I recognize that this user page belongs to the Wikipedia project and not to me personally. As such, I recognize that I am expected to respectfully abide by community standards as to the presentation and content of this page, and that if I do not like these guidelines, I am welcome either to engage in reasonable discussion about it, to publish my material elsewhere, or to leave the project.
This is an archive of User talk:Lar from about 15 October 2006 through about 1 November 2006. Please do not comment here, use my current talk page for that, thanks. It is part of a series of archives, see the box at right for the list and to navigate to others. An index to all my talk page archives, automatically maintained by User:HBC Archive Indexerbot can be found at User:Lar/TalkArchiveIndex. |
|
Hi Lar. I just wanted to thank you for your support in my request for adminship, even though it didn't come in the form of a support "vote". (You also deserve still more thanks for your tireless on and regarding WP:SRNC.)
As with any person in any community, there are editors on Wikipedia whose opinion I respect, and those whose opinion I unfortunately I do not. Yours I do. Freakofnurture's I do not. Unfortunately, this puts me in a bit of a bind, since the two of you seem to have the same opinion. Thus I was hoping you could help me out so that I could better myself as an editor -- regardless of whether or not I go through a third RfA somewhere down the line.
I was wondering specifically which of the incidents Freakofnurture cited give you a bad feeling, and what I can do to solve those fears -- whether it's in direct response to those incidents, or in general. Any coaching you're willing to provide would be much appreciated. -- NORTH talk 14:53, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi,
After some time not looking at the double naming issue anymore (it hurt toooo much) I heard that you now try to mediate. I am happy to hear that someone at least tries it.
I just wanted to let you know why I can not contribute to the South-Tyrol pages for now:
The main reason for the issue hurting me soo much is for comments from people who don't know anything about my home place and then saying things like "it's in italy, so the name has to be italian". The truth is not so simple. And it hurts if people change reality by making things simple.
The fact is, that South Tyrol is protected by (italian)law from italians trying to take away our german. German and Italian has equal rights in South Tyrol. By law.
The bigges problem is: You can not just take a mojority vote in Wikipedia and uses that as an excuse to ignore law. The law is here to protect minorities. How do you protect a minority in a majority vote where you have 50(?) Million italians against 200.000 german speaking South Tyroleans? There is no way that this minority can survive in Wikipedia if you do everything by mojority votings.
This whole issue is so frustrating, because added to being a minority, the English of the South Tyroleans is really bad, because we learn it as third or fourth language (first we HAVE to learn german, then italian, some also ladin, and only in the end a little bit english). How can we fight for our rights in the english Wikipedia if the italians have such a big majority and so simple arguments.
And additionally my granfather was tortured by italians and died in prison because he fighted for the right that the german speakers have the same rights as the italian speakers in South Tyrol. Maybe you can understand that people who want to eliminate the german names in South Tyrol really upset me personally, and I can not discuss with people who just say "it's italy, so use italian". This is like torturing me (and 200.000 other people).
What I want to say: Please understand that I can not contribute, but please don't forget that it is about a weak minority being suppressed by a strong big majority. Do you want to support this behaviour against italian law?
Should Wikipedia follow the law?
Is NPOV not also bound to follow the law and not change it by a simple majority vote?
