This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 10 |
Thanks for the barnstar. Assessments are what I like doing the most here, so both reviewer barnstars are very much appreciated. It's good to see that you and Bahraini Activist are still going strong btw. INever Cry 07:03, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the cleanup of the RBI ref; I wasn't sure what to do with when I saw that my ref didn't work , so I deleted it. Thanks again.
Wev done a good cleanup. Im burnt out now, so ill get to it later if you dont. Just finding a source for what i added and heading off Lihaas ( talk) 19:50, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I see you're changing "onboard" to "on board" with automated tools. I'm curious which discussion or source didn't like "onboard". Seems okay in BritEng, and has always been okay in AmEng. - Dank ( push to talk) 12:06, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
On 29 July 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Anaheim police shooting and protests, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that a fatal shooting on July 22 was the sixth shooting incident in less than a year involving Anaheim, California, police officers? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Anaheim police shooting and protests. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added 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. |
Graeme Bartlett ( talk) 08:03, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
When you have time, could you take a look at Death of Abdulredha Buhmaid? See if you can find any POV and remove it. Thanks. Mohamed CJ (talk) 10:21, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Just to let you know (I am supposed to - this is what it says). Ottawahitech ( talk) 15:36, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Could you please stop using AWB to change the word 'onboard' to ' on board'. When used in relation to ships, onboard = aboard a ship, on board = on a board, as per the edit to 27 January on tbe January 1981 article, where I have twice reverted the AWB editing. The use of the word 'onboard' which your edit changed on tbe Amnesty International article is also correct, note the article states 'British-English is used. I have reverted a couple of others, where the wording is used in Ship related articles There are many others, so could you please go through them manually and check the usage. Richard Harvey ( talk) 22:46, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Could you please stop using AWB to insert {{ ibid}} tags in articles which use Op. cit. in shortened footnote citations. Op. cit. is used in an endnote or footnote to refer the reader to a previously cited work, standing in for repetition of the full title of the work. Thanks. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 03:02, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
I hereby award this barnstar to editor Khazar2 for being an excellent all round contributor to Wikipedia. FeydHuxtable ( talk) 16:13, 1 August 2012 (UTC) |
On 31 July 2012, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article July 2012 India blackout, which you created. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page. |
On 6 August 2012, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article 2012 Egyptian–Israeli border attack, which you created. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page. |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
For your tireless contributions to articles on a wide range of topics, and helping contribute to them in a friendly, cooperative way, as well as taking the time to properly format them. Activism 1234 23:41, 6 August 2012 (UTC) |
Re this: in fact, I only reinserted my latest addition while I left the other contentious bits (the lead, the title of the 'Defections' section, the order in which the two claims are presented, etc.) as they were. Calling this a reversal, and thereby a violation of the 3RR, is quite a stretch. Furthermore, your claim that there's a talk page consensus is quite disingenuous as you know full well that there are only three people discussing, of which one disagrees. That's not a consensus. - TaalVerbeteraar ( talk) 17:09, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
Another attack just happened, only 10 miles from the Israeli border.
Gunmen opened fire early Wednesday morning on a police checkpoint near el-Arish in the northern Sinai Peninsula, approximately 10 miles from Israel’s border with Egypt.
There were no immediate reports of injuries.
Egyptian state news agency MENA reported that “unknown gunmen opened fire on a checkpoint on the main road between el-Arish and Rafah,” and that exchanges of gunfire continued late into the night.
Do you think that this should go in to the article, maybe in a new section, "Subsequent attack?" Or do you think it's too early to decide? This may also show that Egypt was more alert and ready this time, following what happened last time.
Thanks. -- Activism 1234 01:10, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Found this interesting, may go in the "reaction" section, as it happened in the same village, same area, just a day after. If you feel it should, feel free to add it in, or tell me and I'll do it. -- Activism 1234 15:35, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
You can add Ratna Sarumpaet to your list soon (see review) — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 02:56, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
I think that the article on the attack is looking really good, and has a lot of information, both on the attack and on reactions to the attack. The infobox is very detailed and referenced, and with a great map. How would I go about seeking an upgrade for the article? It's currently a "start-class" article.
I'm new to this stuff.
Thanks. -- Activism 1234 04:10, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Please review I don't personally mind so much, but null edits such as [1], [2], [3], [4], and [5] are discouraged. I have about 10,000 items on my watchlist and these can quickly add up. Thanks for your otherwise very fine work. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 04:54, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
I like your improvements and edits to this article. They're really great!
I was just wondering - do you have a special tool you use to format date/time, or authors names (last, first). For example, see this diff. Or do you do it manually?
Thanks, and keep up the good work!
