![]() | This page 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. |
No comment really.-- Anothroskon ( talk) 08:45, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Please see the recent editing history @ Template:Table Greekletters and the brief discussion at User talk:Scientizzle#Name. Since you protected the page and seem to know more about what's going on with these topics in general, maybe you can clear up what's going on? The edits of 204.152.215.115 ( talk · contribs) alse seem to have a fixation on you... — Scien tizzle 14:21, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
I've posted to ANI regarding your BLP-based reversions at Conservapedia to get more admin eyeballs on the issue. In no way was it intended to be an accusation or an attack on you, though it would have been better for you to bring in an uninvolved admin. ...comments? ~ B F izz 05:02, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Could you unprotect Conservapedia please? -- Nx / talk 09:53, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Shirik ( Questions or Comments?) 17:45, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello. You are invited to take part in the deletion discussion on the redirect Comparison between roman and han empires. Regards Gun Powder Ma ( talk) 01:57, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi there, as you have previously wondered about the reasons behind the ban of Offliner, I think you may be interested in this request for clarification. Colchicum ( talk) 10:45, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
The page on "Macedonia (ancient kingdom)" and other pages on Ancient Macedonia are probably corrupted. Therefore the editors of the page are warned to be aware of potential sockpuppeters (a report of the recent sockpuppetry investigation is displayed). Please do not repeatedly erase that report, or you risk to be blocked. Draganparis ( talk) 17:59, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
I think that a collage image would be the best thing for the Istanbul article, no matter what the collage is, as it is Wikipedia custom to give large and especially historic cities such collages. Personally, I would not mind if the other collage, not just the one I personally prefer, would be inserted. What say you?-- RM ( Be my friend) 04:05, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
On March 29, 2007, you deleted a number of files of images occurring in our article Galatasaray Lisesi, stating as the reason: (copyvio, banned user) ( User:Shuppiluliuma?). These included the following:
Two days later, a new single-purpose account
uploaded eight files to the Wikimedia Commons, including seven with the above names, claiming {{
PD-self}}
.
I can't check if these are the same images as the files you deleted, but I bet they are. I also don't know how you determined copyvio, but I bet the eighth one ( commons:File:Logo2b.jpg) is also a copyvio. If they are indeed copyvios, they should be deleted at the Commons, but I don't have the evidence available. Is it convenient for you to take care of this? -- Lambiam 20:29, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
hello. I have some problems with this user in Kermanshah page. he deleted my reliable refrences about this article many times without any explanation.(see here and here)and just accusing me of being sockpuppet of a user that called Persia2099. as I saw this user's talk page the reason that we was blocked was making multiple image upload with false copyright declarations. but I myself never uploaded any images in wikipedia so I don't have anything to do with him. after all you should do something about this user he is going to waste my time for reverting this page again and again. thank you-- Bahramm 2 ( talk) 10:18, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello FP. If this is not your thing, you are welcome to send away this question with no further comment. I saw your name in the history of WP:DIGWUREN as someone who aded sanctions there lately. I was looking around for an admin familiar with Eastern Europe that could review some ideas I have for closing a 3RR case.
See WP:AN3#User:Squash Racket reported by User:Umumu(Result: ). This is a case of Hungarian vs Romanian nationalist controversy, on historical topics. There have been disputes for a long time at John Hunyadi, and the article Magyarization probably can go without comment so far as the opportunity for arousing passions. The 3RR case is open, and could provide a chance for using discretionary sanctions under WP:DIGWUREN, if it's a good solution. The person who brought the complaint has broken 3RR, in my opinion, and may be a sock of User:Iaaasi, though I would not attempt to resolve that matter now. Instead of a 3RR block a 1RR restriction on the complaining editor seems justifiable, under discretionary sanctions. If another admin makes this moot by closing the 3RR sooner, I would consider taking the action myself and then offering it for review on a noticeboard.
If I first offer this issue for comment at ANI as a 'what to do' question, there will be 50 yards of comment from involved editors in no time. My interest would be in taking an admin action that has a chance of quieting down the Hungarian-Romanian front in our articles, in the longer term. A nice summary of the long-term problem is given at User_talk:Excirial#Low_intensity_edit_war_:.29.
Instead of a personal 1RR restriction, a milder action could be to impose an *article* 1RR on both John Hunyadi and Magyarization. This probably needs WP:AN to ratify, but it shouldn't be difficult. Any feedback as to what is best solution would be welcome. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 17:01, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
I like the way you've redone the article on Hellenic languages. ( Taivo ( talk) 18:49, 16 April 2010 (UTC))
While I rarely like it when anyone declares from on high that free discussion should not be allowed, I could at least get over that if your decision wasn't so absurd.
Any new proposal at renaming can be brought forward later only if it comes with fresh, new ideas, and if it is proposed by somebody other than those who have been squabbling over it for months.
The rules on discussing something which has already been discussed are new evidence not new ideas. There will probably not be any "fresh, new ideas" because the question of changing the title is about common names and descriptiveness with the proposed titles all basically set in stone. Also, it seems you are saying even if I were to somehow come up with a fresh, new idea I would not be able to present it simply because I have debated this before. You are clearly violating Wikipedia policy in making this decision.
As for a rename not being required:
When there is no obvious common name for the topic, as used by a significant majority of reliable English language sources, editors should reach a consensus as to which title is best.
There it is rather clear that if it is a common name there should not be any question as to what title should be used with consensus only necessary if there is not a common name. The only policy that could prevent it would be on neutrality which was already tossed out by a past admin.-- The Devil's Advocate ( talk) 00:07, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion here. Tadija speaks 17:06, 18 April 2010 (UTC) (Using {{ Please see}}) -- Tadija speaks 17:06, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Kushtrim123 mentioned you [2]. Could you please verify/explain what Kushtrim123 claims to be your comments.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 17:43, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello Future. I have seen this user page and I was shocked. How is he allowed to put such user box about the Macedonian language on Wikipedia? Can you delete that user box from Wikipedia and from his user page as well? I think you are allowed to delete it since you were deleting user boxes from my page, too. I hope that this user box would be eliminated from this Wikipedia. (The box says: this users speaks on the Bulgarian dfialect of FYROM). Thanks in advance -- MacedonianBoy ( talk) 19:33, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Since I feel offended by this comment [ [3]] you recently posted, can you please explain me how, Vikos-Aoos National Park (1 of my 2 GAs) or the majority of the articles I've created so far are consider anti-Albanian and I personally hardly ever in all my career on Wikipedia made a single edit to any article that was not directly motivated by a single POV agenda (namely, making Albanians look bad and Greeks look good in the struggle over Epirus). Several other examples are Zakynthos Marine Park, Pindus National Park, Panagiotis Soutsos, Ioannis Giagkos, Battle of Elaia-Kalamas, Pavlos Vrellis Greek History Museum, Belthandros and Chrysantza Song of Armouris (all of them Dyk's) and several other [ [4]].
Actually the vast majority of my contribution is irrelevant with Albania. I kindly ask you to give an explanation on this or rephrase this comment because it is virtually wrong. Thank you. Alexikoua ( talk) 20:02, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
[5] I agree with this(in fact it was my first proposed version) but since it was endlessly reverted by some users I decided to compromise.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 21:26, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Just a heads up I have returned after a break to the London Victory Parade of 1946 and have made a few edits, including additions and removals of material. I would appreciate your observation of the page, and guidance. There is also some discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Polish participation at the London Victory Parade of 1946 Thanks, - Chumchum7 ( talk) 15:48, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi! Could you look at this article? Something should be done to facilitate discussion. Alæxis ¿question? 21:38, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
A while ago I started a discussion here, but no neutral/uninvolved editor replied and I was wondering if you could take a look.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 13:23, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
I'm guessing that Nipsonanomhmata ( talk · contribs) tagged the article for WP:GREECE because of the historical connection with Archimedes (much of that narrative was removed recently – a genuine case of throwing out the bath-water!) Cheers -- RexxS ( talk) 14:37, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
I am wondering if you find anything unusual with this user's activities. After being uninvolved in South Ossetia War article rename discussions he has suddenly become heavily involved. He may just be trying to take up the slack or something of the sort, but it just seems unusual to me.-- The Devil's Advocate ( talk) 17:54, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
How very nice. I have just hinted at a probable necessity of requesting a mediation, and Devil's Advocate already spreads around doubts in me and my activities. "Always strike first (repeatedly)" - it must be a good motto, no, Devil's Advocate? Looks like I will have to act accordingly.
Future Perfect at Sunrise, since you're an administrator, who already has some experience with contentious atmosphere in 2008 South Ossetia war article, may I request your attention to a new rename discussion, spawned by Devil's Advocate immediately after you have closed the previous one [7]? Although I get an impression, that you are already well aware of it, I'm still interested in hearing your opinion on how much this new discussion is different from previous ones, considering that Devil's Advocate has already used several of his old arguments, including his usual Ad Hominems, and still haven't presented a single new one. Moreover, he have started inviting other users for comments on his new proposal, which is not a criminal thing in itself, but from the two users, who have responded, one have declared himself disinterested in the discussion (because he sees no difference from previous ones, and expects no result from it [8]), and another have already started using the same old proposals and arguments (against Devil's Advocate, I might add [9]). I'm afraid it all is just a spark for igniting a yet another fully blown rename discussion with no new arguments whatsoever.
To summarize, current Devil's Advocate proposal basically concerns a required ratio between descriptiveness and commonness of the title - a question, which is not regulated by current Wikipedia rules, and therefore the answer is bound to be sought in the area of each one's personal subjective opinion. I think, and I hope you'll agree with me, that it's hard to expect that editors of this polarized article will come to a single opinion, and therefore it all indeed will be just yet another waste of time. If a stop can be put to these endless rename discussions, at least until new facts concerning the article arise, I think it's time to do that now. ETST ( talk) 22:25, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
At http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Ukrainians&action=history , involving User:Voyevoda . Inflammatory undiscussed WP:SYNTH.- Galassi ( talk) 06:23, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for the warning but unfortunately you're wrong.-- Dr.Mamalala 09:20, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
This unexplained edit seems to break your editing restriction, especially as I'd reverted his removal of Kosovo last time he'd removed it. His edit summary for the first removal was "→Attending dignitaries: not a state" and mine for the reversion "The status of Kosovo is unclear - saying it is not a state over simplifies things - 66/192 UN states recognise it, importantly this includes Poland - please discuss on talk page before removing again." When he removed it the second time he neither left an edit summary or commented on the talk page. I'd appreciate it if you could take a look. Dpmuk ( talk) 13:07, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Your privileges as the administrator does not give you the right to destroy someone else's work[ [11]]. Do not do that again, thank you-- Dr.Mamalala 17:00, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Looks like Wiki Historian N OH is going through and reverting changes made by myself and others. Like readding clearly WP:OR and unsourced information about Walmarts and Lowes. Readding a picture of William Henry Harrison to the page. This guy has a blistering case of WP:OWN and needs to be stopped. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 22:29, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi, Future Perfect at Sunrise. Because you participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Tylman (3rd nomination), you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Tylman (4th nomination). Cunard ( talk) 02:21, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
I'm sorry for bothering you again, but I was wondering, whether you have accidentally missed my previous request. In addition to things already described there, all that has happened was Devil's Advocate again repeating himself word-to-word [12], and yet another user invited by him, completely ignored the topic of discussed proposal and went directly to supporting "Russo-Georgian war" title instead [13]. I want to hear your opinion on that. Anyway, I can understand, if you do not want to involve yourself in this matter anymore, but right now I need a clear answer on whether you're going to watch over this discussion and take necessary actions? If not, I'll probably just have to file an RfC, or find another admin, or whatever. Thanks for your understanding. ETST ( talk) 18:22, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
There's an anon IP that is on an anti-Linguist List crusade. He's deleting most of the article on the flimsy excuse that it's not referenced. He preceded this with a series of deletions of links to Linguist List's Multitree from a dozen or so language family articles. He's clearly operating off some sort of agenda. I've reverted his deletions at the main article twice now. ( Taivo ( talk) 10:28, 27 April 2010 (UTC))
You may remember I protested (not threatened you, as some claim) for one deletion of my text and I excused me later when you warned me to be an administrator (nothing showed to me before that you were an administrator though). Would you help now solve some defamation problem please? Thank you very much. Draganparis ( talk) 13:09, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
It is indeed correct that some Greeks palatalize l and n sounds before an "ee" sound and others do not unless there is another vowel following. Kostaki mou ( talk) 22:22, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Could you please help on this [14] before growing in a hot dispute? The same misused reference, is being replicated in all Illyrian related articles. Moreover look at this Peresadyes nonsense pure WP:SYNTH. Just try to figure out what this (lead of the article) could possibly mean Peresadyes, (Greek: Περεσάδυές[1]) were most likely a Thracian tribe[2] of the Edones or Illyrians[1](?!) that ruled[3] over, or(?!) with the Encheleans, or(?!) the Sesarethi, but only(?!) if the latter were not the Encheleans themselves(?!) and were part of the Taulantii group[4] of tribes.?!?!?!?! Thanks in advance Aigest ( talk) 11:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I replied here [16] but let me tell you that I was very surprised by your proposal! (Joking) Is it really you or somebody has stolen your identity ?:) Anyway my idea is that a person should be accountable for its own actions. Aigest ( talk) 15:13, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
I replied there. Please try to understand my point. Aigest ( talk) 15:34, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
I don't see why did you put my name in tag teaming with other guys, here my last 500 contributions [17]. Where do you see my tag teaming with quick reverts, except well known and now famous Dardani case, which was well explained by you in Kedadi case and where you do agree that I was right?! Aigest ( talk) 13:41, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
I am letting you know because you participated in the thread the first time it was brought to the WP:ANI. Here are the URL and wikilink to the current discussion. [18] Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Speedy deletion Uighur house redux
Cheers! Geo Swan ( talk) 14:04, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know in my talk page.
Thank you for letting me know in my talk page that you mentioned me in the AE. Please read my last comment. I actually agree with your proposal of imposing 1RR or 3RR rules to the whole group (last person that breaks it) rather than to the single person and I thank you for coming up with it. I would suggest that we extend that for at least 3 months. To me it makes sense and will give both us and the admins a break and more quietness in our editing and article improving.
