in their own fields, are reliable, but I may need a 'ruling' from others that it is, due to I7's repeated actions. From what I can see of WP:RSN, it's not clear whether a definitive ruling can be gotten there, or whether peopel will laugh at my question and just reply, "Duh. Of *course* multiple professors from prominent universtieis writing about their own field, and documenting or peer reviewed, is reliable, Duh!" Or should I post for just that exactly? Thanks in advance. Harel ( talk) 05:48, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Mind you, I say all of this in general, right? I haven't looked carefully at your references or the content of the text--but I did see a few "UP"s, and it's easy to recognize that your opponent's argument is without merit (which doesn't make you right, of course). I'm no historian, at least not of the modern period, so I can't tell right off the bat who's right and who's wrong, but I do have an idea of where the stronger argument lies. Does that help? Good luck, Drmies ( talk) 15:21, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Syria became an independent republic in 1946. Syrian democracy was overturned a few years later, however, when the March_1949_Syrian_coup_d'état in the country ended democratic rule in a coup which, according to declassified records and statements by former CIA agents, was sponsored by the United States CIA. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]
Hello! Wilhelmina Will has given you some cookies. Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully these have made your day better. Happy munching! Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:plate}} to someone's talk page, or eat these cookies on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munchplate}}. |
Wilhelmina Will ( talk) 10:43, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm sure it was a mistake :) For An Angel ( talk) 14:52, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
LOL. Don't take it so seriously. It's just a show and it's supposed to be fun. I can't get enough of it :) For An Angel ( talk) 04:09, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Remember what i told you months ago about the "Portuguese" League being filled with foreigners? Have a look at this matchsheet and try to pick out the intruder (see here http://www.zerozero.pt/jogo.php?id=1730521&page=1).
Charming hey? As always, kind regards, keep up the good work - -- Vasco Amaral ( talk) 17:20, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Item #2: can't help you much with the technicalities there mate! Only thing i know is that the discussion (discussions!) is (are) there, and he has NEVER participated. Also, as you well indicated in the report, he writes almost no summaries (99,99999999999999% of the time he does not), and the pattern continues. Ah, and what about his talkpage messages? No, he has not respond to those either, safe for the first time, where he pretty much told User:GiantSnowman he was clueless. -- Vasco Amaral ( talk) 01:02, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
The reason I reduced the "Taxonomy" section in this article was because Obsidian Soul and I came to the conclusion that it should be taken out. I created a separate page for the species Naja nigricincta. LAx33 ( talk) 17:53, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello, since you recently participated in an RfC at Campaign for "santorum" neologism, I thought you might be interested in this proposal for renaming the article, or perhaps another of the rename proposals on the page. Best, Be——Critical 22:09, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Friendly sir,
A few weeks ago, you issued a gracious invitation for my wife and I to join you and yours for dinner tonight at a fancy restaurant near your local Publix. Were it not for the several thousand mile trip and a myriad of other obligations, we would have accepted. Instead we dined in our home, my wife and I and our 22 year old disabled younger son, on wild sockeye salmon, rice pilaf and steamed broccoli topped with toasted almonds. To garnish the salmon, I halved and cored some cherry tomatoes, then cut them into heart shapes. Three hearts adorned each fillet. The wine was a cheap dark pink sparkler, but these days, even cheap California wines are pretty decent. Chocolate lava cake will follow shortly.