Thanks for your time and efforts, Fantasy 10:09, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Look, there have been countless situations very similar to this, and in every case the 'majority' is nothing more than renaming to the modern, there here-and-now. Look at Poland - what used to be the city of Lwow in Poland is now the city of Lviv in Ukraine. Did the Polish-speaking population complain that the (at the time) Russians were 'trying to take away their Polish?' - probably. What was the end result? Assimilation. Want to hear a hard story? Imagine living as my wife did under communism - waking up in your country (or the puppet it represented) and going to school to have to stare at the flag of another country and learn it's language and songs, etc. The situation in South Tyrol is different - it belongs to the Italian government now. It was decided upon by both sides, that's it. It wasn't the kind of assimilation like Poland was under with the Soviet Union. So by the Italians assigning names and such, well, look again at Lviv. After that region was turned over to Ukraine, well, the names were reassigned (from Polish to Ukrainian/Russian) and the people had to assimilate. It didn't necessarily take anything away - but I feel in the case of South Tyrol, well, the Italian government is the one that owns the area (like it or not). I'm sure there are many regions along volatile borders that have experienced the same thing. Bottom line is that as it has been said, a final decision may end up causing hardship or insulting a group (whether majority or minority). And as everything else in the world, we will all have to learn to live with it. Taalo and I mainly started in on this because of the unilateral approach that occurred last year without consensus or the kind of open discussion that is occurring today. So if we go with something that is NPOV and appeases two naming conventions, that may be the most neutral approach possible (given that choosing the minority causes prejudice to the minority in their own country!). Rarelibra 20:41, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
You appear to be having a problem understanding Italian and European law. All is explained here
You need to study specifically: Articles 101 and 102
The following which should be read in conjunction may assist you in your comprehension:
I think you will see the law is quite easily understood in this instance. I draw no conclusions I merely point out the legalities of the situation Giano 07:32, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
I suppose that first we address the names of the cities, and then we can move on to the North Italian highway names. :) Regards, Newyorkbrad 11:54, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Interesting. The way I read the document provided above at [3] - from the official website of the province, no less, is that the name is to be "Trentino-Alto Adige", the province being "Bolzano", etc. So in standing on a proper naming convention, offering up a dual-name NPOV is actually flexing a bit to allow an official stance with ties to the German language as well (instead of just naming it an English translation of just a German name). Rarelibra 20:47, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
My administratorship candidacy succeeded with a final tally of 81/0/1. I appreciate your support. Results are at Wikipedia:Recently_created_admins#Durova. Warmly, Durova 14:40, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi. You were the last person to comment on this thread at AN/I. As the case has blown up afresh at AN/I today with all the same arguments, it would be much appreciated if you could pop over and give a perspective on things. Many thanks for your time, Aquilina 10:55, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Hello Lar, I got your name off the list of "Wikipedia administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles" . About 2 days ago I was fooling around with tags on a page that I had created on an ophthalmologist Selig Percy Amoils. I put a "speedy delete" tag on the article, and when I looked again it wasn't there...... Could you please help to restore the piece? Thank you Paul venter 16:33, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm now out of the hospital, which is good. Thank you!-- Kyok o 20:42, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
I may be pushing it here, but I feel your diplomatic skills may be needed. Following a heavy re-editing of Paul McCartney there was a tiff between two major participants in The Beatles Project, as evidenced here and here. I realise that my comments may not have helped, and if being censured by a third party is deemed appropriate in getting people back then I will take it on the chin, but I believed I was doing the best for all concerned. I also quite understand if you do not feel you want to get involved, but I know you and Kingboyk go back a while. LessHeard vanU 16:15, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
Lar, thank you so much for your support for my RfA. I passed with a vote tally of 61/0/1. I am honored that the consensus was to allow me the added privilege of the admin mop. I appreciate your support and complimentary words on my RFA, as well as your note of congratulations! -- plange 21:46, 22 October 2006 (UTC) |
|
Has there been a decision on Wikipedia:Danny's contest? User:Zoe| (talk) 17:54, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your support in my
not-so-recent RfA, which succeeded with a final tally of (97/4/4)! I've never been able to accept compliments gracefully, and the heavy support from this outstanding community left me at a complete loss for words -- so, a very belated
thank you for all of your kind words.
I have done and will continue to do the utmost to serve the community in this new capacity, wherever it may take me, and to set an example others might wish to follow in. With a little luck and a lot of advice, this may be enough. Maybe someday the enwiki admins of the future will look back and say, "Yeah, that guy was an admin." Hopefully then they don't start talking about the explosive ArbComm case I got tied into and oh what a drama that was, but we'll see, won't we? Surely some of you have seen me in action by now; with that in mind, I openly invite and welcome any feedback here or here -- help me become the best editor and sysop I can be.