-- Activism 1234 22:29, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
New thing... I'm not that familiar with the copyright of uploading images on Wikipedia... However, this article could definitely use some images of the attack, and I do remember seeing some (for example, see here, which should be sufficient]]). Now, a similar attack in 2011 allowed the file [[File:Terror_Strikes_Israeli_Civilians_in_Southern_Israel.jpg|picture]] from the IDF Spokesperson's Unit from Flickr by saying that it "is released under a Creative Commons license by the Israeli Defence Forces Spokesperson's Unit." As of now, the images in the link I gave you to the recent 2012 attack aren't on Flikr. Do you know if the Creative Commons license would still apply though, to the website, and I'd be allowed to upload it?
If I was too confusing or wordy, let me know.
Thanks. -- Activism 1234 03:51, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
The spokesperson unit of the Israel Defense Forces began publishing its photographs online (on its Flickr account) under a free Creative Commons license. This move follows a long and protracted process of legislation promoted by WMIL in discussions in the Science and Technology Committee of the Knesset, the Israeli parliament. While legislation meant to free any work created by the Israeli government of copyright has not yet been accepted, the move by the IDF is certainly motivated by it. Hundreds of IDF Spokesperson images are now in use on Wikimedia projects. WMIL released a widely circulated press release condoning the move by the IDF spokesperson.
The In The News Barnstar | ||
Your efforts in In The News section of the main page are well admired. Thanks to you many stories that were going to get ignored were posted. I also appreciate your approach in countering US bias there and attempts to reform the section to be more objective. Mohamed CJ (talk) 20:39, 9 August 2012 (UTC) |
Just wanted to let you know that some care! Mohamed CJ (talk) 20:39, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Please see this new section on the talk page when you get a chance. I am sending you this notification as you have been involved greatly in the article and talk page.
Thanks.
-- Activism 1234 22:46, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Love your work on this article. I just wanted to let you know that the ref you recently added (ref # 35) is missing the archive url, causing it to show in references as an error. INever Cry 18:34, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
Isn't it obvious why you deserve this barnstar?
What's not so obvious is why I haven't given this earlier... Oh well, better late than never! Activism 1234 01:28, 12 August 2012 (UTC) |
Thanks, nice to receive a compliment._ _ _ _ 83d40m ( talk) 02:46, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Do you think ITN would accept a nomination of Perseids meteor shower?
Or perhaps US, Turkey considering no fly zone on Syria?
I doubt it would go through b/c it hasn't happened yet and is just considering...
Thanks!
-- Activism 1234 05:50, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Nice to meet you Khazar2, my name is Kurtis and I am an editor interested in topics relating to human rights. In case you're unfamiliar with me, I formerly edited under the username "Master&Expert" until being renamed several hours ago.
Anyways, several days ago I was speaking with Crisco 1492 (a link for your convenience), and he told me you're the go-to guy for human rights articles. I recently created and expanded the article Forced evictions in Baku from scratch, and have nominated it to be on DYK (nomination here). Both Poeticbent and Secretlondon commented that the article might be construed as being biased towards one side of the dispute. After reviewing the page, I came to agree with their sentiments and began revising the text so as not to give undue weight to the critics of the Aliyev regime. But right now, I'm lost as to what I should do next, and how I can further improve this article to the point where it could be considered a strong piece of content (ideally attaining featured status, unless that's a bit lofty for this point in time). I also requested a peer review for the article, but it has yet to receive a response.
Would you be willing to offer me some advice in how I can improve this article? Your assistance would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! =) Kurtis ( talk) 10:40, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
I've been told that Arabic media is claiming that Morsi and Tantawi were fighting (not physically) before Morsi fired Tantawi (ITN). Apparently, Tantawi said he had evidence that the 5 August attack was perpetrated by terrorists from Gaza. Tantawi insisted that for this reason, the Egyptian-Gaza border (Rafah crossing) should be closed once and for all, as a threat to Egyptian national security. However, Morsi said that Palestinians would never accept closing the border (Morsi had made promises in the past to Hamas to open the crossing more and lift the Egyptian blockade on Gaza). However, Tantawi said that this decision is to be made by the military (SCAF), and Morsi said that he (Morsi) is rather the supreme commander of the military. Hours after this, the reports said, Tantawi and some other officials were quickly replaced, as a result of this.
Is this reliable enough to be included (not as a fact, but attributed as "According to some Arabic media...) in the article on the attack, under Egyptian response?
Thanks.
-- Activism 1234 18:30, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Why does the self-immolation article contain so few notable political self-immolations, and only from 2011-present? I'm sure that there are plenty of political self-immolations from places like Vietnam in the 1900's, as opposed to just 2011-present. Thought it'd be best to bring into your attention as you'd likely know many of these. -- Activism 1234 05:02, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 10 |
Thanks for the barnstar. Assessments are what I like doing the most here, so both reviewer barnstars are very much appreciated. It's good to see that you and Bahraini Activist are still going strong btw. INever Cry 07:03, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the cleanup of the RBI ref; I wasn't sure what to do with when I saw that my ref didn't work , so I deleted it. Thanks again.
