Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 555:
Line 555:
:::Halibutt, when opposing your adminship, I thought I would be the first and only one to do so, given a scope and quality of your contributions to the Polish segment. No that I see your nomination opposed by a much larger number of editors that I thought feasible, I really doubt if you deserve all this. Perhaps it's not so bad when so many editors know you and have their opinion on your editing. If you're interested to know my opinion, I believe the current situation arose from you and Piotrus not being careful enough to dissociate yourselves from the trolls who disrupt normal functioning of this project, such as puerile Molobo, a tireless revert warrior Space Cadet, and Witkacy with his paranoic Black Book. There is no need for great editors like you and Piotr to connive their trolling just because they are ethnically Polish. Look, I don't connive Nixer on the basis of his living in Moscow. Whatever the result of current voting, I hope that the lessons will be learned and I don't think I would oppose your nomination the next time it surfaces. --] 11:18, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
:::Halibutt, when opposing your adminship, I thought I would be the first and only one to do so, given a scope and quality of your contributions to the Polish segment. No that I see your nomination opposed by a much larger number of editors that I thought feasible, I really doubt if you deserve all this. Perhaps it's not so bad when so many editors know you and have their opinion on your editing. If you're interested to know my opinion, I believe the current situation arose from you and Piotrus not being careful enough to dissociate yourselves from the trolls who disrupt normal functioning of this project, such as puerile Molobo, a tireless revert warrior Space Cadet, and Witkacy with his paranoic Black Book. There is no need for great editors like you and Piotr to connive their trolling just because they are ethnically Polish. Look, I don't connive Nixer on the basis of his living in Moscow. Whatever the result of current voting, I hope that the lessons will be learned and I don't think I would oppose your nomination the next time it surfaces. --] 11:18, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
::::yep, there is no guilt by association, unless you do, intentionally, associate yourself with people. All the fools are not in the other camp, and to have a fool in your own camp is a predicament, you have to show that the foolishness is not inherent in the position. ] <small>]</small> 13:34, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
::::yep, there is no guilt by association, unless you do, intentionally, associate yourself with people. All the fools are not in the other camp, and to have a fool in your own camp is a predicament, you have to show that the foolishness is not inherent in the position. ] <small>]</small> 13:34, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
::Thanks for the wishes, Ghirlandajo. However, I got an impression that they were a tad double-faced. After all some of the arguments you still hold against me are quite bizarre. For instance, you hold that being of the same nationality as another wikipedian is my guilt. Sorry, but I cannot do much about it. I was born 24 years ago, other wikipedians were also born quite some time ago and there's little we can do about their nationality. If Molobo offended you in any way - it should be treated as an argument against his nomination, not mine.
::Also, you still hold that the fact that you took my comment out of context or simply did not understand it (]) is an argument against me. You continue to quarrel about ], even if it was you not to be able to use the talk page, and not me. You continue to claim that the conflict was about expansion of that article and not about deletion of parts of the text which seemed important to all who took part in the discussion. You continue to claim that I duplicated my contribution by placing it in both articles on ] and ], eventhough I never edited the latter article in my whole life. You continue to state that some of your invitations to the voting displeased me while I clearly explained this to be untrue. You continue to claim that I asked User:Knyaz to revert you (thus assuming my bad will) whereas I explained that you're wrong on that one. Sure, you apologized Aegis for wrongly calling him someone's sock puppet, but not at the page where you offended him and people can still see your offence there. You continue to claim that there is something wrong with my behaviour since I do not find Knyaz a sockpuppet of anyone or never had any interest in that. You still believe that our usage of Polish at our talk pages is something wrong eventhough you have always had an option to ask for translation - or ask us to use English only. In fact when you noted that I promised to use English only, yet you still hold that one against me (eventhough it's perfectly in accordance with wiki rules)...
::So, allow me to note that your wishes of best luck are somehow similar to ''Best luck, you vandal, conspirator, revert-war-proponent, bad-will-assuming andsockpuppet-supporter'', which is not what I would like to hear on my 2nd anniversary here. ]] 23:34, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
:::Also, the fact that you continue to accuse me of various, mostly false things on many wikipedians' talk pages make me think that your comment on my talk page was some kind of a joke only. ]] 02:32, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I just came across this image:Lidia matisse.jpg. I am not familiar with Soviet Union's laws, but I know Matisse lived mainly in France, and his works could be protected by French copyright law in France and other Berne Convention parties. Do you happen to know where the work is first published? Tomos 12:02, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I cannot be sure where the portrait was published, so I changed {sovietpd} to {PD-old-50}. In my jurisdiction (I live in Russia) Matisse's work passed to the public domain on the 50th anniversary of his death. --Ghirlandajo 13:54, 20 Dec 2004 (GMT)
Hi. Thank you for your reply. I came up with another question. It seems that under many copyright laws, author's life + 50 years is calculated in a little tricky way: counting starts from the beginning of the next year of the author's death, and last until 50 year passes. It is, in other words, treat as if the author died at the last second of the last day of a year. Berne Convention's article 7-(5) has that provision, and that is reflected in many copyright laws, I think. In that case, the copyright protection last until the end of 2004. It may be wise to wait just about 10 days to attach that {PD-old-50} tag.