So, we appreciate the invitation, and when our ship comes in, we will journey your way. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:31, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Are you familiar with James Spann? I used to watch him, mostly before he made certain of his opinions known. <If I said just what I thought of some of those views, I might be in BLP violation.> Ladyof Shalott 05:07, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
... conspiracy theories. - Sitush ( talk) 06:19, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Sad but at least closure. MartinSFSA ( talk) 07:01, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Over at Watts Up With That? there are many instances of "Watts's" - I was about to change them to "Watts'" but apparently both are right and we link to that article in the MOS. Which do you reckon is better? "Watts's" looks stupid IMO. On a kind of related note [4]. SmartSE ( talk) 15:23, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Dear Drmies, Further regarding article on Abdul Qavi Desnavi, finally edited by Ehsan Sehgal his new user name is Justice007 on 30 Dec. 2011. His edits are not constructive. I consider, he is not familiar with topic, it seems he never read books & writing of Desnavi. He deleted important matters from the article, even the name of books from the list. Desnavi has written around 50 books Ref. http://www.worldcat.org/wcidentities/lccn-n84-206925 but he mentioned only 13 books & deleted rest from the list. Even he given wrong Ref. (see, http://theindianawaaz.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2992&catid=12) That ref. is from news paper that only given one name of his book. In brief, I think said article not need any correction, in case if it is not in parameter of Wikipedia then it can be corrected by any of his editor but should not allow for deletion of matter which has proper references. Almost 45 days passed nobody has rated the article after deletion of matter, if you check history you will find the article was rated by many readers. As you had commented earlier on the article, so I requested please go through original article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bpldxb/sandbox & judge yourself. Regards Bpldxb' 16:41, 15 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bpldxb ( talk • contribs)
Hi, I am starting Wikipedia:WikiProject Ravidassia. I would like to get help from people who are interested. You may sign up for the project on the [ [5]]. McKinseies ( talk) 17:02, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
I missed your extensive post at the Edit Warring noticeboard until after I had already blocked Kumioko 31 hours. The trigger here was the declaration that they intended to continue reverting, which is a bad thing. As always, I'm open to review - but wanted to apologize if I stepped on your toes. Thanks. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 18:02, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi Drmies; it's 99 again, this time getting involved at Fred Flintstone and Nancy Mercado. The former is minor stuff, but it's irksome to be questioned about socking [6]. The latter is more serious, re: COI and copyright violations, and a user who persistently claims ownership of the article. If you have a few spare minutes and nothing better to do your thoughts re: either article would be greatly appreciated. Hope you're well. Cheers, 99.12.242.7 ( talk) 19:28, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
On Talk:Raising a flag over the Reichstag you wrote "FWIW, the proposer of this move/rename has been proven a sock of User:Anonymiss Madchen" Where? -- PBS ( talk) 21:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Its OK I've found it Sockpuppet investigations: Sascha Kreiger We need banners at the top of the Socks and the puppet master so that there is a category of these accounts (so that users can be easily informed about this character. As you know more about this than me, I would prefer it if you did this. But if not then let me know and I will preform the honours. -- PBS ( talk) 21:46, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Dunno why i keep nagging you with the subject, especially when you must be much more au courant than me on the subject, but i took the trouble...
Last round in the Eredivisie: TWENTE-HERACLES (14 national players in 22); AZ-EXCELSIOR (13/22); VENLO-GRONINGEN (17/22); RODA-NEC (8/22, the weakest); UTRECHT-DEN HAAG (15/22); PSV/DE GRAAFSCHAP (11/22); RKC-HEERENVEEN (16/22); FEYENOORD-VITESSE (16/22) and NAC-AJAX (14/22). As you can see, no gray area there, no comparison with the "Portuguese" League, i even know of cases of teams in the Liga de Honra (second division) with nearly 20 foreigners.
Cheerio, keep it up - -- Vasco Amaral ( talk) 21:42, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
The numbers are both starting teams combined (hence the number 22), following the order in which the teams are presented. In this round, the teams that played with the less nationals were indeed RODA (3, plus the 5 from NEC equals the 8 you see) but not only, also PSV (3, but as GRAAFSCHAP fielded 8 it equals 11); on the opposite pole, NAC BREDA "presented" 10 Dutch players (+4 from AJAX equals 14), FEYENOORD and RKC both 9 (so HEERENVEEN is not the "champion" there, sorry if i disappointed you :)).
Hey, they may not be the champions of national players' defense, but next season comes the son of God... -- Vasco Amaral ( talk) 23:39, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: line feed character in |title=
at position 57 (
help)
Recent investigation..indicates that CIA agents Miles Copeland and Stephen Meade..were directly involved in the coup in which Syrian colonel husni Za'im seized power. According to then former CIA agent Wilbur Eveland, the coup was carried out in order to obtain Syrian ratification of TAPLINE.
{{
cite book}}
: line feed character in |title=
at position 56 (
help)
Miles Copeland, formerly a CIA agent, has outlined how he and Stephen Meade backed Zaim, and American archival sources confirm that it was during this period that Meade established links with extremist right-wing elements of the Syrian army, who ultimately carried out the coup.