I also have to praise user:alexikoua who came up with the idea of having a Greco-Albanian group to deal off articles for Albanian-Greek problematics User_talk:Sulmues#Common_sense. Could you help us with some advise on how we could set that up? -- Sulmues Let's talk 17:57, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Please see my response here. -- Sulmues Let's talk 18:53, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
I think we should build something similar to the Greek and Turkish wikipedians cooperation board. -- Sulmues Let's talk 02:10, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
The Albanian ethnicity of the Arvanites is an fundamental fact which must be taken into account no matter how much users with Greek point of views appeal to change real history. -- Albanau ( talk) 17:49, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
See the SPI here [21]. Athenean ( talk) 19:27, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Damn you're fast. I hadn't even finished notifying all the people he had gotten involved with. Athenean ( talk) 19:37, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Forgot this IP as well [22]. Thanks. Athenean ( talk) 20:01, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Up late tonight, are we? :) Thanks for the help on Democracy, that stuff it really out there. Athenean ( talk) 23:03, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the c-e job. By the way you have been mentioned in talk:Greeks in Albania, seems we have another situation. Alexikoua ( talk) 11:04, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Seems User Zjarri has got out of control. Disruptive activity in Anastasios Avramidis-Liaktsis, initiating moves without any discussion. Alexikoua ( talk) 11:31, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Guys, simply put your sources on the table. Alexikoua, I cannot verify your sources say what you claim they say (unlike with Zjarri's sources, of which I can check at least one.) Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:43, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Today, I had the chance to read your proposal at AE and I agree with it. The current situation is anything else but productive. For example as soon as Alexikoua reached 3 reverts in Greeks of Albania, Megistias started reverting [23]. He also reverted Aigest [24]. I remember clearly that with your help there was reached a consensus so I can't understand why he would start again reverting.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 13:01, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello, Future Perfect at Sunrise. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic wikihounding. Thank you.--See section "Is this acceptable Wikiquette?" Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 19:19, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Please note that the final decision has been made on this AE request; it will shortly be closed. Stifle ( talk) 10:59, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
I'll post my comments in the article's discussion page the following minutes, as per restriction. Actually the time I saved the new version I saw the note in my talk page. Alexikoua ( talk) 14:30, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Alexikoua insists that only Muslim Albanians can be called Cham Albanians. I was wondering what do you think about that since it seems that you have enough knowledge on the subject.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 21:07, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
There are many theories, I choosed the one that is described in the source Zjarri. used (Kretsi), which is definitely one of the most credible sources on the subject. Alexikoua ( talk) 21:40, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Does this outing justify a block? ( Taivo ( talk) 22:17, 2 May 2010 (UTC))
Could you take a look at this one please, it seems to be a problematic false positive: [ [25]]. Thanks in advance. The user was blocked as they tripped the filter, but from what I can see they were tagging deadlinks, which are infact dead, thus I will unblock them for now. -- Taelus ( talk) 23:38, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Could you please judge the situation, as I'd better avoid interacting with the notorious certified revert-warrior and wikistalker (almost certainly he'll soon appear right here): [26]. The problem ("Georgian" or "Jewish" or anything of this sort instead of "Soviet" when ethnicity hardly matters at all) is all over Wikipedia, though, so I don't know what would be a decent solution in the long run. Colchicum ( talk) 09:55, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
[27], your opinion would be helpful to clarify it.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 21:52, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
In this article Albanian Resistance of World War II there has been a continuous tendency in vandalism edits by anon IP [28], [29], [30], [31] and the last one [32]. The same thing even more exagerated happens in Albania article just look only the last days [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] and the last one [39]. Could you please semi-protect these pages so we can get rid of this abuse by anon IP, even other edits by IP are of no value, so we will lose nothing on allowing only established users to edit on these pages. Maybe this action can be extended over all Albanian articles which show such tendency. Aigest ( talk) 10:05, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
FPaS, simply wanting some clarification from you if possible please. As you gave this warning, can you please advise if User:Martintg's participation at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Russavia-Biophys/Workshop#Biophys_has_proxied and Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Russavia-Biophys/Workshop#Not_a_battleground is in fact in violation of this topic ban? As he is not a named party to the arbitration, and because this Arbitration has to do with EE-editing (yet a-f'ing'gain) from which he is topic banned, simply wanting clarification from you. Cheers, -- Russavia I'm chanting as we speak 18:19, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, would like to make the following points:
Cheers, -- Martin ( talk) 21:22, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
I have undone your redirect of Armenians in Samtskhe-Javakheti to Samtskhe-Javakheti. The latter article is on the actual region, whilst the former is an article on a large (and notable) diaspora which lives in that region. There is too much information in the former article which would be lost through the simple redirect. That the article may seem to be POV, is an issue of editing, and mainly of cleanup and better referencing. But it is a notable subject, and shouldn't be deleted by redirecting without attempting to salvage any content at all from it. Cheers, -- Russavia I'm chanting as we speak 21:34, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Additionally, it doesn't appear to be a POVFORK of the region article, but somewhat of a split of Armenians in Georgia, and that could very well be legitimate. Don't you agree? -- Russavia I'm chanting as we speak 21:39, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
[40] your opinion would be helpful because I've been waiting for about a month and no one has replied.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 16:53, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi Future, for your information Historian19 is back [41], usual predictable behaviour, if you are interested in sorting him out again :-)
Kind Regards -- Marek. 69 talk 02:24, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Hat links are not needed at pages such as Macedonia (Greece) or Macedonia (food). The reader is already at the desired page. Andreas (T) 18:10, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
As he does seem determined, I'd appreciate some evidence that he's Deucalionite. I don't need a lot of diffs, just something that makes clear there's a connection. Also, just to clarify, is there anything wrong with this edit or the sourcing, or are you objecting only because he's banned? SlimVirgin talk contribs 13:36, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello Future! I would like some advice regarding Pumpie ( talk · contribs). On the one hand he is the only one who bothers creating articles on some rather obscure Greek people and villages, on the other his contributions consist of nothing but horrible machine-translations and a huge number of often ridiculously implausible redirects. He really doesn't seem to understand Greek, or be very good at English. He's been repeatedly admonished about the machine translations both by me and many other users to no avail, and has been banned in the German Wiki. As I patrol new pages under WPGR scope, I come often across his articles, and am growing exasperated. My question is, is there a way to make him either give more attention to his edits (at least to smooth out the mangled English) or, failing that, make him stay off? Constantine ✍ 14:40, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi! I have transposed your question to the discussion of the article and answered there. FlavianusEP ( talk) 01:59, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
It seems he has a new sock - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kievlyanin . A lot of his items correspond to V's edits on ruwiki.-- Galassi ( talk) 00:46, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Can you please take a look here Talk:Evllogji Kurilla. A recent move was performed without any discussion. Alexikoua ( talk) 14:18, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Don't know if you keep that article watchlisted, but if you don't, I suggest you start doing so. Balkanian's word has recently gone on one of his nationalist editing sprees, ramming through a highly POV-ish "Ethnicity" section together with his trademark 15 references [42]. This, without any prior discussion and clearly against the painstakingly agreed-upon previous consensus hammered out by Moreschi [43] to NOT include an "ethnicity" section (though that time he was addressing himself to Factuarius). Cheers, Athenean ( talk) 18:56, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Athenean, why don't you bring this discussion in the Albanian-Greek talk page rather than in FPaS's talkpage? You seem quite excitable and throwing too many accusations. -- Sulmues Let's talk 21:08, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
It seems the banned user returned to Arvanites with a new IP, so I've semi-protected it indefinitely, and blocked him again. I'll leave you to decide whether the edit needs to be reverted too. SlimVirgin talk contribs 15:27, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
What shou;d i do? Stupidus Maximus ( talk) 19:15, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Can you tell me why you left a warning on only my page when there's another party [44] to the reverting? If you look at the edit history you'll see that the guy has blanked referenced text and has been shadowing my edits and reverting blanking out text and references. [45]. Reverting and blanking out text is basically all that this guy goes on wiki [46] I have no problems respecting revert policies but not when it's applied and warning given out selectively. Thanks. Melonbarmonster2 ( talk) 23:18, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
See also Taekwondo, where he has a long history of this sort of behavior (also under User:Melonbarmonster). JJL ( talk) 13:36, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi. Could you delete User:Jack Merridew (doppelganger) and back Jeff G off? This is not a 'sock' account. Thanks. Jack Merridew 00:42, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
It wasn't my bot. I sometimes use MalarzBOT ( talk · contribs). Malarz pl ( talk) 19:30, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
All Around Amazing Barnstar | |
For your contributions and for having taught me more than a couple of things in how to be precise and how to properly reference. Thank you for being around. Danke schoen! Sulmues Let's talk 21:50, 17 May 2010 (UTC) |
Although, I do not agree with the -s in the end, neither in the name, nor in the surname (as it was not the case...), there is a bit too Greek for Kurila the whole thing :P. I have never seen something written about him refering to Kourilas, except of Greek authors. In every English, German, etc. books he is refered as Eulogios Kurila, Eulogios Kurilas, Eulogio Kurila, Eulogio Kurilas, etc. etc., nowhere the Greek ou is in his name for the latin u... Balkanian`s word ( talk) 13:41, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
A while back, I made some cpedits to the not-so-great prose of that article [52]. Today, Stupidus Maximus, evidently from watching all my contribs with a microscope, blanket reverted me [53] without any explanation, apparently just for sheer spite. What is to be done with this fellow? He is starting to become REAL disruptive. Time for AE? Athenean ( talk) 22:25, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Changing from military person to Military Person doesn't really clasify as disruption. You seem to be having a prose dispute so Athenean I think you should discuss with him and not report him constantly.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 22:29, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Yes, he certainly has been a nuisance, but in this case he appears to have self-reverted and marked the edit as a "mistake", so let's leave it at that. Zjarri, your constant defending of your fellow sock is becoming tiresome. Fut.Perf. ☼ 05:01, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Greetings Future,
Long time; hope everything's ok, the empire and all. Here's what: I tried to do delete an IP's edits in talk:Greece, it was re-added 5 mins later. It appears to be an automated spammer or maybe scammer account targeting articles in the news. After checking the IPs talk page, I saw you're already on top of this ready to bail-out the Greek situation as more than often Germans are these days :) Since you already served a final warning, I think it may be time now to up the ante and block those CDS short-sellers ...eh I mean that IP copy-paster :)
Just curious, any idea what the Hell EUR666=X he was talking about? Godspeed you! Shadowmorph ^"^ 09:48, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
It seems that something really odd is going on here [ [57]]. Alexikoua ( talk) 10:30, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Can you please move back Pandeli Çale to Pandeli Cale. It was a mistake of a fellow editor, which is now explained. Thanks, Balkanian`s word ( talk) 19:17, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
I see you gave LAz17 ( talk · contribs) a final warning for behaviour problems in December. He's currently at WQA for his behaviour at Talk:Red Star Belgrade: mind having a word before he takes this too far? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 21:13, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
One of those cases that need another opinion [61].-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 15:54, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
You are challenging and reverting roughly one in every two edits that I make. When we discuss why and when you lose the discussion you always challenge me with WP:V and WP:NPOV despite my articulate references. You have accused me of racism, plagiarism, dubiousness and have threatened me with blocking (more than once in the case of blocking). You follow me around articles that you have never edited in before and have no knowledge. I'd appreciate it if you were a little more supportive and courteous and less aggressive. Nipsonanomhmata ( talk) 11:50, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
I moved the page to be consistent with 1991–1992 South Ossetia War (capitalized W). If there are objections that are well thought out I would not object to moving back, but we should be consistent between the 1991-1992 and 2008 conflicts. Neutrality talk 07:58, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi. Could you please have a look at this report at WP:AN: [62]? Thanks. Grand master 15:48, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Reported for lack of good faith for your disruptive editing at the usual place. Nipsonanomhmata ( talk) 20:02, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
[63]. The guy is relentless. Athenean ( talk) 04:10, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
I'd recently a conversation with User:Balkanians' Word, after he returned in our community [ [65]]. It seems that this spa story is repeating, promising the most possible detailed descriptions of his favourite wiki-topic the Cham issue and especially everything about massacres. I've also noticed that the specific user is obsessed to create wp:battle situations like [ [66]] and [ [67]]. By the way the specific article is listed for deletion. Alexikoua ( talk) 19:15, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Hey, again, Fut. Perf! I accidentally (and completely) screwed up the article Holon (long story). I was wondering if you could spread the word around and maybe see what you can do to fix it? Thanks!-- RM ( Be my friend) 05:55, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Since you dealt with the situation, there is a (new) case in wp:ani. Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Sock_of_banned_user_disrupting_wikipedia_while_record-breaking_SPI_is_still_open. Alexikoua ( talk) 08:48, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
My memory is playing tricks on me. I should have acknowledged your quick response to my query right away. I should have acknowledged that you made excellent points -- one that even though I had been working on those articles for over five years, I had not been aware of. I should have thanked you for drawing it to my attention.
Your point about redirecting "Uighur house" was absolutely correct, and very tactfully phrased. Thanks.
But you made another, much more important point "...the reason you had the need for so many links appears to have been that you were routinely linking to things from inside literal quotes, often in cases where your link constituted an explanation not of the meaning of a term, but an "easter-egg link" trying to explain what the expression referred to in the specific context. Please check WP:MOSLINK to see why we usually don't do such links."
I don't remember reviewing WP:MOSLINK before. If I did I overlooked that I was making links that didn't comply with it. And I thank you for drawing it to my attention, and for doing so in a tactful way.
A day or two after your note I returned to the discussion fora, and IIRC, I did acknowledge that you convinced me that my redirection of the general term "Uighur house", and some other similar redirects I had created, were a mistake, and that I should have used piped links. I got a convincing comment via email at around the same time that made the same point.
I'd like to ask for more comments/opinions/assistance.
A year or so ago I started to rewrite the sections of these articles that contained the long quotes. I started to replace them with a briefer summary of what the quoted material had contained, stripping out redundancies, and written for a general audience, not a military reader. I'd generally try to create a document on wikisource, containing the original memo, and put a {{ wikisource}} link in that section of the document.
After you drew my attention to the possibility my use of links within quoted material might lapse from WP:MOSLINK I decided that I should up the priority I placed on this particular initiative of mine. If I understood your easter-egg comment, then replacing those quotes with summaries of the allegations, and having the summaries include wikilinks to articles on topics mentioned in the allegations is policy-compliant?
Another contributor has challenged me on replacing the quoted material with summaries, asserting that the quoted documents are somehow "unique", and thus can't be fairly or neutrally summarized.
I am not aware of any wikipolicy which supports the premise that some WP:RS are "unique" in a way that means they can't be summarized. Neutrally written and properly referenced summaries of WP:RS are the kind of contributions we are supposed to offer, I thought. Are you aware of a wikipolicy that supports the premise some WP:RS can't be summarized?
Cheers! Geo Swan ( talk) 12:43, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm going through old proposals. User:Future Perfect at Sunrise/MOSMAC3 doesn't seem active; is the plan still to have this as an active proposal or has it been superseded by Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Macedonia)? Fences& Windows 15:54, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
I added one more in this large list. If you remember this article: [ [71]] was initially listed for afd, but finally was speedy deleted due to copy-vio. Suppose this is the reason why I can't find the 'afd' discussion. Alexikoua ( talk) 14:25, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
It seems that with this afd in 'Massacre of Kodra', Stupidus Maximus 'virtually declared' that he is Guildenrich. He even copy-pasted one of his sources from his past userpage in both the article and the afd. Alexikoua ( talk) 21:27, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Could you please enforce talk page guidelines (not a forum and all that) on Talk:The Soviet Story to avoid unnecessary confrontation? Colchicum ( talk) 11:53, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for removing the enforcer, well, at least you understand my inability to stay away from here. A clear addiction case. -- Sulmues Let's talk 14:06, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
[72] So far the only advice I managed to get is to rewrite it emphasizing on the falseness of the allegations, but you know how Balkans articles are so I think that without more uninvolved opinions any changes would be reverted by the usual circus.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 14:22, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
[73] bah Finn Rindahl ( talk) 21:29, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Looks like someone is accusing you of sockpuppetry at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Future Perfect at Sunrise. I'm almost certain the filer is a sock though, but I don't have much to work with. Care to comment? Elockid ( Talk) 21:36, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Since you were interested to check his past, it appears that User:Dan of sq:wiki isn't active some 13 months now [ [75]]. Alexikoua ( talk) 11:00, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
To sum up, trolling comments [ [77]] and voting in Albanian related topics [ [78]] are the major interests of this latest wp:spa account [ [79]]. Alexikoua ( talk) 16:41, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Just returning after 14 months (long story) I decided to check out some of the articles I used to be active on. So... I noticed that the Republic of Macedonia article has calmed down and stabilised appreciably. Nice job. :) •Jim62sch• dissera! 18:24, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm glad it all worked out, as it was kind of, well, a lot more stressful than it needed to be. •Jim62sch• dissera! 05:25, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed your contribution of today and I have some remarks.