In case you don't mind reading the legal text, the Berne Convention article 7 is here: Tomos 04:42, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Please do not revert this article again today. You are at least close to breaking the 3RR and may be blocked if you continue.-gadfium 19:03, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Edit summary
Hello. Please provide an edit summary. Thanks and happy edits. Hyacinth 02:38, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Saint Petersburg
Thanks for the great old picture additions to the article - wonderful! Leonard G. 00:32, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Your objectives at Misplaced Pages
your "russophobic hysteria"
What are your objectives at Misplaced Pages? Are you contributing knowledge or infiltrating Russian imperial propaganda? Try to stay more polite and avoid such statements. --rydel 11:40, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Improving vs vandalism
I don't mind if you correct my language/grammer, or if you move various article parts to better articles. However, simply reverting/deleting changes because *you* think they are not pretty is not a creative action. Wiki goal is not to be a beautiful novel, but an encyclopedia. Nice language is nice, but it is the information part that is essential. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:45, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
FYI, I support changes you made to Polish king template. Adding info is good. Removing info is bad. About Wladyslaw - obviously he didn't rule for long, or actually not at all, but he was crowned, wasn't he? You should expand on this - or why is it wrong - instead of deleting stuff, which leads to revert war and banning ppl from editing. We don't want that, do we? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:59, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Dear Piotrus, firstly Wladyslaw wasn't so much as generally accepted as a Russian tsar, let alone crowned. He was a Russian tsar in a sense that Edward III was the king of France. Secondly, the article on him contains a ridiculous statement that he ruled Russia for quarter a century (1610-35). You may check it out yourself. Ghirlandajo 17:11, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Your listing of Emax as vandal
I believe your listing of Emax as a vandal is improper. He is really not a vandal but rather someone who pushes his own agenda. That's different from vandalism. You may want to take a look at Misplaced Pages:Dispute_resolution for gudance on how to deal with such problems. If he is really violating the WP:3RR, he will likely loose the case. --Gene s 08:24, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I would agree here that the dispute you have with Emax is not an appropriate one for VIP. Disagreements over content are not vandalism. I am not defending Emax here; I live about as far away from the Polish/Russian border as is possible, and I have no view on the dispute. Follow the dispute resolution procedures.-gadfium 09:16, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
By the way, I would like to list User:Emax on Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment for his refusal to use talk pages, generally uncooperative behavior, and personal attacks. I need a second contributor for that. Please contact me if you would like to do that. --Gene s 09:23, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I rather thought the concerns over a slightly sloping horizon were somewhat besides the point. However, since I got the impression that most of the support votes were positive due to its being interesting early colour photography, whilst most of the oppose votes were worried about the horizon, I was wondering whether there was a different Prokudin-Gorskii colour photograph that could be nominated (preferably one with strong colours but no obvious horizon... :) -- Solipsist 12:09, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Can you tell me for which Russian places we should use this category? Does it depend on population? If so - tell me border between towns and cities, because in Russia cites and towns are not divided. Thank you. MaxiMaxiMax 07:14, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC) <...>
If you don't answer I will have to revert your category changes, sorry. MaxiMaxiMax 09:00, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
You would return Gzhel and Ust-Izhora in the same category with Moscow and St Petersburg? Good luck to you! I don't think that such changes are good for the Wiki, however. There is so much more important things you can do. I trasfer this discussion from my page to RWNB talk page. Ghirlandajo 09:29, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Ok, I hope it will help. MaxiMaxiMax 09:31, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Um, in the article itself, as well as on your user page, you used the 's' form of the first name (which gets google hits), but the article is titled with a 'z' (which gets zero hits). Is there any particular reason the article shouldn't be moved to the 's' form? (I'd get input from my Russian roommate, but she won't be back from work for at least 6-7 hours). Thanks. Niteowlneils 17:55, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC) Talk
I found that the same basic article had been added a few weeks ago as Joseph Vladimirovich, Count Gourko. I liked your intro better (it established why he was notable right away), and you had some extra info at the end and an additional cat, so I moved all that to the earlier one, moved it to Joseph Vladimirovich Gourko and made Jozeph Gurko a redir (and updated all the pages that were looking for it there), along with some extra redirs to try and keep it from getting accidentally duplicated again. I even found an article that didn't link to either of them, so now Veliko Turnovo does. Niteowlneils 05:43, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Great additions! Thank you! -- Chris 73Talk 10:40, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)
Regarding Emax
Let's bring an arbitration case against Emax. If you agree to support my move to file charges against him, we should do it tomorrow. --Gene s 15:06, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