Wev done a good cleanup. Im burnt out now, so ill get to it later if you dont. Just finding a source for what i added and heading off Lihaas ( talk) 19:50, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I see you're changing "onboard" to "on board" with automated tools. I'm curious which discussion or source didn't like "onboard". Seems okay in BritEng, and has always been okay in AmEng. - Dank ( push to talk) 12:06, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
On 29 July 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Anaheim police shooting and protests, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that a fatal shooting on July 22 was the sixth shooting incident in less than a year involving Anaheim, California, police officers? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Anaheim police shooting and protests. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added 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. |
Graeme Bartlett ( talk) 08:03, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
When you have time, could you take a look at Death of Abdulredha Buhmaid? See if you can find any POV and remove it. Thanks. Mohamed CJ (talk) 10:21, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Just to let you know (I am supposed to - this is what it says). Ottawahitech ( talk) 15:36, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Could you please stop using AWB to change the word 'onboard' to ' on board'. When used in relation to ships, onboard = aboard a ship, on board = on a board, as per the edit to 27 January on tbe January 1981 article, where I have twice reverted the AWB editing. The use of the word 'onboard' which your edit changed on tbe Amnesty International article is also correct, note the article states 'British-English is used. I have reverted a couple of others, where the wording is used in Ship related articles There are many others, so could you please go through them manually and check the usage. Richard Harvey ( talk) 22:46, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Could you please stop using AWB to insert {{ ibid}} tags in articles which use Op. cit. in shortened footnote citations. Op. cit. is used in an endnote or footnote to refer the reader to a previously cited work, standing in for repetition of the full title of the work. Thanks. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 03:02, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
I hereby award this barnstar to editor Khazar2 for being an excellent all round contributor to Wikipedia. FeydHuxtable ( talk) 16:13, 1 August 2012 (UTC) |
On 31 July 2012, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article July 2012 India blackout, which you created. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page. |
On 6 August 2012, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article 2012 Egyptian–Israeli border attack, which you created. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page. |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
For your tireless contributions to articles on a wide range of topics, and helping contribute to them in a friendly, cooperative way, as well as taking the time to properly format them. Activism 1234 23:41, 6 August 2012 (UTC) |
Re this: in fact, I only reinserted my latest addition while I left the other contentious bits (the lead, the title of the 'Defections' section, the order in which the two claims are presented, etc.) as they were. Calling this a reversal, and thereby a violation of the 3RR, is quite a stretch. Furthermore, your claim that there's a talk page consensus is quite disingenuous as you know full well that there are only three people discussing, of which one disagrees. That's not a consensus. - TaalVerbeteraar ( talk) 17:09, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
Another attack just happened, only 10 miles from the Israeli border.
Gunmen opened fire early Wednesday morning on a police checkpoint near el-Arish in the northern Sinai Peninsula, approximately 10 miles from Israel’s border with Egypt.
There were no immediate reports of injuries.
Egyptian state news agency MENA reported that “unknown gunmen opened fire on a checkpoint on the main road between el-Arish and Rafah,” and that exchanges of gunfire continued late into the night.
Do you think that this should go in to the article, maybe in a new section, "Subsequent attack?" Or do you think it's too early to decide? This may also show that Egypt was more alert and ready this time, following what happened last time.
Thanks. -- Activism 1234 01:10, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Found this interesting, may go in the "reaction" section, as it happened in the same village, same area, just a day after. If you feel it should, feel free to add it in, or tell me and I'll do it. -- Activism 1234 15:35, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
You can add Ratna Sarumpaet to your list soon (see review) — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 02:56, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
I think that the article on the attack is looking really good, and has a lot of information, both on the attack and on reactions to the attack. The infobox is very detailed and referenced, and with a great map. How would I go about seeking an upgrade for the article? It's currently a "start-class" article.
I'm new to this stuff.
Thanks. -- Activism 1234 04:10, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Please review I don't personally mind so much, but null edits such as [1], [2], [3], [4], and [5] are discouraged. I have about 10,000 items on my watchlist and these can quickly add up. Thanks for your otherwise very fine work. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 04:54, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
I like your improvements and edits to this article. They're really great!
I was just wondering - do you have a special tool you use to format date/time, or authors names (last, first). For example, see this diff. Or do you do it manually?
Thanks, and keep up the good work!