However, in the coming days I plan to do research on the flags with the cn-tag. Therefore, if possible, I will remove the tag by adding a reference, otherwise I will remove the entry. Would you mind help me to check the reliability of sources? Thank you. The White Lion ( talk) 18:20, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Ok, if I find better sources, I will submit them to your attention. Well, about the term Macedonian, I understand that any additional qualifier could serve as a precedent to justify cases like Greek-Macedonian one. But the matter is highly controversial, also judging by the constant rv I can see. I hope we will not be forced to ask for a new semi-protection of the page. TWL ( talk) 14:13, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello! I need some help on English to Greek translation. For english words "Bishop of Rome", which words are more suitable "Επίσκοπο της Ρώμης" or "Επίσκοπος Ρώμης". If you think none of these is right, feel free to suggest your own words. Thank you. Amit6 ( talk) 17:41, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Ja, danke für den Hinweis auf meiner de. Seite. The guy seems to have lots of fun chasing all kinds of wiki-admins around. He is bright, too - managed amazingly to stitch a three-line-Swahili entry together. Since he was kicked out from en and de he seems to look at smaller wikis. Found also a remark from an Irish user on his SMITHECAV alias at gv. Tonite -after I had blocked 3 IP of his- he sent me a link on fr which seem to be his blocked identities over there: fr:Wikipédia:Faux-nez/SIMTHEGREC. Can we send him back to you at en, please?? ( sw:user:kipala) Kipala ( talk) 19:14, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I'm confused by something I'm seeing at WP:AIV. A bot claims that 87.203.115.3 ( talk · contribs) edited 2008 Greek riots at 10:01 EDT this morning [82] but the article doesn't show any edits at that time, nor does the user's contributions show any edits. Does that mean something from the article was oversighted or am I missing something on how to read this? Thanks, -- B ( talk) 19:53, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
You previously commented on Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Marknutley/The Gore Effect. A new version of the article has been created in article space at The Gore Effect and has been nominated for deletion. If you have any views on this, please feel free to comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Gore Effect. -- ChrisO ( talk) 08:19, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
If you still remember him, his block period recently expired and now he is creating a number of problems on Albanian related articles. I've noticed that he evaded his block [ [83]] during his 6 months block. Alexikoua ( talk) 08:43, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Who is the banned user? Will Beback talk 00:51, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
It looks like a false positive to me, but there was a similar case a few months ago where I thought the same thing about the same type of filter and was wrong. Since you know this person better than anyone else and you seem to be active right now, I come to you for clarification. Is this edit legitimate? The false positive report is here. — Soap — 21:11, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
I notice you have had the article as a protected redirect for two years and wondering if you would consider unprotecting it. I think the subject has clearly established notability given its wide coverage in national media and serving as inspiration for episodes of prominent shows like Law and Order: SVU. Also he had been interviewed by People magazine with regards to the Jaycee Dugard kidnapping.-- The Devil's Advocate ( talk) 00:54, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I have recently attempted to start an overhaul of the article Soviet Union. So far there has been some rather heated (and apparently fairly pointless) discussion on its talk page concerning the proposals, and there doesn't seem to be a prospect for coming to terms with some of the folks there. Unfortunately surprisingly few people seem to be interested in the topic, and those who are appear fairly opinionated and determined to defend the motherland no matter what sources say. I'll understand if you don't want to be immersed in this topic area, but unfortunately there is a grave shortage of third-party editors willing to enforce content policies there. You seem to be rather good at it elsewhere, so would you mind to chime in and try to sort it out? Nothing too specific so far, just please keep an eye on this. Colchicum ( talk) 01:06, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Can I ask you to userfy the article Yakir Forman for me. I have some additional material to add and didn't know that the article had been PRODed, Alansohn ( talk) 04:54, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Can you believe this? -- Taivo ( talk) 05:34, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi, FPS, could you please move Erseka to Ersekë? It's the only Albanian city that is incorrectly spelt. See also Talk:Erseka. -- Sulmues Let's talk 21:20, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
I am curious to find out which would be the perfect state of art explanation since nowadays practically every reference to Albanians says the same thing (some say direct some say generally assumed not only EB but other NPOV and RS sources also look here) and what is the difference between your mixing or references in one and my version here when they are saying the same thing. Aigest ( talk) 09:03, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
@Fut. I am curious to find out how did you find out the fact that the huge majority is agnostic. Maybe you misunderstood what I was saying when I was referring to the state of art of the issue. When apart those who support Illyrian-Albanian hypothesis there are:
Did it pass into your mind that the majority of the specialists (I don't believe the above mentioned experts were referring to non-specialist) had already expressed an opinion different from yours? Aigest ( talk) 21:37, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Maybe, but said that let me remind you that first.. that meme is opinion of specialists (just like the other meme also) and second..they are in majority. You had to deal with it, like it or not Aigest ( talk) 21:38, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Rederi AB Slite was a Sweden-based company. Therefore, as per Aktiebolag, the company name should be abbreviated with both capital letters as Rederi AB Slite, not as Rederi Ab Slite as you have moved it (as the latter would signify it being based in Finland, which it wasn't). Aplogies if this sounded harsh, it's late and I'm tired. Never the less, unless i'm missing something, you moved the article from the correctly capitalized title to the incorrect one. — Kjet ( talk · contribs) 22:05, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Usually when I come across User:Jacob_Peters' socks I take'em to Moreschi since he's got a ton of experience in blocking them, but since he's inactive and since you've helped him out with this sort of thing in the past, thought I'd notify you of a message I left at his page: [84]. Double nickels on the dime its JP. radek ( talk) 16:34, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello, at [85] I suppose you did not mean to add the first paragraph, which looks like it was copied from elsewhere? Sandstein 23:21, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
I have put this page on pending change protection per request at the pending change queue. However, it seems that this article have a bad history of edit war, and since you know the history of this article better than me, be sure to keep an eye in case if another edit war breaks out, and you are more than welcome to override the PCP by putting it back to semi or full if needed, thanks. 山本一郎 ( 会話) 06:09, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
There is another Russian nationalist edit-warrior ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Borealis55). He reappears every few days: removes citations, inserts modifiers to make the citations sound partisan or untrustworthy~. This is way beyond typical content disputes: He engages in absolutely no discussions. - Galassi ( talk) 00:39, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
I am positive that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kievlyanin is a sock for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Voyevoda. - Galassi ( talk) 13:01, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. GregJackP Boomer! 12:52, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
Feel free to read WP:NPA at your leisure before you use such language regarding my good faith efforts to help a very nonproductive user. And since the account in question is an SPA that engaged in repeated violations of several policies, including the one against vandalism, you might want to avoid making blatant errors (such as "it isn't vandalism") in the future. Şłџğģő 18:09, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
I tried to address this issue to NuclearWarfare a while back but I didn't realize he wouldn't be able to look at it. S/he did direct me to you however as a possible arbiter. Here is the issues;
I am not sure what the proper route is to pursue this, but I do not believe that the user Imzaid (also goes by Monteil for some reason) should be editing the page of Zaid Shakir because of overt conflict of interest. "She" writes in this diff [86]: "Second,I am the wife of Zaid Shakir and set-up this page 2yrs.ago"
I honestly wouldn't mind if she continued to edit the page but I continue to run into the same problems over and over again as she either lacks a fundamental understanding of Wikipedia policies or purposely ignores them. A few examples: 1) Inserting commercial links and spam linking: [87] 2) Unexplained deletion of sourced material: [88] Imzaid also never includes an edit summary, making it difficult to know why she made certain changes. I asked the user to make smaller changes one by one, but Imzaid's blanket changes make it difficult to have any sort of reasonable conversation on the merits of those alterations.
Since I first addressed this issue to NuclearWarfare in late May, the same conflict has repeated itself over and over and over again.
Your help is appreciated. Plot Spoiler ( talk) 17:53, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
Am I allowed to comment on the AfD? I will comply with whatever you advise. Thanks, GregJackP Boomer! 20:42, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
And may I edit on the talk page? I am trying to get clarification on the BLP policy. Thank you. Minor4th • talk 22:20, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
Can you give a look at the article Serbian–Albanian conflict. It is full of WP:OR WP:SYNTH, but what is more important is only an agenda pushing article. Aigest ( talk) 08:32, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
This banned user is back [89] so could you semi-protect the article?-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 16:53, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
(unindent)Deucalionite is back in Talk:Byllis. Along with other users he is trying to add the WPGR tag.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 20:35, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
I've added wpgr before 'ancient Greece & Rome' tag was added (as I've explained above this tag is ok to me). Alexikoua ( talk) 22:50, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
I added an indef topic ban to the user in addition to your block. [94] It's up to you whether you want to lift the block or not. NW ( Talk) 20:20, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Could you take a look at this?
Basically, the article includes the statement:
Varsovian insists on adding the following statement right after it:
The problem is that none of these citations 1) reference Cloud and Olson and, more importantly 2) show that historical records, media reports of the time, statements from the British government or the memoirs of western command Poles (sic) actually contradict Cloud and Olson. In fact, pretty much all the sources given in citations SUPPORT Cloud and Olson. So Varsovian is pretending that the citations say the opposite of what they actually say.
I realize my comments on talk page go into some detail and are a bit long but I wanted to fully examine the citations. Furthermore, while when I was first looking at it I expected this to be just typical OR and stretching of the info present in the sources, by the time I got done looking through the citations it became pretty clear that this was a probably deliberate misrepresentation of the sources. I could buy if it was one or two mistakes, in a case where the matter is ambiguous. But this is 7 (seven) instances of providing sources which say the OPPOSITE of what they are supposed to reference.
While this isn't as blatantly offensive of a misrepresentation as what Bandurist did recently on "Polish Auxiliary Police", it's very much in the same vein - sticking a citation at the end of a highly contentious claim in the hope that no one will check it for verifiability. Also, this kind of problem with Varsovian's editing apparantly keeps coming up again and again; and when he comes under scrutiny he backs off for a few days, then after a short break returns to do OR on this article (and several others) - and this time he totally misrepresented the sources to support it. radek ( talk) 00:41, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I mention you here. radek ( talk) 13:20, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I sent almost exact version to Sandstein yesterday for clarification through email if this is valid yesterday-he can confirm this. If he would wrote that this has no merit then I wouldn't have posted. He directed me to post this to AE for clarification. -- MyMoloboaccount ( talk) 16:28, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
-- MyMoloboaccount ( talk) 16:38, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I am aware of your thoughts on the WP tags in the tag pages. However I would like to remind you that I have been reported to AE by user:Athenean mainly on the accusation that I entered the tag of WPSQ in Molossians, Thesprotians, and Chaonians. According to many Albanian scholars, they were Illyrian tribes, not Greek tribes. Sandstein gave me a warning because he considered such behavior as WP:Battleground mentality. As a result, while you may see meaningless, futile, and stupid, entering and removing WP tags, other admins might not see it that way. I posted in the Greek WP a question Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Greece#WPSQ_and_WPGR_tags as to what WPGR members think and I would like to know if there is any policy in Wikipedia that clarifies a little better tagging policies. Could you please consider your intervention in that talk page with your thoughts? -- Sulmues Let's talk 17:17, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
What's this spree of nominating to deletion all the Albanian folklore as soon as I wrote the mother article of all of them ( Albanian Songs of the Frontier Warriors)? If it's a way to get people to contribute this week on the articles, then it might not work because they're all to see the final of the World Cup.
You may drop a line on the WP Albania. You well know that we are just 2-3 active ones. -- Sulmues Let's talk 20:18, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
![]() | On July 10, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kildare Poems, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
-- Cirt ( talk) 06:02, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the friendly warning. It all got a bit nuts there for a while! I guess interest will drop off like crazy one the World Cup is over. Hope so anyway. Best wishes, Invertzoo ( talk) 20:37, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
When Tundrabuggy ( talk · contribs) was found to be a sock of Dajudem ( talk · contribs) you requested that a CU store the relevant data. Do you know if this was done? I ask because an SPI was opened on another user believed to be a sock of Dajudem/Tundrabuggy. nableezy - 00:01, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Seems that Megistias' case has been archived without any notice. Cheers. — Kedadi 16:16, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi! Could you please take a look at the relevant section of the Ural Mountains, User talk:Materialscientist and Riphean Mountains? The claim that Pliny the Elder assigned the Riphaean Mountains to the Ural Mountains seems particularly dubious. Well, to the best of my knowledge he couldn't and didn't, not sure if a passing mention in a 1823 book could beat it. And there are probably other issues. Your suggestions are welcome. Colchicum ( talk) 12:25, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
how can i prove that, the art work is under a free licance. this is the original page the author has published the work: http://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attila_(hun_uralkod%C3%B3)-- Finn Diesel ( talk) 15:02, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
definitely, he claims he is the same person who upload the art work and he also claims there couldn't be any limitations.-- Finn Diesel ( talk) 20:27, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Duchamps comb has repeatedly removed sourced material from Rand Paul without discussion, and then began disrupting Paul's talk page by introducing misleading quotes. Duchamps posted this on the talk page:
In reality, the sentence said:
Additionally, the source is a document that Rand Paul penned himself! When asked to cease the removal of sourced information in the article without discussion, Duchamps declined. As you've dealt with Duchamps previously, regarding similar actions, I believe this situation would benefit from your help. The Original Wikipedian ( talk) 19:55, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for tagging the Attila photo for deletion from the commons. I expanded on the situation on the Attila the Hun talk page. I deleted the photo from the article, then realized I was putting the cart before the horse, that the Commons deletion should have a chance to be answered. I went back to replace the photo, and discovered a different problem: An anonymous editor making several changes in a few minutes, including to the Attila the Hun article, with the Edit Summary "IN GOD I TRUST - FINN DIESEL" [95]
I'm not sure whether it's more appropriate to move this to an anti-vandalism page, but I assume since you are familiar with the history, there would be less confusion if you continued. I'll mention the reason I got involved at all was noticing what seemed to be a high number of reverts in Finn Diesel without an Edit Summary, and a warning for edit warring his talk page. The copyright violation only seems to be one of the problems, although perhaps the most cut-and-dried. Regards, Alpha Ralpha Boulevard ( talk) 19:01, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Following a motion at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment:
Remedy 20 of Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Eastern European mailing list ("Miacek topic banned") is lifted.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, NW ( Talk) 00:11, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Please take care of this nightmare: [96]. Colchicum ( talk) 22:40, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
You blocked User:Showasw the other day as a sockpuppet of banned User:Serafin. Is User:MyMoloboaccount another sockpuppet?-- Srleffler ( talk) 23:56, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
The article only states "(dubbed "Climategate" in the media)". Their is not a section as to the Etymology, yet there is over 2 million hits on Google. NFCC #1&8 states, "significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." The screenshot clearly illustrates the media (FOX News) using of the phrase. So if there is no written section about the media "dubbing" the Incident it can only be represented by a photo, how are we to get one that is for free/fair use (Note: that almost half of the ref used in the article use the word climategate). As far as Contextual significance [97] Climategate became very controversial and garnered lots of media coverage, a screenshot of that term in news coverage would likely be appropriate.-- Ducha mps_ comb MFA 22:32, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
If it is not too much trouble I would like to request that you remove the word "birther" from both the Incident Archive and from my Block log. I find that word terribly-offensive and upsetting and do not feel I should carry this stigma.-- Ducha mps_ comb MFA 23:34, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Qwyrxian ( talk) 12:40, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
As somebody who has taken part in the previous discussions on this topic, you may be interested in the current move discussion here. Varsovian ( talk) 17:19, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
[100] is that Deucalionite or someone else?It is him
[101]--
— ZjarriRrethues —
talk
17:34, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello Future Perfect. Since you previously warned the two editors who are now at WP:AN3#User:Posse72 reported by User:Tbma (Result: ), regarding the Battle of Tali-Ihantala, do you want to comment there on what should be done? It seems to be that an indefinite topic ban under WP:DIGWUREN would be a way to get their attention, but that might not be the only thing to try. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 22:16, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
I am an uninvolved editor who came in response to the kimchi RfC. I do not entirely agree with Hkwon's POV or his editing practice but to dish out an indefinite topic ban for a minor edit war is way over the top. Martin Hogbin ( talk) 23:03, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
The current disruption at the Korean cuisine articles is part of a long-standing pattern of disputes that has in the past been so violent that I've taken the stance that the whole topic area is de facto under a regime of "discretionary sanctions" similar to that of Eastern Europe, Israel-Palestine and other ideological hotspots, i.e. allowing admins largely carte blanche to intervene with whatever sanctions are necessary. Arbcom or no Arbcom. Whenever I've taken unconventional measures in this field (e.g. at Liancourt Rocks and other articles), the community has upheld them. A topic-ban like the one I imposed is essentially just a delayed disruption block under the normal blocking policy. I'm saying to this editor: "I've got enough reasons that would justify blocking you for a longish time, but for now I won't as long as you stay out of the topic area". We can of course take this to a noticeboard too, if you insist. Or, if you insist I do things by the book, I can just block the person right away. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:18, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
(ec)
I feel that either this restriction should be applied fairly upon the disputants, particularly Melonbarmonster2 who has been engaging in controversial edit wars in a multitude of articles related to Korean cuisine, or that this restriction shouldn't be applied at all. I share Hkwon's POV on the basis of many reliable sources that fermentation is a central element in the definition of kimchi, and after you topic-banned Hkwon, Melonbarmonster2 has threatened me of the same happening to me because of my views on this subject. [105] Cydevil38 ( talk) 03:17, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Huh? How'd Hkwon get blocked for edit warring/personal attacks 4 days after his last edit? -- SarekOfVulcan ( talk) 15:37, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Since you were the one who removed Tillman's post at Talk:CRU email controversy, I thought you might want to take a look at this. Best, NW ( Talk) 21:12, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
THanks for the warning. I have no problem with stricter limitations on reverts as long as they are applied consistently and I have advance notice of them. To that end, I have to correct your statement that I revert warred as bad as Hkwon the "last few days". Hkwon revert warred with 3 or 4 separate editors all over the same dead horse issue for weeks on end though now it seems Cydevil has taken on the cause. I did make three reverts in response to a revert by Cydevil on the 24th but all the spurts of reverts in the history page I have been involved in were regarding different article issues most of which were all resolved with discussed compromise and consensus. The latest example of this was my exchange with Vulcan on the 22nd. Yes we reverted but we both engaged in discussion and came to a compromise and the article was improved as a result. Older dispute/issues resolved include discussion over TED material. Melonbarmonster2 ( talk) 02:15, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
That made my day :) -- Taivo ( talk) 18:57, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
This should really make us quiver in fear :p -- Taivo ( talk) 19:05, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
I'd like you to note that I explicitly refused to be Russavia's policeman regarding his offensive relitigation of EEML as part of his comments supportive of Miacek. Don't take that to mean I'm not furious. Do take that to mean that coming up on 7 months of my topic ban there are editors who believe we can behave better and editors who have yet to demonstrate the same.