{{
cite book}}
: line feed character in |quote=
at position 58 (
help)
Some days my patience is sorely tried... Jayjg (talk) 20:36, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
I think the speedy was declined improperly by the person who tagged it. Can this still be a speedy or should I take it to AfD. Bgwhite ( talk) 23:55, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Purplebackpack89 claim on Danjel abusing Twinkle is this but Danjel did request that Purplebackpack89 stay off, understandably so, his talk page. Bidgee ( talk) 00:26, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
There is a user changing wording of a couple of direct quotes here. Gooolog ( talk) 01:34, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
did this because typo made sentence hard for me to read -- obviously revert if you object me to tweaking your comment. Nobody Ent 01:53, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm working on moving around the refs for
Miss Millie, and retrieved dates of today are showing up. I'm not deliberately adding them, and I'm just cutting and pasting from what was there - not adding cite templates. WTF?
Ladyof
Shalott
02:02, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
|others=
" for, I believe, the first and only time
a few months ago. •
MANdARAX •
XAЯAbИAM
08:52, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
← Bg, I think you may have to revert a lot more vandalism if you expect your user page to get vandalized. Still, it's shocking that it hasn't been. If Dr. M's doppelgänger doesn't do it, maybe I will. As for that threat, it almost looks like a joke, although it clearly isn't. That user's page contains a very unfunny joke; I've seen others who have the same joke on their user page brought to ANI because of it. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 03:58, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Apache warrior. Best quote from the article, "Apache Warrior began watching pornography consistently starting in 1985 when he was in college." Only the first ref backs up anything. See it while it is "hot", because it is being speedy deleted. Bgwhite ( talk) 04:36, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
You have read James Tod but may not be aware that in the past he has been removed as a source from articles due to issues regarding WP:RS. The biographical article makes that evident, of course. I am having a spot of bother at Ror with reference to the use of Tod, and it involves Ror Is King, with whom both of us had dealings last November that ended up at WP:ANI. Within the last few days, general sanctions have been put into place for Indian subcontinent caste/community articles, per this, and I tried to make the user aware of them here. Their response, aside from reverting me again, was to go a bit daft on my talk page. "Daft" because, as in November, they have completely misunderstood how we operate. What do I do next? I did open a discussion at Talk:Ror#James Tod prior to their last revert, pointing out the numerous references contained in James Tod that demonstrate his unreliability. What do I do next? I am unfamiliar with the operation of general sanctions etc. - Sitush ( talk) 14:34, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm not aware of the sanctions bit for caste articles (but I'll look in a moment) and don't know how that would affect this article (I don't know much about sanctions in the first place). Who was involved in the discussion that led to the sanctions? Who brought down the hammer? Ask them, I'd say... And where's Spaceman Spiff when you need him? Good luck Sitush--there's not much I can do for you right now but wish you well. Drmies ( talk) 20:21, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Well, you were right. RIK went mad at James Tod, adding unsourced quotations etc that were of-topic. I have left a note for them. - Sitush ( talk) 03:46, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
...for your contribution to the article weasel! Chrisrus ( talk) 17:59, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
I was not engaged in an edit war. I only altered the page two times. I did not break the rules, as there is no established talk for the subject upon which i was editing on the modern history of syria page. I7laseral ( talk) 05:00, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
[2]. At least they read their own message, then. But what about all the WikiLove that's undoubtedly coming their way? Drmies ( talk) 05:08, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Drmies thanks for your notce in Talk:2011–2012 Syrian uprising. I can see you instantly realized what fallacy he was citing, that "I can find lots of 'experts' who say [nonsense] therefore I can ignore your peer reviewed mulpile scholarly references" Can you briefly clarify this "WP:RSN"? Is that the place to get mediation so third parties can conclude, basically, "Columbia University and Simon Fraser University and Boston University professors publishing in peer reviewed scholarly journals and in their books citing original materials, are not the same as 'self appointed 'scholars' who say UFOs took Elvis" so I7laseral should stop deleting the fact (CIA involvement in 1949 coup in Syria) he keep deleting depiste 4-5 sources/references?"?