See WP:DR, WP:RFAr. And please do use summary field in your edits, because it's difficult to argue against Emax for his no-summary edits when you often do the same. I am leaving for today now. Bye. --Gene s 15:59, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
The guy got banned for 24 hours. Let's see if that is enough. I guess there is no need for further action at this time. --Gene s 05:35, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Anti-Polonism
Are you actually disputing the article on Anti-Polonism? I'm asking because I can't find any comments from you, neither in the edit history, nor in the talk page. Could you explain what is it that you find NPOV on the talk page? Alternatively we could simply erase the NPOV tag. Halibutt 09:32, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)
That's a spectacular illustration you've added. I hope you won't be cross that I shifted it upwards and gave some specific text to show how conservative taste could employ some hints of neoclassical features within a wholly Rococo setting in the 1770s. This is an Orlov interior, so I added it at Gatchina to contrast with Paul's neoclassic gallery. (Old Rinaldi died in 1794.) --Wetman 09:08, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Just a note of thanks for your recent edits at Symbolism (arts) and for the Vrubel image as well. Someone does need to do the article about the Russian Symbolist movement; it probably would help a whole lot if the person who created it read Russian. -- Smerdis of Tlön 15:19, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Thank you most kindly. Will have a look. Smerdis of Tlön 04:55, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Hi Ghirlandajo! Could you please add all of the names of the Russian foreign ministers to your Russian Foreign Ministers template? I'm not sure how to do it. It somehow starts with Ordyn-Naschekin and ommits all of the ministers precedeing him. Or is it on purpose? Thank you! KNewman 18:53, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
Just a little more patience
Hi, Ghirlandajo! I am very glad to see you back and very much appreciate your knowledgeable editing over the articles I created/worked on previously as well as over all articles. May I ask you to please be more patient, except of course, when you simply add more info to the article, as you did very well with St. Andrew's Church. For example, I spent some time looking for the info on children of Svyatoslav II and I was kind of sorry to see this just blanked. If you think I made a mistake on who their mother was, sure correct it. Same with Ivan Fyodorov. I didn't erase your version about "annihilation" but raised the objection first, because I agree that there is indeed a controversy going in Lvov regarding the issue. I am sure all the differences can be resolved at relevant article's talk pages. I am just asking you to change what you see as mistakes with little more patience. If we just stick to facts, we will be able to defend the info from being manipulated by all sorts of nationalist, -philes, -phobes, imperialists and (insert any other cliche here).
Some time ago I tried to move forward the History of Christianity in Ukraine article as well as the articles of several Ukrainian churches. I kind of lost the steam but I would appreciate any input there.
Finally, the Ukrainian Wikiportal put together by several users is almost ready to be released. I made a draft based on Misplaced Pages:Wikiportal/Russia which I helped maintain to a very small degree. Now, improved by several coworkers it is still at my userspace at User:Irpen/uawp and we plan to soon move it to Misplaced Pages:Wikiportal/Ukraine and link to it prominently in several major UA-related articles like Ukraine, Ukrainian language, etc. If you want to take a look at it and propose changes at its talk pages, or just do them if you don't expect opposition, your help would be most appreciated. Thank you, -Irpen 19:59, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)
Recent Polish names campaign
Hi, Ghirlandajo! Thanks for your support at talk:Minsk page. I hope the stories with name insertion like the recent ones with Kiev and Minsk articles won't be too common. There are many reasonable people among the Polish editors, although some certainly have issues with sensitive national pride. On my own, I recently compiled the discussions from several talk pages regarding the Kijow in Kiev article and placed the compilation in my userspace. If you want, take a look at it at User talk:Irpen/Kijów in Kiev article. Finally, if this is going to start over, I don't think placing "Varshava" in the Warsaw article and "Belostok" into Bialystok would help. That's exactly a WP:Point position took by several editors that disrupted the Kiev article for the day. Stchastlivo, -Irpen 06:10, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)
Pictures needed
Hi there, Ghirlandajo! I thought you left us for some reason. Haven't seen you in a while. Good to have you back. I don't know if you check Misplaced Pages:Wikiportal/Russia on a regular basis or not, but I would really appreciate it if you could find and upload some nice pictures of different Russian monasteries. I posted two articles about monasteries under the "Requested images" section. You did a wonderful job on finding images for other monasteries, so I figured you could help us out here. Check the Russian Wikiportal more often! I look forward to working with you on other articles, as well. Cheers! KNewman 12:42, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
Images
I see you are doing art articles, with plenty of pics. I'd suggest you to put images into wikicommons, where they can be accessible from other-language wikipedias as well. mikka(t) 23:22, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
French translation
Why not for a translation of Vladimir, but it is already done ... :fr:Vladimir. Anyway, I am trying to do a new article about a World Heritage site every day (original - like DR Congo or Belgium- or a de/en/nl/ translation), and I will probably translate some other russian ones...