PЄTЄRS J VЄСRUМВА ►
TALK
14:47, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
For your comments on that "Climategate" image. I've already explained the NFCC issues, as have others; I'm afraid this isn't so much an example of people not informing themselves as of people being in denial about what NFCC requires. -- ChrisO ( talk) 08:15, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Your accusation [106] is itself a disruption. If you have a problem with me, please take it up on my talk page. Thanks. A Quest For Knowledge ( talk) 15:18, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Well? After your Hkwon ban, how do you feel about it, and what, if anything, are you planning to do about it? I see you as indirectly responsible, Hkwon was so exasperated by this type of thing that he did what he did, which was wrong, I suppose, but now that he's gone who's going to balance out the situation with the Koreans who take the equal but opposite approach? The system is out of balance because you took away one side of it, as Alison and I are not Korean we can't be as effective for complicated but not too hard to understand reasons. Please do something. Chrisrus ( talk) 20:14, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
I added this sentence [107] then this one
[108] based on this source [109] and then Athenean removed the Paleo-Balkan wording and moved it below despite chronological arrangement. Now he's telling me that somehow my edits are the same and he's suggesting that because of that one should go. I'm also trying to convince him that obviously the source when mentioning southern and northern tribes refers to northern Paleo-Balkan(Illyrians, Thracians) and southern ones(Greeks). This is becoming a discussion with too many or arguments, so could you please once again step in and offer your opinion regardless of its content here or here.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 20:16, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
This guy is like a small fly in the soup. You want to ignore him, but you can't quite dig him out with your spoon and he just keeps buzzing and wiggling around. -- Taivo ( talk) 22:35, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Future, I've received your message
[110].
You've said "Your recent articles such as Defense of Krk airport and Battle of Gospić are highly non-neutral in tone and content".
Can you, please, be more precise? You'll make it easier for me.
Please, assume good faith.
I've tried to use as much as possible precise words to avoid negative etiquetting of the whole communities, but to point to the perpetrators.
So, where do you see non-neutral elements (highly non-neutral????!!) in those articles? Which sentences?
I've referred to the sources I've listed on the bottom of the page.
If you find any line doubtful, please, add {{fact}}.
I've been working so with others here for years, and it worked fine for all involved sides.
Grammar incorrect? Noone's perfect. I try my best, someone always corrects my errors.
I correct others, others correct me.
That's what makes this project as cooperation.
Kubura (
talk)
01:27, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Do you think you should review your actions here, in terms of the timing of the block you have imposed? Conceded his edits were sanctionable, but the topic ban which you attempted to impose clearly did not gain community support. The block which you then imposed was in fact implemented four days after his last edit, and I suspect that if it were necessary to defend this block you would find it difficult to do so. I have not unblocked (although I considered it) but it might be a sensible approach if you were to reconsider and start over with a level one warning. Not trying to interfere, but his unblock request and comments about it are attracting some attention. -- Anthony.bradbury "talk" 19:13, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
I was about to close down the discussion myself.-- *Kat* ( talk) 21:22, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
24 hours of rest at Ukrainian language from User:Windyhead. Thank you. -- Taivo ( talk) 20:35, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
I understand where you're coming from, but would a final warning on that have been a bit less BITEy? It's not clear that they had been warned formally before other than 3RR issues in the past. Georgewilliamherbert ( talk) 21:20, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Darkly ] "Better", huh? Would you like to discuss that with my fiercely loyal pet monster ? Bishonen | talk 17:12, 30 July 2010 (UTC).
I was following the conversation on Lar's talk page and would like to share my thoughts a bit (hope you don't mind). First off, I don't think you are biased, perhaps Lar is privy to information I am not, but I have seen you warn people on both sides of the issue - maybe I am simply being ignorant here. Second, I don't think Lar is biased either, but I also understand that it is a very natural, perhaps inevitable, reaction to respond to extremism with extremism. Has Lar done this? Yeah, I think he'd probably admit to being more acidic than usual and I suspect he will detox from the area after the Arbcom proceedings are over. I'm guilty of this as well.
I think a problem, probably in all contentious areas, is that people tend to make snap judgments. No side on any debate is going to be right 100% of the time, but if an admin shows up when one side is correct they may tend to dismiss the other side forevermore. It is difficult to find admins that can walk that fine line without crossing over to one side, but generally I think Lar has done a good job. I just hope that you and Lar can find a way to see eye to eye on things a bit more and hopefully by understanding how people react to extremism you can both avoid that pitfall and lend a friendly hand to those teetering on the edge. Happy admining. TheGoodLocust ( talk) 20:43, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
There is a disagreement whether a translation of the native name belongs conventional_long_name field in Template:Infobox former country. As you had participated in the discussion with similar topic in the past, I'd like to ask your participation. Thank you. -- Kusunose 04:07, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I've left a reply on the AE page regarding your comment and explaining why the report has been made. Varsovian ( talk) 09:12, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Dear FPaS, you might have noticed the current vandalizing efforts targeted at the established and stable versions of Ilinden–Preobrazhenie Uprising and Bulgarian Men's High School of Thessaloniki. Best, Apcbg ( talk) 12:46, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
You might find this [111] interesting. Cheers, Athenean ( talk) 23:05, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you with this issue again. You have closed the debate, stating that it should not be reopened. However, if a debate has achieved no consensus, it might well be appropriate to offer more factual information, so that consensus can eventually emerge. I have been checking the English websites of German state governments (seven of which use Minister-President, two use Prime minister, one uses Premier, with three states on which I haven't found pertinent information, and three city states who are governed by mayors). In my view, there should be a place to communicate this information. Cs32en Talk to me 02:50, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Howdy. Just an FYI I've mentioned you in passing [112] thanks, - Chumchum7 ( talk) 09:12, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
I noticed you still haven't answered the question about ChrisO's conduct, both in incivility and 3RR violations. Why is Minor4th and I in your sights, but blatent violations such as his are not? The only reasonable conclusion is that you are biased. Please explain why you won't address this. GregJackP Boomer! 04:04, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
When I called BRD, it was my first revert. I posted that on the talk page even before I made the edit. Minor 4th 06:38, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
By the way, for the record, my comments concerning Marknutley's lack of knowledge related to some of the diffs that Pmanderson posted, especially this one in which MN asserts that "The Greek city states were not democracys [sic]." Honestly, the mind boggles - who does he think invented the concept of democracy, and where does he think the word came from? You would think that someone who wants to edit an article called List of wars between democracies would actually have some idea of history and (even if he doesn't know all the details) would be sufficiently motivated to open an encyclopedia - heck, even look it up on Wikipedia - and get the facts. This is extreme incompetence, both in terms of a lack of knowledge and also in terms of an apparent intellectual laziness in not being willing to look up a basic fact that a high school kid should know. You've heard of the sword-skeleton theory? Case in point. -- ChrisO ( talk) 02:16, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
You say "how did this slip through" for re some 4-month-old vandalism. I don't think this is all that rare. I recently corrected two two-year-old vandalizations: childish name change and probably politically motivated.
There are also good-faith content errors which have persisted for quite long times. For example, editor Wetman believes (mistakenly, I think) that Urrecht means "(supposed) rights to territories inhabited since 'time immemorial'"; whereas it actually seems to mean "natural law" (synonymous with Naturrecht). discussion This has made it into two articles: one incorrectly, the other correctly (but ambiguously). -- Macrakis ( talk) 15:15, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
[128] It wasn't my intention to do so, but you are right, i shouldn't have commented at all. -- Kim D. Petersen ( talk) 16:05, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
I just noticed a heated discussion on Talk:Congress_of_Berlin#Ethnographic_maps, which is about to get ugly quite fast. I know you had to deal with similar situations in the past, so you might be the best person to resolve the dispute. You're bound to find it quite familiar and easy to deal with. I know you're somewhat busy, but if you're in the mood...-- Laveol T 21:06, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Not that I know. What are you talking about? William M. Connolley ( talk) 09:08, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
I draw your attention to [129] William M. Connolley ( talk) 11:06, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Please stop the situation at RFE. Lar and Franamax should not be allowed to comment so long as they are also agressively excluding other admins through wikilawyering, particularly with the arbcom case sorting this out —Preceding unsigned comment added by Polargeo ( talk • contribs)
(archive time stamp:) 17:42, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
(Not giving the IP) but your meta-complaint on User talk:TenOfAllTrades is so true, and so elegant. Deserves to sit in Bishzilla's pocket together with Heimstern Läufer's incivility essay ! bishzilla ROARR!! 01:04, 6 August 2010 (UTC).
Thanks for that. Photos from five different DSLRs just wasn't right. XLerate ( talk) 08:31, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for unblocking me, I was convinced people were happy to see me blocked. If I was still blocked (and was still blocked until 5 pm tomorrow) I would not have had a chance to apologise and try to sort something out and expand an article. I'm not saying what I said was acceptable nor thatI shouldn't have been blocked but I do think that something needs to be done and something written into the NPA criteria which distinguishes between a provoked or unprovoked attack. I'm happy to forget this situation but I think that the blocking criteria should be reduced to 6 hours for such an obvious comment used in frustration at receiving a speedy warning. There is a difference between launching a full scale personal attack/rant at somebody innocent and saying something unplesant in the spur of the moment in removing an article warning I think. That's not to say that it is acceptable to attack or call anybody any name but I do believe there is a difference and I think in future this should be a criteria for deciding upon blocking duration. What happened earlier was a moment of anger/frustration and did not need 24 hours or even an hour for me to calm down. Dr. Blofeld 22:05, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
With your thoughts on biographies of footballers and everyone else. User_talk:Sulmues#Kosovo_as_country_of_birth. Usually I come to you when I'm lost. Thanks! -- Sulmues ( talk) 22:06, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
I got an e-mail from User:2007apm asking me to take a look at the block carried out following this SPI (February 2010). The initial e-mail was back in February 2010 and nothing was done then, but the user e-mailed again recently (August 2010) and I'd like to try and sort this out. Would you be able to take a look at this and see how strong you think the evidence is connecting the accounts? The dates of editing don't quite seem to match the usual pattern here as far as I can tell. I'm asking you because you blocked most of the Emperordarius socks. I've asked the blocking admin and SPI clerk User:MuZemike to have a look as well. You could both comment on his talk page where he has filed several unblock requests that were declined without considering whether the initial identification as a sock was correct or not. If there is evidence that shouldn't be discussed on-wiki (to avoid revealing how certain behavioural identifications are made) please feel free to e-mail me. Thanks. Carcharoth ( talk) 22:33, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
...both with your suggestion on my talk page (meta-irony notwithstanding), and with your action at Hipocrite's talk page. TenOfAllTrades( talk) 15:27, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
FP: you should either have left it all for Hip or you should remove all the problematic comments. Leaving some behind shows your partisanship. ++ Lar: t/ c 21:33, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
im here to improve wikipedia articles. you cant give me a ban, bacause you have not any reason for that.-- Finn Diesel ( talk) 15:36, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
he may be a good person or admin but he doesn't allow people to improve articles.-- Finn Diesel ( talk) 21:29, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
dear admin, the copyright problem about "File:Buda es Attila.JPG" has been fixed. please protect the page against Richard. as we all know he is not here to improve medival european history. thanks.-- Finn Diesel ( talk) 12:08, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
i respect all users and all art works in wikipedia but i cant see any respect to Hungarian art works in articles. it is not an acceptable policy for Hungarian users in wikipedia..-- Finn Diesel ( talk) 12:48, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
You are mentioned (in a nice way). Keep up the good work. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Toddst1_misconduct RIPGC ( talk) 04:13, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
You didn't even give me a chance to speak. How is that fair or appropriate behaviour for any administrator. ( olive ( talk) 19:14, 9 August 2010 (UTC))
It would be sufficient that you say "bizarre dialogue". Otherwise, I see it as a support for Yobol's attack against me, which is breaking policy. All the statements on my side in this dialogue was centred on what the other editor wrote (in diffs). I never attacked the editor personally. I never suggested that he creates a bad environment. I never accused him of twisting my words. There was no confusion possible about what Yobol wrote in these diffs. They were very simple statements, not subject to misinterpretation or "twisting". Yobol kept saying that his position about the lead did not change. Fine, but his non ambiguous statements were nevertheless highly relevant in the ongoing discussion about this lead. In particular, the statement http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:Transcendental_Meditation&diff=376686243&oldid=376684444 was about the article, but it also had a strong implication on the lead because of WP:LEAD. However, Yobol was not aware of all aspects of this discussion, so it could not appreciate that. I don't understand why he accused me of twisting his words. This is a personal attack against me. It breaks policy. Please do not do the same. Edith Sirius Lee ( talk) 07:54, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
![]() | This page 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. |
No comment really.-- Anothroskon ( talk) 08:45, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Please see the recent editing history @ Template:Table Greekletters and the brief discussion at User talk:Scientizzle#Name. Since you protected the page and seem to know more about what's going on with these topics in general, maybe you can clear up what's going on? The edits of 204.152.215.115 ( talk · contribs) alse seem to have a fixation on you... — Scien tizzle 14:21, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
I've posted to ANI regarding your BLP-based reversions at Conservapedia to get more admin eyeballs on the issue. In no way was it intended to be an accusation or an attack on you, though it would have been better for you to bring in an uninvolved admin. ...comments? ~ B F izz 05:02, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Could you unprotect Conservapedia please? -- Nx / talk 09:53, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Shirik ( Questions or Comments?) 17:45, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello. You are invited to take part in the deletion discussion on the redirect Comparison between roman and han empires. Regards Gun Powder Ma ( talk) 01:57, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi there, as you have previously wondered about the reasons behind the ban of Offliner, I think you may be interested in this request for clarification. Colchicum ( talk) 10:45, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
The page on "Macedonia (ancient kingdom)" and other pages on Ancient Macedonia are probably corrupted. Therefore the editors of the page are warned to be aware of potential sockpuppeters (a report of the recent sockpuppetry investigation is displayed). Please do not repeatedly erase that report, or you risk to be blocked. Draganparis ( talk) 17:59, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
I think that a collage image would be the best thing for the Istanbul article, no matter what the collage is, as it is Wikipedia custom to give large and especially historic cities such collages. Personally, I would not mind if the other collage, not just the one I personally prefer, would be inserted. What say you?-- RM ( Be my friend) 04:05, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
On March 29, 2007, you deleted a number of files of images occurring in our article Galatasaray Lisesi, stating as the reason: (copyvio, banned user) ( User:Shuppiluliuma?). These included the following:
Two days later, a new single-purpose account
uploaded eight files to the Wikimedia Commons, including seven with the above names, claiming {{
PD-self}}
.