|
FYI - Gene Centauri ( talk · contribs · count) appears to be someone's sock harrassing User:Gene Poole and User:Centauri, may be username blockable... Georgewilliamherbert 02:15, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
The October 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 22:41, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
seriously, I would love to set mine up like yours but I have no idea how. PStrait 04:42, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
I removed an unsourced and subjective statement from the article about Copenhagen about a minute ago. I suspect that it is the same individual using that IP ( User:125.235.247.223) as the one who uses the account User:Comanche_cph, since that edit [7] is identical to the one made by Comanche_cph [8] in August this year. ( Comparison here) The same anonymous user have also made an edit to the article about Scandinavia, that more or less matches the opinions expressed by Comanche cph before he/she was blocked this summer. This anonymous user hasn't overstepped yet (except for what I've corrected in the Copenhagen article), and AFAIK the block has expired. But I'd like to inform you anyway, in case we have another revert war on our hands. /M.O ( u) ( t) 10:19, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
Lar, I must apologize for contacting you again, however it seems that I am continually being pursued by User:Gryffndor in the events that occurred a while back regarding South Tyrol. If you look at my contributions since the initiation of mediation, I have gone on to make edits regarding the geography of various Cantons of France, several edits regarding telecommunications companies, edits with telecommunications and mapping categories, etc. I have no wish to interact with Gryffndor - in fact, I have recently been approved for using VandalBot and joined Esperanza as well. Can you please help by letting Gryffndor know that I wish to have no involvement, and that because of the recent events he should please avoid any more antagonism? Thank you. Rarelibra 23:39, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Well, for one, I added an archive page which he failed to notice and has since added things back - though I am allowed the archive page as Wikipedia states. I wish he would just go his way and leave me alone, as my edits are contributing to positive not negative. Rarelibra 15:11, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
It's been taken care of by another admin, quoting that a user doesn't have to keep such warning templates on their talk pages - and if someone like Gryffndor continues to revert the changes, he is actually in jeopardy of the 3RR rule. Rarelibra 18:00, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
File:Vampire2.jpg My secret pleasure... (an anonymous contributor)
You are receiving this message because you are currently listed as a coach in the 'Active' section of the coaching box.
Thank you for helping with admin coaching! H ig hway Grammar Enforcer! 20:28, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
I recognize that this user page belongs to the Wikipedia project and not to me personally. As such, I recognize that I am expected to respectfully abide by community standards as to the presentation and content of this page, and that if I do not like these guidelines, I am welcome either to engage in reasonable discussion about it, to publish my material elsewhere, or to leave the project.
This is an archive of User talk:Lar from about 15 October 2006 through about 1 November 2006. Please do not comment here, use my current talk page for that, thanks. It is part of a series of archives, see the box at right for the list and to navigate to others. An index to all my talk page archives, automatically maintained by User:HBC Archive Indexerbot can be found at User:Lar/TalkArchiveIndex. |
|
Hi Lar. I just wanted to thank you for your support in my request for adminship, even though it didn't come in the form of a support "vote". (You also deserve still more thanks for your tireless on and regarding WP:SRNC.)
As with any person in any community, there are editors on Wikipedia whose opinion I respect, and those whose opinion I unfortunately I do not. Yours I do. Freakofnurture's I do not. Unfortunately, this puts me in a bit of a bind, since the two of you seem to have the same opinion. Thus I was hoping you could help me out so that I could better myself as an editor -- regardless of whether or not I go through a third RfA somewhere down the line.
I was wondering specifically which of the incidents Freakofnurture cited give you a bad feeling, and what I can do to solve those fears -- whether it's in direct response to those incidents, or in general. Any coaching you're willing to provide would be much appreciated. -- NORTH talk 14:53, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi,
After some time not looking at the double naming issue anymore (it hurt toooo much) I heard that you now try to mediate. I am happy to hear that someone at least tries it.
I just wanted to let you know why I can not contribute to the South-Tyrol pages for now:
The main reason for the issue hurting me soo much is for comments from people who don't know anything about my home place and then saying things like "it's in italy, so the name has to be italian". The truth is not so simple. And it hurts if people change reality by making things simple.
The fact is, that South Tyrol is protected by (italian)law from italians trying to take away our german. German and Italian has equal rights in South Tyrol. By law.