I personally don't need advice on whether Columbia University, etc, scholars in their own fields, are reliable, but I may need a 'ruling' from others that it is, due to I7's repeated actions. From what I can see of WP:RSN, it's not clear whether a definitive ruling can be gotten there, or whether peopel will laugh at my question and just reply, "Duh. Of *course* multiple professors from prominent universtieis writing about their own field, and documenting or peer reviewed, is reliable, Duh!" Or should I post for just that exactly? Thanks in advance. Harel ( talk) 05:48, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Mind you, I say all of this in general, right? I haven't looked carefully at your references or the content of the text--but I did see a few "UP"s, and it's easy to recognize that your opponent's argument is without merit (which doesn't make you right, of course). I'm no historian, at least not of the modern period, so I can't tell right off the bat who's right and who's wrong, but I do have an idea of where the stronger argument lies. Does that help? Good luck, Drmies ( talk) 15:21, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Syria became an independent republic in 1946. Syrian democracy was overturned a few years later, however, when the March_1949_Syrian_coup_d'état in the country ended democratic rule in a coup which, according to declassified records and statements by former CIA agents, was sponsored by the United States CIA. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]
Hello! Wilhelmina Will has given you some cookies. Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully these have made your day better. Happy munching! Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:plate}} to someone's talk page, or eat these cookies on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munchplate}}. |
Wilhelmina Will ( talk) 10:43, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm sure it was a mistake :) For An Angel ( talk) 14:52, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
LOL. Don't take it so seriously. It's just a show and it's supposed to be fun. I can't get enough of it :) For An Angel ( talk) 04:09, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Remember what i told you months ago about the "Portuguese" League being filled with foreigners? Have a look at this matchsheet and try to pick out the intruder (see here http://www.zerozero.pt/jogo.php?id=1730521&page=1).
Charming hey? As always, kind regards, keep up the good work - -- Vasco Amaral ( talk) 17:20, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Item #2: can't help you much with the technicalities there mate! Only thing i know is that the discussion (discussions!) is (are) there, and he has NEVER participated. Also, as you well indicated in the report, he writes almost no summaries (99,99999999999999% of the time he does not), and the pattern continues. Ah, and what about his talkpage messages? No, he has not respond to those either, safe for the first time, where he pretty much told User:GiantSnowman he was clueless. -- Vasco Amaral ( talk) 01:02, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
The reason I reduced the "Taxonomy" section in this article was because Obsidian Soul and I came to the conclusion that it should be taken out. I created a separate page for the species Naja nigricincta. LAx33 ( talk) 17:53, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello, since you recently participated in an RfC at Campaign for "santorum" neologism, I thought you might be interested in this proposal for renaming the article, or perhaps another of the rename proposals on the page. Best, Be——Critical 22:09, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Friendly sir,
A few weeks ago, you issued a gracious invitation for my wife and I to join you and yours for dinner tonight at a fancy restaurant near your local Publix. Were it not for the several thousand mile trip and a myriad of other obligations, we would have accepted. Instead we dined in our home, my wife and I and our 22 year old disabled younger son, on wild sockeye salmon, rice pilaf and steamed broccoli topped with toasted almonds. To garnish the salmon, I halved and cored some cherry tomatoes, then cut them into heart shapes. Three hearts adorned each fillet. The wine was a cheap dark pink sparkler, but these days, even cheap California wines are pretty decent. Chocolate lava cake will follow shortly.