I can't check if these are the same images as the files you deleted, but I bet they are. I also don't know how you determined copyvio, but I bet the eighth one ( commons:File:Logo2b.jpg) is also a copyvio. If they are indeed copyvios, they should be deleted at the Commons, but I don't have the evidence available. Is it convenient for you to take care of this? -- Lambiam 20:29, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
hello. I have some problems with this user in Kermanshah page. he deleted my reliable refrences about this article many times without any explanation.(see here and here)and just accusing me of being sockpuppet of a user that called Persia2099. as I saw this user's talk page the reason that we was blocked was making multiple image upload with false copyright declarations. but I myself never uploaded any images in wikipedia so I don't have anything to do with him. after all you should do something about this user he is going to waste my time for reverting this page again and again. thank you-- Bahramm 2 ( talk) 10:18, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello FP. If this is not your thing, you are welcome to send away this question with no further comment. I saw your name in the history of WP:DIGWUREN as someone who aded sanctions there lately. I was looking around for an admin familiar with Eastern Europe that could review some ideas I have for closing a 3RR case.
See WP:AN3#User:Squash Racket reported by User:Umumu(Result: ). This is a case of Hungarian vs Romanian nationalist controversy, on historical topics. There have been disputes for a long time at John Hunyadi, and the article Magyarization probably can go without comment so far as the opportunity for arousing passions. The 3RR case is open, and could provide a chance for using discretionary sanctions under WP:DIGWUREN, if it's a good solution. The person who brought the complaint has broken 3RR, in my opinion, and may be a sock of User:Iaaasi, though I would not attempt to resolve that matter now. Instead of a 3RR block a 1RR restriction on the complaining editor seems justifiable, under discretionary sanctions. If another admin makes this moot by closing the 3RR sooner, I would consider taking the action myself and then offering it for review on a noticeboard.
If I first offer this issue for comment at ANI as a 'what to do' question, there will be 50 yards of comment from involved editors in no time. My interest would be in taking an admin action that has a chance of quieting down the Hungarian-Romanian front in our articles, in the longer term. A nice summary of the long-term problem is given at User_talk:Excirial#Low_intensity_edit_war_:.29.
Instead of a personal 1RR restriction, a milder action could be to impose an *article* 1RR on both John Hunyadi and Magyarization. This probably needs WP:AN to ratify, but it shouldn't be difficult. Any feedback as to what is best solution would be welcome. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 17:01, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
I like the way you've redone the article on Hellenic languages. ( Taivo ( talk) 18:49, 16 April 2010 (UTC))
While I rarely like it when anyone declares from on high that free discussion should not be allowed, I could at least get over that if your decision wasn't so absurd.
Any new proposal at renaming can be brought forward later only if it comes with fresh, new ideas, and if it is proposed by somebody other than those who have been squabbling over it for months.
The rules on discussing something which has already been discussed are new evidence not new ideas. There will probably not be any "fresh, new ideas" because the question of changing the title is about common names and descriptiveness with the proposed titles all basically set in stone. Also, it seems you are saying even if I were to somehow come up with a fresh, new idea I would not be able to present it simply because I have debated this before. You are clearly violating Wikipedia policy in making this decision.
As for a rename not being required:
When there is no obvious common name for the topic, as used by a significant majority of reliable English language sources, editors should reach a consensus as to which title is best.
There it is rather clear that if it is a common name there should not be any question as to what title should be used with consensus only necessary if there is not a common name. The only policy that could prevent it would be on neutrality which was already tossed out by a past admin.-- The Devil's Advocate ( talk) 00:07, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion here. Tadija speaks 17:06, 18 April 2010 (UTC) (Using {{ Please see}}) -- Tadija speaks 17:06, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Kushtrim123 mentioned you [2]. Could you please verify/explain what Kushtrim123 claims to be your comments.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 17:43, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello Future. I have seen this user page and I was shocked. How is he allowed to put such user box about the Macedonian language on Wikipedia? Can you delete that user box from Wikipedia and from his user page as well? I think you are allowed to delete it since you were deleting user boxes from my page, too. I hope that this user box would be eliminated from this Wikipedia. (The box says: this users speaks on the Bulgarian dfialect of FYROM). Thanks in advance -- MacedonianBoy ( talk) 19:33, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Since I feel offended by this comment [ [3]] you recently posted, can you please explain me how, Vikos-Aoos National Park (1 of my 2 GAs) or the majority of the articles I've created so far are consider anti-Albanian and I personally hardly ever in all my career on Wikipedia made a single edit to any article that was not directly motivated by a single POV agenda (namely, making Albanians look bad and Greeks look good in the struggle over Epirus). Several other examples are Zakynthos Marine Park, Pindus National Park, Panagiotis Soutsos, Ioannis Giagkos, Battle of Elaia-Kalamas, Pavlos Vrellis Greek History Museum, Belthandros and Chrysantza Song of Armouris (all of them Dyk's) and several other [ [4]].
Actually the vast majority of my contribution is irrelevant with Albania. I kindly ask you to give an explanation on this or rephrase this comment because it is virtually wrong. Thank you. Alexikoua ( talk) 20:02, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
[5] I agree with this(in fact it was my first proposed version) but since it was endlessly reverted by some users I decided to compromise.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 21:26, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Just a heads up I have returned after a break to the London Victory Parade of 1946 and have made a few edits, including additions and removals of material. I would appreciate your observation of the page, and guidance. There is also some discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Polish participation at the London Victory Parade of 1946 Thanks, - Chumchum7 ( talk) 15:48, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi! Could you look at this article? Something should be done to facilitate discussion. Alæxis ¿question? 21:38, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
A while ago I started a discussion here, but no neutral/uninvolved editor replied and I was wondering if you could take a look.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 13:23, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
I'm guessing that Nipsonanomhmata ( talk · contribs) tagged the article for WP:GREECE because of the historical connection with Archimedes (much of that narrative was removed recently – a genuine case of throwing out the bath-water!) Cheers -- RexxS ( talk) 14:37, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
I am wondering if you find anything unusual with this user's activities. After being uninvolved in South Ossetia War article rename discussions he has suddenly become heavily involved. He may just be trying to take up the slack or something of the sort, but it just seems unusual to me.-- The Devil's Advocate ( talk) 17:54, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
How very nice. I have just hinted at a probable necessity of requesting a mediation, and Devil's Advocate already spreads around doubts in me and my activities. "Always strike first (repeatedly)" - it must be a good motto, no, Devil's Advocate? Looks like I will have to act accordingly.
Future Perfect at Sunrise, since you're an administrator, who already has some experience with contentious atmosphere in 2008 South Ossetia war article, may I request your attention to a new rename discussion, spawned by Devil's Advocate immediately after you have closed the previous one [7]? Although I get an impression, that you are already well aware of it, I'm still interested in hearing your opinion on how much this new discussion is different from previous ones, considering that Devil's Advocate has already used several of his old arguments, including his usual Ad Hominems, and still haven't presented a single new one. Moreover, he have started inviting other users for comments on his new proposal, which is not a criminal thing in itself, but from the two users, who have responded, one have declared himself disinterested in the discussion (because he sees no difference from previous ones, and expects no result from it [8]), and another have already started using the same old proposals and arguments (against Devil's Advocate, I might add [9]). I'm afraid it all is just a spark for igniting a yet another fully blown rename discussion with no new arguments whatsoever.
To summarize, current Devil's Advocate proposal basically concerns a required ratio between descriptiveness and commonness of the title - a question, which is not regulated by current Wikipedia rules, and therefore the answer is bound to be sought in the area of each one's personal subjective opinion. I think, and I hope you'll agree with me, that it's hard to expect that editors of this polarized article will come to a single opinion, and therefore it all indeed will be just yet another waste of time. If a stop can be put to these endless rename discussions, at least until new facts concerning the article arise, I think it's time to do that now. ETST ( talk) 22:25, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
At http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Ukrainians&action=history , involving User:Voyevoda . Inflammatory undiscussed WP:SYNTH.- Galassi ( talk) 06:23, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for the warning but unfortunately you're wrong.-- Dr.Mamalala 09:20, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
This unexplained edit seems to break your editing restriction, especially as I'd reverted his removal of Kosovo last time he'd removed it. His edit summary for the first removal was "→Attending dignitaries: not a state" and mine for the reversion "The status of Kosovo is unclear - saying it is not a state over simplifies things - 66/192 UN states recognise it, importantly this includes Poland - please discuss on talk page before removing again." When he removed it the second time he neither left an edit summary or commented on the talk page. I'd appreciate it if you could take a look. Dpmuk ( talk) 13:07, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Your privileges as the administrator does not give you the right to destroy someone else's work[ [11]]. Do not do that again, thank you-- Dr.Mamalala 17:00, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Looks like Wiki Historian N OH is going through and reverting changes made by myself and others. Like readding clearly WP:OR and unsourced information about Walmarts and Lowes. Readding a picture of William Henry Harrison to the page. This guy has a blistering case of WP:OWN and needs to be stopped. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 22:29, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi, Future Perfect at Sunrise. Because you participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Tylman (3rd nomination), you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Tylman (4th nomination). Cunard ( talk) 02:21, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
I'm sorry for bothering you again, but I was wondering, whether you have accidentally missed my previous request. In addition to things already described there, all that has happened was Devil's Advocate again repeating himself word-to-word [12], and yet another user invited by him, completely ignored the topic of discussed proposal and went directly to supporting "Russo-Georgian war" title instead [13]. I want to hear your opinion on that. Anyway, I can understand, if you do not want to involve yourself in this matter anymore, but right now I need a clear answer on whether you're going to watch over this discussion and take necessary actions? If not, I'll probably just have to file an RfC, or find another admin, or whatever. Thanks for your understanding. ETST ( talk) 18:22, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
There's an anon IP that is on an anti-Linguist List crusade. He's deleting most of the article on the flimsy excuse that it's not referenced. He preceded this with a series of deletions of links to Linguist List's Multitree from a dozen or so language family articles. He's clearly operating off some sort of agenda. I've reverted his deletions at the main article twice now. ( Taivo ( talk) 10:28, 27 April 2010 (UTC))
You may remember I protested (not threatened you, as some claim) for one deletion of my text and I excused me later when you warned me to be an administrator (nothing showed to me before that you were an administrator though). Would you help now solve some defamation problem please? Thank you very much. Draganparis ( talk) 13:09, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
It is indeed correct that some Greeks palatalize l and n sounds before an "ee" sound and others do not unless there is another vowel following. Kostaki mou ( talk) 22:22, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Could you please help on this [14] before growing in a hot dispute? The same misused reference, is being replicated in all Illyrian related articles. Moreover look at this Peresadyes nonsense pure WP:SYNTH. Just try to figure out what this (lead of the article) could possibly mean Peresadyes, (Greek: Περεσάδυές[1]) were most likely a Thracian tribe[2] of the Edones or Illyrians[1](?!) that ruled[3] over, or(?!) with the Encheleans, or(?!) the Sesarethi, but only(?!) if the latter were not the Encheleans themselves(?!) and were part of the Taulantii group[4] of tribes.?!?!?!?! Thanks in advance Aigest ( talk) 11:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I replied here [16] but let me tell you that I was very surprised by your proposal! (Joking) Is it really you or somebody has stolen your identity ?:) Anyway my idea is that a person should be accountable for its own actions. Aigest ( talk) 15:13, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
I replied there. Please try to understand my point. Aigest ( talk) 15:34, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
I don't see why did you put my name in tag teaming with other guys, here my last 500 contributions [17]. Where do you see my tag teaming with quick reverts, except well known and now famous Dardani case, which was well explained by you in Kedadi case and where you do agree that I was right?! Aigest ( talk) 13:41, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
I am letting you know because you participated in the thread the first time it was brought to the WP:ANI. Here are the URL and wikilink to the current discussion. [18] Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Speedy deletion Uighur house redux
Cheers! Geo Swan ( talk) 14:04, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know in my talk page.
Thank you for letting me know in my talk page that you mentioned me in the AE. Please read my last comment. I actually agree with your proposal of imposing 1RR or 3RR rules to the whole group (last person that breaks it) rather than to the single person and I thank you for coming up with it. I would suggest that we extend that for at least 3 months. To me it makes sense and will give both us and the admins a break and more quietness in our editing and article improving.