-- Activism 1234 22:29, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
New thing... I'm not that familiar with the copyright of uploading images on Wikipedia... However, this article could definitely use some images of the attack, and I do remember seeing some (for example, see here, which should be sufficient]]). Now, a similar attack in 2011 allowed the file [[File:Terror_Strikes_Israeli_Civilians_in_Southern_Israel.jpg|picture]] from the IDF Spokesperson's Unit from Flickr by saying that it "is released under a Creative Commons license by the Israeli Defence Forces Spokesperson's Unit." As of now, the images in the link I gave you to the recent 2012 attack aren't on Flikr. Do you know if the Creative Commons license would still apply though, to the website, and I'd be allowed to upload it?
If I was too confusing or wordy, let me know.
Thanks. -- Activism 1234 03:51, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
The spokesperson unit of the Israel Defense Forces began publishing its photographs online (on its Flickr account) under a free Creative Commons license. This move follows a long and protracted process of legislation promoted by WMIL in discussions in the Science and Technology Committee of the Knesset, the Israeli parliament. While legislation meant to free any work created by the Israeli government of copyright has not yet been accepted, the move by the IDF is certainly motivated by it. Hundreds of IDF Spokesperson images are now in use on Wikimedia projects. WMIL released a widely circulated press release condoning the move by the IDF spokesperson.
The In The News Barnstar | ||
Your efforts in In The News section of the main page are well admired. Thanks to you many stories that were going to get ignored were posted. I also appreciate your approach in countering US bias there and attempts to reform the section to be more objective. Mohamed CJ (talk) 20:39, 9 August 2012 (UTC) |
Just wanted to let you know that some care! Mohamed CJ (talk) 20:39, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Please see this new section on the talk page when you get a chance. I am sending you this notification as you have been involved greatly in the article and talk page.
Thanks.
-- Activism 1234 22:46, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Love your work on this article. I just wanted to let you know that the ref you recently added (ref # 35) is missing the archive url, causing it to show in references as an error. INever Cry 18:34, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
Isn't it obvious why you deserve this barnstar?
What's not so obvious is why I haven't given this earlier... Oh well, better late than never! Activism 1234 01:28, 12 August 2012 (UTC) |
Thanks, nice to receive a compliment._ _ _ _ 83d40m ( talk) 02:46, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Do you think ITN would accept a nomination of Perseids meteor shower?
Or perhaps US, Turkey considering no fly zone on Syria?
I doubt it would go through b/c it hasn't happened yet and is just considering...
Thanks!
-- Activism 1234 05:50, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Nice to meet you Khazar2, my name is Kurtis and I am an editor interested in topics relating to human rights. In case you're unfamiliar with me, I formerly edited under the username "Master&Expert" until being renamed several hours ago.
Anyways, several days ago I was speaking with Crisco 1492 (a link for your convenience), and he told me you're the go-to guy for human rights articles. I recently created and expanded the article Forced evictions in Baku from scratch, and have nominated it to be on DYK (nomination here). Both Poeticbent and Secretlondon commented that the article might be construed as being biased towards one side of the dispute. After reviewing the page, I came to agree with their sentiments and began revising the text so as not to give undue weight to the critics of the Aliyev regime. But right now, I'm lost as to what I should do next, and how I can further improve this article to the point where it could be considered a strong piece of content (ideally attaining featured status, unless that's a bit lofty for this point in time). I also requested a peer review for the article, but it has yet to receive a response.
Would you be willing to offer me some advice in how I can improve this article? Your assistance would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! =) Kurtis ( talk) 10:40, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
I've been told that Arabic media is claiming that Morsi and Tantawi were fighting (not physically) before Morsi fired Tantawi (ITN). Apparently, Tantawi said he had evidence that the 5 August attack was perpetrated by terrorists from Gaza. Tantawi insisted that for this reason, the Egyptian-Gaza border (Rafah crossing) should be closed once and for all, as a threat to Egyptian national security. However, Morsi said that Palestinians would never accept closing the border (Morsi had made promises in the past to Hamas to open the crossing more and lift the Egyptian blockade on Gaza). However, Tantawi said that this decision is to be made by the military (SCAF), and Morsi said that he (Morsi) is rather the supreme commander of the military. Hours after this, the reports said, Tantawi and some other officials were quickly replaced, as a result of this.
Is this reliable enough to be included (not as a fact, but attributed as "According to some Arabic media...) in the article on the attack, under Egyptian response?
Thanks.
-- Activism 1234 18:30, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Why does the self-immolation article contain so few notable political self-immolations, and only from 2011-present? I'm sure that there are plenty of political self-immolations from places like Vietnam in the 1900's, as opposed to just 2011-present. Thought it'd be best to bring into your attention as you'd likely know many of these. -- Activism 1234 05:02, 15 August 2012 (UTC)