So, we appreciate the invitation, and when our ship comes in, we will journey your way. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:31, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Are you familiar with James Spann? I used to watch him, mostly before he made certain of his opinions known. <If I said just what I thought of some of those views, I might be in BLP violation.> Ladyof Shalott 05:07, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
... conspiracy theories. - Sitush ( talk) 06:19, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Sad but at least closure. MartinSFSA ( talk) 07:01, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Over at Watts Up With That? there are many instances of "Watts's" - I was about to change them to "Watts'" but apparently both are right and we link to that article in the MOS. Which do you reckon is better? "Watts's" looks stupid IMO. On a kind of related note [4]. SmartSE ( talk) 15:23, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Dear Drmies, Further regarding article on Abdul Qavi Desnavi, finally edited by Ehsan Sehgal his new user name is Justice007 on 30 Dec. 2011. His edits are not constructive. I consider, he is not familiar with topic, it seems he never read books & writing of Desnavi. He deleted important matters from the article, even the name of books from the list. Desnavi has written around 50 books Ref. http://www.worldcat.org/wcidentities/lccn-n84-206925 but he mentioned only 13 books & deleted rest from the list. Even he given wrong Ref. (see, http://theindianawaaz.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2992&catid=12) That ref. is from news paper that only given one name of his book. In brief, I think said article not need any correction, in case if it is not in parameter of Wikipedia then it can be corrected by any of his editor but should not allow for deletion of matter which has proper references. Almost 45 days passed nobody has rated the article after deletion of matter, if you check history you will find the article was rated by many readers. As you had commented earlier on the article, so I requested please go through original article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bpldxb/sandbox & judge yourself. Regards Bpldxb' 16:41, 15 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bpldxb ( talk • contribs)
Hi, I am starting Wikipedia:WikiProject Ravidassia. I would like to get help from people who are interested. You may sign up for the project on the [ [5]]. McKinseies ( talk) 17:02, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
I missed your extensive post at the Edit Warring noticeboard until after I had already blocked Kumioko 31 hours. The trigger here was the declaration that they intended to continue reverting, which is a bad thing. As always, I'm open to review - but wanted to apologize if I stepped on your toes. Thanks. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 18:02, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi Drmies; it's 99 again, this time getting involved at Fred Flintstone and Nancy Mercado. The former is minor stuff, but it's irksome to be questioned about socking [6]. The latter is more serious, re: COI and copyright violations, and a user who persistently claims ownership of the article. If you have a few spare minutes and nothing better to do your thoughts re: either article would be greatly appreciated. Hope you're well. Cheers, 99.12.242.7 ( talk) 19:28, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
On Talk:Raising a flag over the Reichstag you wrote "FWIW, the proposer of this move/rename has been proven a sock of User:Anonymiss Madchen" Where? -- PBS ( talk) 21:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Its OK I've found it Sockpuppet investigations: Sascha Kreiger We need banners at the top of the Socks and the puppet master so that there is a category of these accounts (so that users can be easily informed about this character. As you know more about this than me, I would prefer it if you did this. But if not then let me know and I will preform the honours. -- PBS ( talk) 21:46, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Dunno why i keep nagging you with the subject, especially when you must be much more au courant than me on the subject, but i took the trouble...
Last round in the Eredivisie: TWENTE-HERACLES (14 national players in 22); AZ-EXCELSIOR (13/22); VENLO-GRONINGEN (17/22); RODA-NEC (8/22, the weakest); UTRECHT-DEN HAAG (15/22); PSV/DE GRAAFSCHAP (11/22); RKC-HEERENVEEN (16/22); FEYENOORD-VITESSE (16/22) and NAC-AJAX (14/22). As you can see, no gray area there, no comparison with the "Portuguese" League, i even know of cases of teams in the Liga de Honra (second division) with nearly 20 foreigners.
Cheerio, keep it up - -- Vasco Amaral ( talk) 21:42, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
The numbers are both starting teams combined (hence the number 22), following the order in which the teams are presented. In this round, the teams that played with the less nationals were indeed RODA (3, plus the 5 from NEC equals the 8 you see) but not only, also PSV (3, but as GRAAFSCHAP fielded 8 it equals 11); on the opposite pole, NAC BREDA "presented" 10 Dutch players (+4 from AJAX equals 14), FEYENOORD and RKC both 9 (so HEERENVEEN is not the "champion" there, sorry if i disappointed you :)).
Hey, they may not be the champions of national players' defense, but next season comes the son of God... -- Vasco Amaral ( talk) 23:39, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: line feed character in |title=
at position 57 (
help)
Recent investigation..indicates that CIA agents Miles Copeland and Stephen Meade..were directly involved in the coup in which Syrian colonel husni Za'im seized power. According to then former CIA agent Wilbur Eveland, the coup was carried out in order to obtain Syrian ratification of TAPLINE.
{{
cite book}}
: line feed character in |title=
at position 56 (
help)
Miles Copeland, formerly a CIA agent, has outlined how he and Stephen Meade backed Zaim, and American archival sources confirm that it was during this period that Meade established links with extremist right-wing elements of the Syrian army, who ultimately carried out the coup.
{{
cite book}}
: line feed character in |quote=
at position 58 (
help)