I also have to praise user:alexikoua who came up with the idea of having a Greco-Albanian group to deal off articles for Albanian-Greek problematics User_talk:Sulmues#Common_sense. Could you help us with some advise on how we could set that up? -- Sulmues Let's talk 17:57, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Please see my response here. -- Sulmues Let's talk 18:53, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
I think we should build something similar to the Greek and Turkish wikipedians cooperation board. -- Sulmues Let's talk 02:10, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
The Albanian ethnicity of the Arvanites is an fundamental fact which must be taken into account no matter how much users with Greek point of views appeal to change real history. -- Albanau ( talk) 17:49, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
See the SPI here [21]. Athenean ( talk) 19:27, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Damn you're fast. I hadn't even finished notifying all the people he had gotten involved with. Athenean ( talk) 19:37, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Forgot this IP as well [22]. Thanks. Athenean ( talk) 20:01, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Up late tonight, are we? :) Thanks for the help on Democracy, that stuff it really out there. Athenean ( talk) 23:03, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the c-e job. By the way you have been mentioned in talk:Greeks in Albania, seems we have another situation. Alexikoua ( talk) 11:04, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Seems User Zjarri has got out of control. Disruptive activity in Anastasios Avramidis-Liaktsis, initiating moves without any discussion. Alexikoua ( talk) 11:31, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Guys, simply put your sources on the table. Alexikoua, I cannot verify your sources say what you claim they say (unlike with Zjarri's sources, of which I can check at least one.) Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:43, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Today, I had the chance to read your proposal at AE and I agree with it. The current situation is anything else but productive. For example as soon as Alexikoua reached 3 reverts in Greeks of Albania, Megistias started reverting [23]. He also reverted Aigest [24]. I remember clearly that with your help there was reached a consensus so I can't understand why he would start again reverting.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 13:01, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello, Future Perfect at Sunrise. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic wikihounding. Thank you.--See section "Is this acceptable Wikiquette?" Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 19:19, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Please note that the final decision has been made on this AE request; it will shortly be closed. Stifle ( talk) 10:59, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
I'll post my comments in the article's discussion page the following minutes, as per restriction. Actually the time I saved the new version I saw the note in my talk page. Alexikoua ( talk) 14:30, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Alexikoua insists that only Muslim Albanians can be called Cham Albanians. I was wondering what do you think about that since it seems that you have enough knowledge on the subject.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 21:07, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
There are many theories, I choosed the one that is described in the source Zjarri. used (Kretsi), which is definitely one of the most credible sources on the subject. Alexikoua ( talk) 21:40, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Does this outing justify a block? ( Taivo ( talk) 22:17, 2 May 2010 (UTC))
Could you take a look at this one please, it seems to be a problematic false positive: [ [25]]. Thanks in advance. The user was blocked as they tripped the filter, but from what I can see they were tagging deadlinks, which are infact dead, thus I will unblock them for now. -- Taelus ( talk) 23:38, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Could you please judge the situation, as I'd better avoid interacting with the notorious certified revert-warrior and wikistalker (almost certainly he'll soon appear right here): [26]. The problem ("Georgian" or "Jewish" or anything of this sort instead of "Soviet" when ethnicity hardly matters at all) is all over Wikipedia, though, so I don't know what would be a decent solution in the long run. Colchicum ( talk) 09:55, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
[27], your opinion would be helpful to clarify it.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 21:52, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
In this article Albanian Resistance of World War II there has been a continuous tendency in vandalism edits by anon IP [28], [29], [30], [31] and the last one [32]. The same thing even more exagerated happens in Albania article just look only the last days [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] and the last one [39]. Could you please semi-protect these pages so we can get rid of this abuse by anon IP, even other edits by IP are of no value, so we will lose nothing on allowing only established users to edit on these pages. Maybe this action can be extended over all Albanian articles which show such tendency. Aigest ( talk) 10:05, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
FPaS, simply wanting some clarification from you if possible please. As you gave this warning, can you please advise if User:Martintg's participation at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Russavia-Biophys/Workshop#Biophys_has_proxied and Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Russavia-Biophys/Workshop#Not_a_battleground is in fact in violation of this topic ban? As he is not a named party to the arbitration, and because this Arbitration has to do with EE-editing (yet a-f'ing'gain) from which he is topic banned, simply wanting clarification from you. Cheers, -- Russavia I'm chanting as we speak 18:19, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, would like to make the following points:
Cheers, -- Martin ( talk) 21:22, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
I have undone your redirect of Armenians in Samtskhe-Javakheti to Samtskhe-Javakheti. The latter article is on the actual region, whilst the former is an article on a large (and notable) diaspora which lives in that region. There is too much information in the former article which would be lost through the simple redirect. That the article may seem to be POV, is an issue of editing, and mainly of cleanup and better referencing. But it is a notable subject, and shouldn't be deleted by redirecting without attempting to salvage any content at all from it. Cheers, -- Russavia I'm chanting as we speak 21:34, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Additionally, it doesn't appear to be a POVFORK of the region article, but somewhat of a split of Armenians in Georgia, and that could very well be legitimate. Don't you agree? -- Russavia I'm chanting as we speak 21:39, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
[40] your opinion would be helpful because I've been waiting for about a month and no one has replied.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 16:53, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi Future, for your information Historian19 is back [41], usual predictable behaviour, if you are interested in sorting him out again :-)
Kind Regards -- Marek. 69 talk 02:24, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Hat links are not needed at pages such as Macedonia (Greece) or Macedonia (food). The reader is already at the desired page. Andreas (T) 18:10, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
As he does seem determined, I'd appreciate some evidence that he's Deucalionite. I don't need a lot of diffs, just something that makes clear there's a connection. Also, just to clarify, is there anything wrong with this edit or the sourcing, or are you objecting only because he's banned? SlimVirgin talk contribs 13:36, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello Future! I would like some advice regarding Pumpie ( talk · contribs). On the one hand he is the only one who bothers creating articles on some rather obscure Greek people and villages, on the other his contributions consist of nothing but horrible machine-translations and a huge number of often ridiculously implausible redirects. He really doesn't seem to understand Greek, or be very good at English. He's been repeatedly admonished about the machine translations both by me and many other users to no avail, and has been banned in the German Wiki. As I patrol new pages under WPGR scope, I come often across his articles, and am growing exasperated. My question is, is there a way to make him either give more attention to his edits (at least to smooth out the mangled English) or, failing that, make him stay off? Constantine ✍ 14:40, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi! I have transposed your question to the discussion of the article and answered there. FlavianusEP ( talk) 01:59, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
It seems he has a new sock - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kievlyanin . A lot of his items correspond to V's edits on ruwiki.-- Galassi ( talk) 00:46, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Can you please take a look here Talk:Evllogji Kurilla. A recent move was performed without any discussion. Alexikoua ( talk) 14:18, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Don't know if you keep that article watchlisted, but if you don't, I suggest you start doing so. Balkanian's word has recently gone on one of his nationalist editing sprees, ramming through a highly POV-ish "Ethnicity" section together with his trademark 15 references [42]. This, without any prior discussion and clearly against the painstakingly agreed-upon previous consensus hammered out by Moreschi [43] to NOT include an "ethnicity" section (though that time he was addressing himself to Factuarius). Cheers, Athenean ( talk) 18:56, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Athenean, why don't you bring this discussion in the Albanian-Greek talk page rather than in FPaS's talkpage? You seem quite excitable and throwing too many accusations. -- Sulmues Let's talk 21:08, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
It seems the banned user returned to Arvanites with a new IP, so I've semi-protected it indefinitely, and blocked him again. I'll leave you to decide whether the edit needs to be reverted too. SlimVirgin talk contribs 15:27, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
What shou;d i do? Stupidus Maximus ( talk) 19:15, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Can you tell me why you left a warning on only my page when there's another party [44] to the reverting? If you look at the edit history you'll see that the guy has blanked referenced text and has been shadowing my edits and reverting blanking out text and references. [45]. Reverting and blanking out text is basically all that this guy goes on wiki [46] I have no problems respecting revert policies but not when it's applied and warning given out selectively. Thanks. Melonbarmonster2 ( talk) 23:18, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
See also Taekwondo, where he has a long history of this sort of behavior (also under User:Melonbarmonster). JJL ( talk) 13:36, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi. Could you delete User:Jack Merridew (doppelganger) and back Jeff G off? This is not a 'sock' account. Thanks. Jack Merridew 00:42, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
It wasn't my bot. I sometimes use MalarzBOT ( talk · contribs). Malarz pl ( talk) 19:30, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
All Around Amazing Barnstar | |
For your contributions and for having taught me more than a couple of things in how to be precise and how to properly reference. Thank you for being around. Danke schoen! Sulmues Let's talk 21:50, 17 May 2010 (UTC) |
Although, I do not agree with the -s in the end, neither in the name, nor in the surname (as it was not the case...), there is a bit too Greek for Kurila the whole thing :P. I have never seen something written about him refering to Kourilas, except of Greek authors. In every English, German, etc. books he is refered as Eulogios Kurila, Eulogios Kurilas, Eulogio Kurila, Eulogio Kurilas, etc. etc., nowhere the Greek ou is in his name for the latin u... Balkanian`s word ( talk) 13:41, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
A while back, I made some cpedits to the not-so-great prose of that article [52]. Today, Stupidus Maximus, evidently from watching all my contribs with a microscope, blanket reverted me [53] without any explanation, apparently just for sheer spite. What is to be done with this fellow? He is starting to become REAL disruptive. Time for AE? Athenean ( talk) 22:25, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Changing from military person to Military Person doesn't really clasify as disruption. You seem to be having a prose dispute so Athenean I think you should discuss with him and not report him constantly.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 22:29, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Yes, he certainly has been a nuisance, but in this case he appears to have self-reverted and marked the edit as a "mistake", so let's leave it at that. Zjarri, your constant defending of your fellow sock is becoming tiresome. Fut.Perf. ☼ 05:01, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Greetings Future,
Long time; hope everything's ok, the empire and all. Here's what: I tried to do delete an IP's edits in talk:Greece, it was re-added 5 mins later. It appears to be an automated spammer or maybe scammer account targeting articles in the news. After checking the IPs talk page, I saw you're already on top of this ready to bail-out the Greek situation as more than often Germans are these days :) Since you already served a final warning, I think it may be time now to up the ante and block those CDS short-sellers ...eh I mean that IP copy-paster :)
Just curious, any idea what the Hell EUR666=X he was talking about? Godspeed you! Shadowmorph ^"^ 09:48, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
It seems that something really odd is going on here [ [57]]. Alexikoua ( talk) 10:30, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Can you please move back Pandeli Çale to Pandeli Cale. It was a mistake of a fellow editor, which is now explained. Thanks, Balkanian`s word ( talk) 19:17, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
I see you gave LAz17 ( talk · contribs) a final warning for behaviour problems in December. He's currently at WQA for his behaviour at Talk:Red Star Belgrade: mind having a word before he takes this too far? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 21:13, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
One of those cases that need another opinion [61].-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 15:54, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
You are challenging and reverting roughly one in every two edits that I make. When we discuss why and when you lose the discussion you always challenge me with WP:V and WP:NPOV despite my articulate references. You have accused me of racism, plagiarism, dubiousness and have threatened me with blocking (more than once in the case of blocking). You follow me around articles that you have never edited in before and have no knowledge. I'd appreciate it if you were a little more supportive and courteous and less aggressive. Nipsonanomhmata ( talk) 11:50, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
I moved the page to be consistent with 1991–1992 South Ossetia War (capitalized W). If there are objections that are well thought out I would not object to moving back, but we should be consistent between the 1991-1992 and 2008 conflicts. Neutrality talk 07:58, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi. Could you please have a look at this report at WP:AN: [62]? Thanks. Grand master 15:48, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Reported for lack of good faith for your disruptive editing at the usual place. Nipsonanomhmata ( talk) 20:02, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
[63]. The guy is relentless. Athenean ( talk) 04:10, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
I'd recently a conversation with User:Balkanians' Word, after he returned in our community [ [65]]. It seems that this spa story is repeating, promising the most possible detailed descriptions of his favourite wiki-topic the Cham issue and especially everything about massacres. I've also noticed that the specific user is obsessed to create wp:battle situations like [ [66]] and [ [67]]. By the way the specific article is listed for deletion. Alexikoua ( talk) 19:15, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Hey, again, Fut. Perf! I accidentally (and completely) screwed up the article Holon (long story). I was wondering if you could spread the word around and maybe see what you can do to fix it? Thanks!-- RM ( Be my friend) 05:55, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Since you dealt with the situation, there is a (new) case in wp:ani. Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Sock_of_banned_user_disrupting_wikipedia_while_record-breaking_SPI_is_still_open. Alexikoua ( talk) 08:48, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
My memory is playing tricks on me. I should have acknowledged your quick response to my query right away. I should have acknowledged that you made excellent points -- one that even though I had been working on those articles for over five years, I had not been aware of. I should have thanked you for drawing it to my attention.
Your point about redirecting "Uighur house" was absolutely correct, and very tactfully phrased. Thanks.
But you made another, much more important point "...the reason you had the need for so many links appears to have been that you were routinely linking to things from inside literal quotes, often in cases where your link constituted an explanation not of the meaning of a term, but an "easter-egg link" trying to explain what the expression referred to in the specific context. Please check WP:MOSLINK to see why we usually don't do such links."
I don't remember reviewing WP:MOSLINK before. If I did I overlooked that I was making links that didn't comply with it. And I thank you for drawing it to my attention, and for doing so in a tactful way.
A day or two after your note I returned to the discussion fora, and IIRC, I did acknowledge that you convinced me that my redirection of the general term "Uighur house", and some other similar redirects I had created, were a mistake, and that I should have used piped links. I got a convincing comment via email at around the same time that made the same point.
I'd like to ask for more comments/opinions/assistance.
A year or so ago I started to rewrite the sections of these articles that contained the long quotes. I started to replace them with a briefer summary of what the quoted material had contained, stripping out redundancies, and written for a general audience, not a military reader. I'd generally try to create a document on wikisource, containing the original memo, and put a {{ wikisource}} link in that section of the document.
After you drew my attention to the possibility my use of links within quoted material might lapse from WP:MOSLINK I decided that I should up the priority I placed on this particular initiative of mine. If I understood your easter-egg comment, then replacing those quotes with summaries of the allegations, and having the summaries include wikilinks to articles on topics mentioned in the allegations is policy-compliant?
Another contributor has challenged me on replacing the quoted material with summaries, asserting that the quoted documents are somehow "unique", and thus can't be fairly or neutrally summarized.
I am not aware of any wikipolicy which supports the premise that some WP:RS are "unique" in a way that means they can't be summarized. Neutrally written and properly referenced summaries of WP:RS are the kind of contributions we are supposed to offer, I thought. Are you aware of a wikipolicy that supports the premise some WP:RS can't be summarized?
Cheers! Geo Swan ( talk) 12:43, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm going through old proposals. User:Future Perfect at Sunrise/MOSMAC3 doesn't seem active; is the plan still to have this as an active proposal or has it been superseded by Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Macedonia)? Fences& Windows 15:54, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
I added one more in this large list. If you remember this article: [ [71]] was initially listed for afd, but finally was speedy deleted due to copy-vio. Suppose this is the reason why I can't find the 'afd' discussion. Alexikoua ( talk) 14:25, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
It seems that with this afd in 'Massacre of Kodra', Stupidus Maximus 'virtually declared' that he is Guildenrich. He even copy-pasted one of his sources from his past userpage in both the article and the afd. Alexikoua ( talk) 21:27, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Could you please enforce talk page guidelines (not a forum and all that) on Talk:The Soviet Story to avoid unnecessary confrontation? Colchicum ( talk) 11:53, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for removing the enforcer, well, at least you understand my inability to stay away from here. A clear addiction case. -- Sulmues Let's talk 14:06, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
[72] So far the only advice I managed to get is to rewrite it emphasizing on the falseness of the allegations, but you know how Balkans articles are so I think that without more uninvolved opinions any changes would be reverted by the usual circus.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 14:22, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
[73] bah Finn Rindahl ( talk) 21:29, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Looks like someone is accusing you of sockpuppetry at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Future Perfect at Sunrise. I'm almost certain the filer is a sock though, but I don't have much to work with. Care to comment? Elockid ( Talk) 21:36, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Since you were interested to check his past, it appears that User:Dan of sq:wiki isn't active some 13 months now [ [75]]. Alexikoua ( talk) 11:00, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
To sum up, trolling comments [ [77]] and voting in Albanian related topics [ [78]] are the major interests of this latest wp:spa account [ [79]]. Alexikoua ( talk) 16:41, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Just returning after 14 months (long story) I decided to check out some of the articles I used to be active on. So... I noticed that the Republic of Macedonia article has calmed down and stabilised appreciably. Nice job. :) •Jim62sch• dissera! 18:24, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm glad it all worked out, as it was kind of, well, a lot more stressful than it needed to be. •Jim62sch• dissera! 05:25, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed your contribution of today and I have some remarks.