The bigges problem is: You can not just take a mojority vote in Wikipedia and uses that as an excuse to ignore law. The law is here to protect minorities. How do you protect a minority in a majority vote where you have 50(?) Million italians against 200.000 german speaking South Tyroleans? There is no way that this minority can survive in Wikipedia if you do everything by mojority votings.
This whole issue is so frustrating, because added to being a minority, the English of the South Tyroleans is really bad, because we learn it as third or fourth language (first we HAVE to learn german, then italian, some also ladin, and only in the end a little bit english). How can we fight for our rights in the english Wikipedia if the italians have such a big majority and so simple arguments.
And additionally my granfather was tortured by italians and died in prison because he fighted for the right that the german speakers have the same rights as the italian speakers in South Tyrol. Maybe you can understand that people who want to eliminate the german names in South Tyrol really upset me personally, and I can not discuss with people who just say "it's italy, so use italian". This is like torturing me (and 200.000 other people).
What I want to say: Please understand that I can not contribute, but please don't forget that it is about a weak minority being suppressed by a strong big majority. Do you want to support this behaviour against italian law?
Should Wikipedia follow the law?
Is NPOV not also bound to follow the law and not change it by a simple majority vote?
Thanks for your time and efforts, Fantasy 10:09, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Look, there have been countless situations very similar to this, and in every case the 'majority' is nothing more than renaming to the modern, there here-and-now. Look at Poland - what used to be the city of Lwow in Poland is now the city of Lviv in Ukraine. Did the Polish-speaking population complain that the (at the time) Russians were 'trying to take away their Polish?' - probably. What was the end result? Assimilation. Want to hear a hard story? Imagine living as my wife did under communism - waking up in your country (or the puppet it represented) and going to school to have to stare at the flag of another country and learn it's language and songs, etc. The situation in South Tyrol is different - it belongs to the Italian government now. It was decided upon by both sides, that's it. It wasn't the kind of assimilation like Poland was under with the Soviet Union. So by the Italians assigning names and such, well, look again at Lviv. After that region was turned over to Ukraine, well, the names were reassigned (from Polish to Ukrainian/Russian) and the people had to assimilate. It didn't necessarily take anything away - but I feel in the case of South Tyrol, well, the Italian government is the one that owns the area (like it or not). I'm sure there are many regions along volatile borders that have experienced the same thing. Bottom line is that as it has been said, a final decision may end up causing hardship or insulting a group (whether majority or minority). And as everything else in the world, we will all have to learn to live with it. Taalo and I mainly started in on this because of the unilateral approach that occurred last year without consensus or the kind of open discussion that is occurring today. So if we go with something that is NPOV and appeases two naming conventions, that may be the most neutral approach possible (given that choosing the minority causes prejudice to the minority in their own country!). Rarelibra 20:41, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
You appear to be having a problem understanding Italian and European law. All is explained here
You need to study specifically: Articles 101 and 102
The following which should be read in conjunction may assist you in your comprehension:
I think you will see the law is quite easily understood in this instance. I draw no conclusions I merely point out the legalities of the situation Giano 07:32, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
I suppose that first we address the names of the cities, and then we can move on to the North Italian highway names. :) Regards, Newyorkbrad 11:54, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Interesting. The way I read the document provided above at [3] - from the official website of the province, no less, is that the name is to be "Trentino-Alto Adige", the province being "Bolzano", etc. So in standing on a proper naming convention, offering up a dual-name NPOV is actually flexing a bit to allow an official stance with ties to the German language as well (instead of just naming it an English translation of just a German name). Rarelibra 20:47, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
My administratorship candidacy succeeded with a final tally of 81/0/1. I appreciate your support. Results are at Wikipedia:Recently_created_admins#Durova. Warmly, Durova 14:40, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi. You were the last person to comment on this thread at AN/I. As the case has blown up afresh at AN/I today with all the same arguments, it would be much appreciated if you could pop over and give a perspective on things. Many thanks for your time, Aquilina 10:55, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Hello Lar, I got your name off the list of "Wikipedia administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles" . About 2 days ago I was fooling around with tags on a page that I had created on an ophthalmologist Selig Percy Amoils. I put a "speedy delete" tag on the article, and when I looked again it wasn't there...... Could you please help to restore the piece? Thank you Paul venter 16:33, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm now out of the hospital, which is good. Thank you!-- Kyok o 20:42, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