However, in the coming days I plan to do research on the flags with the cn-tag. Therefore, if possible, I will remove the tag by adding a reference, otherwise I will remove the entry. Would you mind help me to check the reliability of sources? Thank you. The White Lion ( talk) 18:20, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Ok, if I find better sources, I will submit them to your attention. Well, about the term Macedonian, I understand that any additional qualifier could serve as a precedent to justify cases like Greek-Macedonian one. But the matter is highly controversial, also judging by the constant rv I can see. I hope we will not be forced to ask for a new semi-protection of the page. TWL ( talk) 14:13, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello! I need some help on English to Greek translation. For english words "Bishop of Rome", which words are more suitable "Επίσκοπο της Ρώμης" or "Επίσκοπος Ρώμης". If you think none of these is right, feel free to suggest your own words. Thank you. Amit6 ( talk) 17:41, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Ja, danke für den Hinweis auf meiner de. Seite. The guy seems to have lots of fun chasing all kinds of wiki-admins around. He is bright, too - managed amazingly to stitch a three-line-Swahili entry together. Since he was kicked out from en and de he seems to look at smaller wikis. Found also a remark from an Irish user on his SMITHECAV alias at gv. Tonite -after I had blocked 3 IP of his- he sent me a link on fr which seem to be his blocked identities over there: fr:Wikipédia:Faux-nez/SIMTHEGREC. Can we send him back to you at en, please?? ( sw:user:kipala) Kipala ( talk) 19:14, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I'm confused by something I'm seeing at WP:AIV. A bot claims that 87.203.115.3 ( talk · contribs) edited 2008 Greek riots at 10:01 EDT this morning [82] but the article doesn't show any edits at that time, nor does the user's contributions show any edits. Does that mean something from the article was oversighted or am I missing something on how to read this? Thanks, -- B ( talk) 19:53, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
You previously commented on Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Marknutley/The Gore Effect. A new version of the article has been created in article space at The Gore Effect and has been nominated for deletion. If you have any views on this, please feel free to comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Gore Effect. -- ChrisO ( talk) 08:19, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
If you still remember him, his block period recently expired and now he is creating a number of problems on Albanian related articles. I've noticed that he evaded his block [ [83]] during his 6 months block. Alexikoua ( talk) 08:43, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Who is the banned user? Will Beback talk 00:51, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
It looks like a false positive to me, but there was a similar case a few months ago where I thought the same thing about the same type of filter and was wrong. Since you know this person better than anyone else and you seem to be active right now, I come to you for clarification. Is this edit legitimate? The false positive report is here. — Soap — 21:11, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
I notice you have had the article as a protected redirect for two years and wondering if you would consider unprotecting it. I think the subject has clearly established notability given its wide coverage in national media and serving as inspiration for episodes of prominent shows like Law and Order: SVU. Also he had been interviewed by People magazine with regards to the Jaycee Dugard kidnapping.-- The Devil's Advocate ( talk) 00:54, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I have recently attempted to start an overhaul of the article Soviet Union. So far there has been some rather heated (and apparently fairly pointless) discussion on its talk page concerning the proposals, and there doesn't seem to be a prospect for coming to terms with some of the folks there. Unfortunately surprisingly few people seem to be interested in the topic, and those who are appear fairly opinionated and determined to defend the motherland no matter what sources say. I'll understand if you don't want to be immersed in this topic area, but unfortunately there is a grave shortage of third-party editors willing to enforce content policies there. You seem to be rather good at it elsewhere, so would you mind to chime in and try to sort it out? Nothing too specific so far, just please keep an eye on this. Colchicum ( talk) 01:06, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Can I ask you to userfy the article Yakir Forman for me. I have some additional material to add and didn't know that the article had been PRODed, Alansohn ( talk) 04:54, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Can you believe this? -- Taivo ( talk) 05:34, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi, FPS, could you please move Erseka to Ersekë? It's the only Albanian city that is incorrectly spelt. See also Talk:Erseka. -- Sulmues Let's talk 21:20, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
I am curious to find out which would be the perfect state of art explanation since nowadays practically every reference to Albanians says the same thing (some say direct some say generally assumed not only EB but other NPOV and RS sources also look here) and what is the difference between your mixing or references in one and my version here when they are saying the same thing. Aigest ( talk) 09:03, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
@Fut. I am curious to find out how did you find out the fact that the huge majority is agnostic. Maybe you misunderstood what I was saying when I was referring to the state of art of the issue. When apart those who support Illyrian-Albanian hypothesis there are:
Did it pass into your mind that the majority of the specialists (I don't believe the above mentioned experts were referring to non-specialist) had already expressed an opinion different from yours? Aigest ( talk) 21:37, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Maybe, but said that let me remind you that first.. that meme is opinion of specialists (just like the other meme also) and second..they are in majority. You had to deal with it, like it or not Aigest ( talk) 21:38, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Rederi AB Slite was a Sweden-based company. Therefore, as per Aktiebolag, the company name should be abbreviated with both capital letters as Rederi AB Slite, not as Rederi Ab Slite as you have moved it (as the latter would signify it being based in Finland, which it wasn't). Aplogies if this sounded harsh, it's late and I'm tired. Never the less, unless i'm missing something, you moved the article from the correctly capitalized title to the incorrect one. — Kjet ( talk · contribs) 22:05, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Usually when I come across User:Jacob_Peters' socks I take'em to Moreschi since he's got a ton of experience in blocking them, but since he's inactive and since you've helped him out with this sort of thing in the past, thought I'd notify you of a message I left at his page: [84]. Double nickels on the dime its JP. radek ( talk) 16:34, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello, at [85] I suppose you did not mean to add the first paragraph, which looks like it was copied from elsewhere? Sandstein 23:21, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
I have put this page on pending change protection per request at the pending change queue. However, it seems that this article have a bad history of edit war, and since you know the history of this article better than me, be sure to keep an eye in case if another edit war breaks out, and you are more than welcome to override the PCP by putting it back to semi or full if needed, thanks. 山本一郎 ( 会話) 06:09, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
There is another Russian nationalist edit-warrior ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Borealis55). He reappears every few days: removes citations, inserts modifiers to make the citations sound partisan or untrustworthy~. This is way beyond typical content disputes: He engages in absolutely no discussions. - Galassi ( talk) 00:39, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
I am positive that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kievlyanin is a sock for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Voyevoda. - Galassi ( talk) 13:01, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. GregJackP Boomer! 12:52, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
Feel free to read WP:NPA at your leisure before you use such language regarding my good faith efforts to help a very nonproductive user. And since the account in question is an SPA that engaged in repeated violations of several policies, including the one against vandalism, you might want to avoid making blatant errors (such as "it isn't vandalism") in the future. Şłџğģő 18:09, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
I tried to address this issue to NuclearWarfare a while back but I didn't realize he wouldn't be able to look at it. S/he did direct me to you however as a possible arbiter. Here is the issues;
I am not sure what the proper route is to pursue this, but I do not believe that the user Imzaid (also goes by Monteil for some reason) should be editing the page of Zaid Shakir because of overt conflict of interest. "She" writes in this diff [86]: "Second,I am the wife of Zaid Shakir and set-up this page 2yrs.ago"
I honestly wouldn't mind if she continued to edit the page but I continue to run into the same problems over and over again as she either lacks a fundamental understanding of Wikipedia policies or purposely ignores them. A few examples: 1) Inserting commercial links and spam linking: [87] 2) Unexplained deletion of sourced material: [88] Imzaid also never includes an edit summary, making it difficult to know why she made certain changes. I asked the user to make smaller changes one by one, but Imzaid's blanket changes make it difficult to have any sort of reasonable conversation on the merits of those alterations.
Since I first addressed this issue to NuclearWarfare in late May, the same conflict has repeated itself over and over and over again.
Your help is appreciated. Plot Spoiler ( talk) 17:53, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
Am I allowed to comment on the AfD? I will comply with whatever you advise. Thanks, GregJackP Boomer! 20:42, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
And may I edit on the talk page? I am trying to get clarification on the BLP policy. Thank you. Minor4th • talk 22:20, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
Can you give a look at the article Serbian–Albanian conflict. It is full of WP:OR WP:SYNTH, but what is more important is only an agenda pushing article. Aigest ( talk) 08:32, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
This banned user is back [89] so could you semi-protect the article?-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 16:53, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
(unindent)Deucalionite is back in Talk:Byllis. Along with other users he is trying to add the WPGR tag.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 20:35, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
I've added wpgr before 'ancient Greece & Rome' tag was added (as I've explained above this tag is ok to me). Alexikoua ( talk) 22:50, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
I added an indef topic ban to the user in addition to your block. [94] It's up to you whether you want to lift the block or not. NW ( Talk) 20:20, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Could you take a look at this?
Basically, the article includes the statement:
Varsovian insists on adding the following statement right after it:
The problem is that none of these citations 1) reference Cloud and Olson and, more importantly 2) show that historical records, media reports of the time, statements from the British government or the memoirs of western command Poles (sic) actually contradict Cloud and Olson. In fact, pretty much all the sources given in citations SUPPORT Cloud and Olson. So Varsovian is pretending that the citations say the opposite of what they actually say.
I realize my comments on talk page go into some detail and are a bit long but I wanted to fully examine the citations. Furthermore, while when I was first looking at it I expected this to be just typical OR and stretching of the info present in the sources, by the time I got done looking through the citations it became pretty clear that this was a probably deliberate misrepresentation of the sources. I could buy if it was one or two mistakes, in a case where the matter is ambiguous. But this is 7 (seven) instances of providing sources which say the OPPOSITE of what they are supposed to reference.
While this isn't as blatantly offensive of a misrepresentation as what Bandurist did recently on "Polish Auxiliary Police", it's very much in the same vein - sticking a citation at the end of a highly contentious claim in the hope that no one will check it for verifiability. Also, this kind of problem with Varsovian's editing apparantly keeps coming up again and again; and when he comes under scrutiny he backs off for a few days, then after a short break returns to do OR on this article (and several others) - and this time he totally misrepresented the sources to support it. radek ( talk) 00:41, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I mention you here. radek ( talk) 13:20, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I sent almost exact version to Sandstein yesterday for clarification through email if this is valid yesterday-he can confirm this. If he would wrote that this has no merit then I wouldn't have posted. He directed me to post this to AE for clarification. -- MyMoloboaccount ( talk) 16:28, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
-- MyMoloboaccount ( talk) 16:38, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I am aware of your thoughts on the WP tags in the tag pages. However I would like to remind you that I have been reported to AE by user:Athenean mainly on the accusation that I entered the tag of WPSQ in Molossians, Thesprotians, and Chaonians. According to many Albanian scholars, they were Illyrian tribes, not Greek tribes. Sandstein gave me a warning because he considered such behavior as WP:Battleground mentality. As a result, while you may see meaningless, futile, and stupid, entering and removing WP tags, other admins might not see it that way. I posted in the Greek WP a question Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Greece#WPSQ_and_WPGR_tags as to what WPGR members think and I would like to know if there is any policy in Wikipedia that clarifies a little better tagging policies. Could you please consider your intervention in that talk page with your thoughts? -- Sulmues Let's talk 17:17, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
What's this spree of nominating to deletion all the Albanian folklore as soon as I wrote the mother article of all of them ( Albanian Songs of the Frontier Warriors)? If it's a way to get people to contribute this week on the articles, then it might not work because they're all to see the final of the World Cup.
You may drop a line on the WP Albania. You well know that we are just 2-3 active ones. -- Sulmues Let's talk 20:18, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
![]() | On July 10, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kildare Poems, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
-- Cirt ( talk) 06:02, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the friendly warning. It all got a bit nuts there for a while! I guess interest will drop off like crazy one the World Cup is over. Hope so anyway. Best wishes, Invertzoo ( talk) 20:37, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
When Tundrabuggy ( talk · contribs) was found to be a sock of Dajudem ( talk · contribs) you requested that a CU store the relevant data. Do you know if this was done? I ask because an SPI was opened on another user believed to be a sock of Dajudem/Tundrabuggy. nableezy - 00:01, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Seems that Megistias' case has been archived without any notice. Cheers. — Kedadi 16:16, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi! Could you please take a look at the relevant section of the Ural Mountains, User talk:Materialscientist and Riphean Mountains? The claim that Pliny the Elder assigned the Riphaean Mountains to the Ural Mountains seems particularly dubious. Well, to the best of my knowledge he couldn't and didn't, not sure if a passing mention in a 1823 book could beat it. And there are probably other issues. Your suggestions are welcome. Colchicum ( talk) 12:25, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
how can i prove that, the art work is under a free licance. this is the original page the author has published the work: http://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attila_(hun_uralkod%C3%B3)-- Finn Diesel ( talk) 15:02, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
definitely, he claims he is the same person who upload the art work and he also claims there couldn't be any limitations.-- Finn Diesel ( talk) 20:27, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Duchamps comb has repeatedly removed sourced material from Rand Paul without discussion, and then began disrupting Paul's talk page by introducing misleading quotes. Duchamps posted this on the talk page:
In reality, the sentence said:
Additionally, the source is a document that Rand Paul penned himself! When asked to cease the removal of sourced information in the article without discussion, Duchamps declined. As you've dealt with Duchamps previously, regarding similar actions, I believe this situation would benefit from your help. The Original Wikipedian ( talk) 19:55, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for tagging the Attila photo for deletion from the commons. I expanded on the situation on the Attila the Hun talk page. I deleted the photo from the article, then realized I was putting the cart before the horse, that the Commons deletion should have a chance to be answered. I went back to replace the photo, and discovered a different problem: An anonymous editor making several changes in a few minutes, including to the Attila the Hun article, with the Edit Summary "IN GOD I TRUST - FINN DIESEL" [95]
I'm not sure whether it's more appropriate to move this to an anti-vandalism page, but I assume since you are familiar with the history, there would be less confusion if you continued. I'll mention the reason I got involved at all was noticing what seemed to be a high number of reverts in Finn Diesel without an Edit Summary, and a warning for edit warring his talk page. The copyright violation only seems to be one of the problems, although perhaps the most cut-and-dried. Regards, Alpha Ralpha Boulevard ( talk) 19:01, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Following a motion at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment:
Remedy 20 of Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Eastern European mailing list ("Miacek topic banned") is lifted.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, NW ( Talk) 00:11, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Please take care of this nightmare: [96]. Colchicum ( talk) 22:40, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
You blocked User:Showasw the other day as a sockpuppet of banned User:Serafin. Is User:MyMoloboaccount another sockpuppet?-- Srleffler ( talk) 23:56, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
The article only states "(dubbed "Climategate" in the media)". Their is not a section as to the Etymology, yet there is over 2 million hits on Google. NFCC #1&8 states, "significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." The screenshot clearly illustrates the media (FOX News) using of the phrase. So if there is no written section about the media "dubbing" the Incident it can only be represented by a photo, how are we to get one that is for free/fair use (Note: that almost half of the ref used in the article use the word climategate). As far as Contextual significance [97] Climategate became very controversial and garnered lots of media coverage, a screenshot of that term in news coverage would likely be appropriate.-- Ducha mps_ comb MFA 22:32, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
If it is not too much trouble I would like to request that you remove the word "birther" from both the Incident Archive and from my Block log. I find that word terribly-offensive and upsetting and do not feel I should carry this stigma.-- Ducha mps_ comb MFA 23:34, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Qwyrxian ( talk) 12:40, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
As somebody who has taken part in the previous discussions on this topic, you may be interested in the current move discussion here. Varsovian ( talk) 17:19, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
[100] is that Deucalionite or someone else?It is him
[101]--
— ZjarriRrethues —
talk
17:34, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello Future Perfect. Since you previously warned the two editors who are now at WP:AN3#User:Posse72 reported by User:Tbma (Result: ), regarding the Battle of Tali-Ihantala, do you want to comment there on what should be done? It seems to be that an indefinite topic ban under WP:DIGWUREN would be a way to get their attention, but that might not be the only thing to try. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 22:16, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
I am an uninvolved editor who came in response to the kimchi RfC. I do not entirely agree with Hkwon's POV or his editing practice but to dish out an indefinite topic ban for a minor edit war is way over the top. Martin Hogbin ( talk) 23:03, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
The current disruption at the Korean cuisine articles is part of a long-standing pattern of disputes that has in the past been so violent that I've taken the stance that the whole topic area is de facto under a regime of "discretionary sanctions" similar to that of Eastern Europe, Israel-Palestine and other ideological hotspots, i.e. allowing admins largely carte blanche to intervene with whatever sanctions are necessary. Arbcom or no Arbcom. Whenever I've taken unconventional measures in this field (e.g. at Liancourt Rocks and other articles), the community has upheld them. A topic-ban like the one I imposed is essentially just a delayed disruption block under the normal blocking policy. I'm saying to this editor: "I've got enough reasons that would justify blocking you for a longish time, but for now I won't as long as you stay out of the topic area". We can of course take this to a noticeboard too, if you insist. Or, if you insist I do things by the book, I can just block the person right away. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:18, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
(ec)
I feel that either this restriction should be applied fairly upon the disputants, particularly Melonbarmonster2 who has been engaging in controversial edit wars in a multitude of articles related to Korean cuisine, or that this restriction shouldn't be applied at all. I share Hkwon's POV on the basis of many reliable sources that fermentation is a central element in the definition of kimchi, and after you topic-banned Hkwon, Melonbarmonster2 has threatened me of the same happening to me because of my views on this subject. [105] Cydevil38 ( talk) 03:17, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Huh? How'd Hkwon get blocked for edit warring/personal attacks 4 days after his last edit? -- SarekOfVulcan ( talk) 15:37, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Since you were the one who removed Tillman's post at Talk:CRU email controversy, I thought you might want to take a look at this. Best, NW ( Talk) 21:12, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
THanks for the warning. I have no problem with stricter limitations on reverts as long as they are applied consistently and I have advance notice of them. To that end, I have to correct your statement that I revert warred as bad as Hkwon the "last few days". Hkwon revert warred with 3 or 4 separate editors all over the same dead horse issue for weeks on end though now it seems Cydevil has taken on the cause. I did make three reverts in response to a revert by Cydevil on the 24th but all the spurts of reverts in the history page I have been involved in were regarding different article issues most of which were all resolved with discussed compromise and consensus. The latest example of this was my exchange with Vulcan on the 22nd. Yes we reverted but we both engaged in discussion and came to a compromise and the article was improved as a result. Older dispute/issues resolved include discussion over TED material. Melonbarmonster2 ( talk) 02:15, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
That made my day :) -- Taivo ( talk) 18:57, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
This should really make us quiver in fear :p -- Taivo ( talk) 19:05, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
I'd like you to note that I explicitly refused to be Russavia's policeman regarding his offensive relitigation of EEML as part of his comments supportive of Miacek. Don't take that to mean I'm not furious. Do take that to mean that coming up on 7 months of my topic ban there are editors who believe we can behave better and editors who have yet to demonstrate the same.
PЄTЄRS J VЄСRUМВА ►
TALK
14:47, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
For your comments on that "Climategate" image. I've already explained the NFCC issues, as have others; I'm afraid this isn't so much an example of people not informing themselves as of people being in denial about what NFCC requires. -- ChrisO ( talk) 08:15, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Your accusation [106] is itself a disruption. If you have a problem with me, please take it up on my talk page. Thanks. A Quest For Knowledge ( talk) 15:18, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Well? After your Hkwon ban, how do you feel about it, and what, if anything, are you planning to do about it? I see you as indirectly responsible, Hkwon was so exasperated by this type of thing that he did what he did, which was wrong, I suppose, but now that he's gone who's going to balance out the situation with the Koreans who take the equal but opposite approach? The system is out of balance because you took away one side of it, as Alison and I are not Korean we can't be as effective for complicated but not too hard to understand reasons. Please do something. Chrisrus ( talk) 20:14, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
I added this sentence [107] then this one
[108] based on this source [109] and then Athenean removed the Paleo-Balkan wording and moved it below despite chronological arrangement. Now he's telling me that somehow my edits are the same and he's suggesting that because of that one should go. I'm also trying to convince him that obviously the source when mentioning southern and northern tribes refers to northern Paleo-Balkan(Illyrians, Thracians) and southern ones(Greeks). This is becoming a discussion with too many or arguments, so could you please once again step in and offer your opinion regardless of its content here or here.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 20:16, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
This guy is like a small fly in the soup. You want to ignore him, but you can't quite dig him out with your spoon and he just keeps buzzing and wiggling around. -- Taivo ( talk) 22:35, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Future, I've received your message
[110].
You've said "Your recent articles such as Defense of Krk airport and Battle of Gospić are highly non-neutral in tone and content".
Can you, please, be more precise? You'll make it easier for me.
Please, assume good faith.
I've tried to use as much as possible precise words to avoid negative etiquetting of the whole communities, but to point to the perpetrators.
So, where do you see non-neutral elements (highly non-neutral????!!) in those articles? Which sentences?
I've referred to the sources I've listed on the bottom of the page.
If you find any line doubtful, please, add {{fact}}.
I've been working so with others here for years, and it worked fine for all involved sides.
Grammar incorrect? Noone's perfect. I try my best, someone always corrects my errors.
I correct others, others correct me.
That's what makes this project as cooperation.
Kubura (
talk)
01:27, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Do you think you should review your actions here, in terms of the timing of the block you have imposed? Conceded his edits were sanctionable, but the topic ban which you attempted to impose clearly did not gain community support. The block which you then imposed was in fact implemented four days after his last edit, and I suspect that if it were necessary to defend this block you would find it difficult to do so. I have not unblocked (although I considered it) but it might be a sensible approach if you were to reconsider and start over with a level one warning. Not trying to interfere, but his unblock request and comments about it are attracting some attention. -- Anthony.bradbury "talk" 19:13, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
I was about to close down the discussion myself.-- *Kat* ( talk) 21:22, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
24 hours of rest at Ukrainian language from User:Windyhead. Thank you. -- Taivo ( talk) 20:35, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
I understand where you're coming from, but would a final warning on that have been a bit less BITEy? It's not clear that they had been warned formally before other than 3RR issues in the past. Georgewilliamherbert ( talk) 21:20, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Darkly ] "Better", huh? Would you like to discuss that with my fiercely loyal pet monster ? Bishonen | talk 17:12, 30 July 2010 (UTC).
I was following the conversation on Lar's talk page and would like to share my thoughts a bit (hope you don't mind). First off, I don't think you are biased, perhaps Lar is privy to information I am not, but I have seen you warn people on both sides of the issue - maybe I am simply being ignorant here. Second, I don't think Lar is biased either, but I also understand that it is a very natural, perhaps inevitable, reaction to respond to extremism with extremism. Has Lar done this? Yeah, I think he'd probably admit to being more acidic than usual and I suspect he will detox from the area after the Arbcom proceedings are over. I'm guilty of this as well.
I think a problem, probably in all contentious areas, is that people tend to make snap judgments. No side on any debate is going to be right 100% of the time, but if an admin shows up when one side is correct they may tend to dismiss the other side forevermore. It is difficult to find admins that can walk that fine line without crossing over to one side, but generally I think Lar has done a good job. I just hope that you and Lar can find a way to see eye to eye on things a bit more and hopefully by understanding how people react to extremism you can both avoid that pitfall and lend a friendly hand to those teetering on the edge. Happy admining. TheGoodLocust ( talk) 20:43, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
There is a disagreement whether a translation of the native name belongs conventional_long_name field in Template:Infobox former country. As you had participated in the discussion with similar topic in the past, I'd like to ask your participation. Thank you. -- Kusunose 04:07, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I've left a reply on the AE page regarding your comment and explaining why the report has been made. Varsovian ( talk) 09:12, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Dear FPaS, you might have noticed the current vandalizing efforts targeted at the established and stable versions of Ilinden–Preobrazhenie Uprising and Bulgarian Men's High School of Thessaloniki. Best, Apcbg ( talk) 12:46, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
You might find this [111] interesting. Cheers, Athenean ( talk) 23:05, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you with this issue again. You have closed the debate, stating that it should not be reopened. However, if a debate has achieved no consensus, it might well be appropriate to offer more factual information, so that consensus can eventually emerge. I have been checking the English websites of German state governments (seven of which use Minister-President, two use Prime minister, one uses Premier, with three states on which I haven't found pertinent information, and three city states who are governed by mayors). In my view, there should be a place to communicate this information. Cs32en Talk to me 02:50, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Howdy. Just an FYI I've mentioned you in passing [112] thanks, - Chumchum7 ( talk) 09:12, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
I noticed you still haven't answered the question about ChrisO's conduct, both in incivility and 3RR violations. Why is Minor4th and I in your sights, but blatent violations such as his are not? The only reasonable conclusion is that you are biased. Please explain why you won't address this. GregJackP Boomer! 04:04, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
When I called BRD, it was my first revert. I posted that on the talk page even before I made the edit. Minor 4th 06:38, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
By the way, for the record, my comments concerning Marknutley's lack of knowledge related to some of the diffs that Pmanderson posted, especially this one in which MN asserts that "The Greek city states were not democracys [sic]." Honestly, the mind boggles - who does he think invented the concept of democracy, and where does he think the word came from? You would think that someone who wants to edit an article called List of wars between democracies would actually have some idea of history and (even if he doesn't know all the details) would be sufficiently motivated to open an encyclopedia - heck, even look it up on Wikipedia - and get the facts. This is extreme incompetence, both in terms of a lack of knowledge and also in terms of an apparent intellectual laziness in not being willing to look up a basic fact that a high school kid should know. You've heard of the sword-skeleton theory? Case in point. -- ChrisO ( talk) 02:16, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
You say "how did this slip through" for re some 4-month-old vandalism. I don't think this is all that rare. I recently corrected two two-year-old vandalizations: childish name change and probably politically motivated.
There are also good-faith content errors which have persisted for quite long times. For example, editor Wetman believes (mistakenly, I think) that Urrecht means "(supposed) rights to territories inhabited since 'time immemorial'"; whereas it actually seems to mean "natural law" (synonymous with Naturrecht). discussion This has made it into two articles: one incorrectly, the other correctly (but ambiguously). -- Macrakis ( talk) 15:15, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
[128] It wasn't my intention to do so, but you are right, i shouldn't have commented at all. -- Kim D. Petersen ( talk) 16:05, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
I just noticed a heated discussion on Talk:Congress_of_Berlin#Ethnographic_maps, which is about to get ugly quite fast. I know you had to deal with similar situations in the past, so you might be the best person to resolve the dispute. You're bound to find it quite familiar and easy to deal with. I know you're somewhat busy, but if you're in the mood...-- Laveol T 21:06, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Not that I know. What are you talking about? William M. Connolley ( talk) 09:08, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
I draw your attention to [129] William M. Connolley ( talk) 11:06, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Please stop the situation at RFE. Lar and Franamax should not be allowed to comment so long as they are also agressively excluding other admins through wikilawyering, particularly with the arbcom case sorting this out —Preceding unsigned comment added by Polargeo ( talk • contribs)
(archive time stamp:) 17:42, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
(Not giving the IP) but your meta-complaint on User talk:TenOfAllTrades is so true, and so elegant. Deserves to sit in Bishzilla's pocket together with Heimstern Läufer's incivility essay ! bishzilla ROARR!! 01:04, 6 August 2010 (UTC).
Thanks for that. Photos from five different DSLRs just wasn't right. XLerate ( talk) 08:31, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for unblocking me, I was convinced people were happy to see me blocked. If I was still blocked (and was still blocked until 5 pm tomorrow) I would not have had a chance to apologise and try to sort something out and expand an article. I'm not saying what I said was acceptable nor thatI shouldn't have been blocked but I do think that something needs to be done and something written into the NPA criteria which distinguishes between a provoked or unprovoked attack. I'm happy to forget this situation but I think that the blocking criteria should be reduced to 6 hours for such an obvious comment used in frustration at receiving a speedy warning. There is a difference between launching a full scale personal attack/rant at somebody innocent and saying something unplesant in the spur of the moment in removing an article warning I think. That's not to say that it is acceptable to attack or call anybody any name but I do believe there is a difference and I think in future this should be a criteria for deciding upon blocking duration. What happened earlier was a moment of anger/frustration and did not need 24 hours or even an hour for me to calm down. Dr. Blofeld 22:05, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
With your thoughts on biographies of footballers and everyone else. User_talk:Sulmues#Kosovo_as_country_of_birth. Usually I come to you when I'm lost. Thanks! -- Sulmues ( talk) 22:06, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
I got an e-mail from User:2007apm asking me to take a look at the block carried out following this SPI (February 2010). The initial e-mail was back in February 2010 and nothing was done then, but the user e-mailed again recently (August 2010) and I'd like to try and sort this out. Would you be able to take a look at this and see how strong you think the evidence is connecting the accounts? The dates of editing don't quite seem to match the usual pattern here as far as I can tell. I'm asking you because you blocked most of the Emperordarius socks. I've asked the blocking admin and SPI clerk User:MuZemike to have a look as well. You could both comment on his talk page where he has filed several unblock requests that were declined without considering whether the initial identification as a sock was correct or not. If there is evidence that shouldn't be discussed on-wiki (to avoid revealing how certain behavioural identifications are made) please feel free to e-mail me. Thanks. Carcharoth ( talk) 22:33, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
...both with your suggestion on my talk page (meta-irony notwithstanding), and with your action at Hipocrite's talk page. TenOfAllTrades( talk) 15:27, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
FP: you should either have left it all for Hip or you should remove all the problematic comments. Leaving some behind shows your partisanship. ++ Lar: t/ c 21:33, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
im here to improve wikipedia articles. you cant give me a ban, bacause you have not any reason for that.-- Finn Diesel ( talk) 15:36, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
he may be a good person or admin but he doesn't allow people to improve articles.-- Finn Diesel ( talk) 21:29, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
dear admin, the copyright problem about "File:Buda es Attila.JPG" has been fixed. please protect the page against Richard. as we all know he is not here to improve medival european history. thanks.-- Finn Diesel ( talk) 12:08, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
i respect all users and all art works in wikipedia but i cant see any respect to Hungarian art works in articles. it is not an acceptable policy for Hungarian users in wikipedia..-- Finn Diesel ( talk) 12:48, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
You are mentioned (in a nice way). Keep up the good work. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Toddst1_misconduct RIPGC ( talk) 04:13, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
You didn't even give me a chance to speak. How is that fair or appropriate behaviour for any administrator. ( olive ( talk) 19:14, 9 August 2010 (UTC))
It would be sufficient that you say "bizarre dialogue". Otherwise, I see it as a support for Yobol's attack against me, which is breaking policy. All the statements on my side in this dialogue was centred on what the other editor wrote (in diffs). I never attacked the editor personally. I never suggested that he creates a bad environment. I never accused him of twisting my words. There was no confusion possible about what Yobol wrote in these diffs. They were very simple statements, not subject to misinterpretation or "twisting". Yobol kept saying that his position about the lead did not change. Fine, but his non ambiguous statements were nevertheless highly relevant in the ongoing discussion about this lead. In particular, the statement http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:Transcendental_Meditation&diff=376686243&oldid=376684444 was about the article, but it also had a strong implication on the lead because of WP:LEAD. However, Yobol was not aware of all aspects of this discussion, so it could not appreciate that. I don't understand why he accused me of twisting his words. This is a personal attack against me. It breaks policy. Please do not do the same. Edith Sirius Lee ( talk) 07:54, 10 August 2010 (UTC)