I may be pushing it here, but I feel your diplomatic skills may be needed. Following a heavy re-editing of Paul McCartney there was a tiff between two major participants in The Beatles Project, as evidenced here and here. I realise that my comments may not have helped, and if being censured by a third party is deemed appropriate in getting people back then I will take it on the chin, but I believed I was doing the best for all concerned. I also quite understand if you do not feel you want to get involved, but I know you and Kingboyk go back a while. LessHeard vanU 16:15, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
Lar, thank you so much for your support for my RfA. I passed with a vote tally of 61/0/1. I am honored that the consensus was to allow me the added privilege of the admin mop. I appreciate your support and complimentary words on my RFA, as well as your note of congratulations! -- plange 21:46, 22 October 2006 (UTC) |
|
Has there been a decision on Wikipedia:Danny's contest? User:Zoe| (talk) 17:54, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your support in my
not-so-recent RfA, which succeeded with a final tally of (97/4/4)! I've never been able to accept compliments gracefully, and the heavy support from this outstanding community left me at a complete loss for words -- so, a very belated
thank you for all of your kind words.
I have done and will continue to do the utmost to serve the community in this new capacity, wherever it may take me, and to set an example others might wish to follow in. With a little luck and a lot of advice, this may be enough. Maybe someday the enwiki admins of the future will look back and say, "Yeah, that guy was an admin." Hopefully then they don't start talking about the explosive ArbComm case I got tied into and oh what a drama that was, but we'll see, won't we? Surely some of you have seen me in action by now; with that in mind, I openly invite and welcome any feedback here or here -- help me become the best editor and sysop I can be.
|
FYI - Gene Centauri ( talk · contribs · count) appears to be someone's sock harrassing User:Gene Poole and User:Centauri, may be username blockable... Georgewilliamherbert 02:15, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
The October 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 22:41, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
seriously, I would love to set mine up like yours but I have no idea how. PStrait 04:42, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
I removed an unsourced and subjective statement from the article about Copenhagen about a minute ago. I suspect that it is the same individual using that IP ( User:125.235.247.223) as the one who uses the account User:Comanche_cph, since that edit [7] is identical to the one made by Comanche_cph [8] in August this year. ( Comparison here) The same anonymous user have also made an edit to the article about Scandinavia, that more or less matches the opinions expressed by Comanche cph before he/she was blocked this summer. This anonymous user hasn't overstepped yet (except for what I've corrected in the Copenhagen article), and AFAIK the block has expired. But I'd like to inform you anyway, in case we have another revert war on our hands. /M.O ( u) ( t) 10:19, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
Lar, I must apologize for contacting you again, however it seems that I am continually being pursued by User:Gryffndor in the events that occurred a while back regarding South Tyrol. If you look at my contributions since the initiation of mediation, I have gone on to make edits regarding the geography of various Cantons of France, several edits regarding telecommunications companies, edits with telecommunications and mapping categories, etc. I have no wish to interact with Gryffndor - in fact, I have recently been approved for using VandalBot and joined Esperanza as well. Can you please help by letting Gryffndor know that I wish to have no involvement, and that because of the recent events he should please avoid any more antagonism? Thank you. Rarelibra 23:39, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Well, for one, I added an archive page which he failed to notice and has since added things back - though I am allowed the archive page as Wikipedia states. I wish he would just go his way and leave me alone, as my edits are contributing to positive not negative. Rarelibra 15:11, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
It's been taken care of by another admin, quoting that a user doesn't have to keep such warning templates on their talk pages - and if someone like Gryffndor continues to revert the changes, he is actually in jeopardy of the 3RR rule. Rarelibra 18:00, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
File:Vampire2.jpg My secret pleasure... (an anonymous contributor)
You are receiving this message because you are currently listed as a coach in the 'Active' section of the coaching box.
Thank you for helping with admin coaching! H ig hway Grammar Enforcer! 20:28, 29 October 2006 (UTC)