Thanks for tracking down the Imperial Academy of Arts. I knew there should be an article but couldn't find it. Now I hope I'll find the other articles that needed the link as well. Rl 09:21, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Hi Ghirlandajo! I would like to repeat all my compliments for the fine work you do on WP. I was really caught off guard by your calling my edit Russophobic, especially because other editors called other edits by me as of the Russian Imperialist. In fact, I think that any nationalism or national phobias are all bad. Please see my entry at talk:Great Russian language and respond there if you would like. I would really like to stay in friendly terms with editors whose work I respect and who contribute to topics in which I am also interested. Regards, -Irpen June 28, 2005 21:27 (UTC)
Nordmann Fir
Hi Ghirlandajo - I've changed the height of these from 85m to 78m as that is the tallest I can find reference to (). Still the tallest tree in Europe by about 15m, if correct. Do you have any details of the 85m report, particularly with documentation of measurement methods? A lot of tall tree measurements are unfortunately very unreliable, unless done with high precision laser equipment with several measurements taken from different angles. - MPF 1 July 2005 10:56 (UTC)
The UNESCO experts state that "the forests include very large specimens, including possibly the largest trees in Europe: specimens of Abies nordmanniana 85m high with a diameter of more than 2m" . See the list of literature at the top of the page. If you don't mind, I'll restore the original phrasing in the article on Western Caucasus. --Ghirlandajo 1 July 2005 11:13 (UTC)
Thanks; I'm happy to let the 85m stay on the basis of that reference, though it would be nice to get more verification including the methods of measurement. - MPF 1 July 2005 14:03 (UTC)
An ooops! - the pic you have added at Western Caucasus is an American Bison! - I'll change it - MPF 1 July 2005 14:05 (UTC)
There is now a stub template for Eastern Orthodox Christianity-related articles in need of expansion. Please add {{orthodoxy-stub}} to articles. You can also go to the Category page for Eastern Orthodox Christianity-related stubs and click the "watch this page" link in the sidebar, so that you can see new stub articles as they appear. Spread the word! JHCC(talk) 6 July 2005 14:57 (UTC)
A must
Hello, Ghirlandajo! First of all, let me thank you for your award! It actually means a lot to me, even though this whole barnstar business may seem a bit childish to some people :). It'll keep me going! Secondly, I wanted to write an article on Cerkov' Pokrova na Nerli, but I'm not sure what it's called in English. Do you have any idea? I hope you can help me out with it. Pictures will be of extreme importance, since this church is considered one of the most wonderful examples of the Russian architecture. What are you working on right now and what do you plan to write in the near future? KNewman July 8, 2005 23:32 (UTC)
I can't add to your excellent material on the Radziwill nest etc., but you inspire me to note that a program to ensure decent Misplaced Pages coverage of all 812 (not really so many) World Heritage Sites would make a good project for the grown-ups. --Wetman04:07, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
Hey, Ghirlandajo! Why do you want to leave for good? High-speed internet connection got too expensive in Yaroslavl? Please, drop me a line. KNewman 21:23, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
Despite several disagreements we had on specific issues, I would hate so see you go. I understand the time constraints factor though. I hope you sill still be around as an occasional editor (the mode to which I switch myself often) and will contribute from time to time and correct the mistakes of others. Cheers, --Irpen 20:12, July 17, 2005 (UTC)
I agree with Irpen. Just make sure you check it out every now and then. Usually, people leave this place only as a result of some revert wars and not because they simply don't have time :). It may be sad, but it is true that a wikifan can always find time for Misplaced Pages, you know that :). Just choose the right dosage, and you will be fine. See you soon. KNewman 21:40, July 17, 2005 (UTC)
1877 war
I've put the pucture there because the source was a russian site, because it is part of history, and because the article regarding romanian independence war will be soon be deleted, i can't merge the articles because i don't know how.
But if you wish to delete the picture, think again, is your poin of view objective?
For people from the balkans russian liberation is equivalent with occupation.
I would not put again the picture on the article, it is up to you if you let the picture there or not,was the romanian troops importance signifiant or not? There was a calling for help from russian side. It is fair not to mention that help? It is up to you to decide.
But to edit the article was an interesting task, I've realized how extremist some people are..
The looses or romanian army were: over 10,000 deads and wounds
Haveing great looses, the Great Duke Nicolae, the commandant of the front from Balkani, sent to prince Carol the following telegramme: "The turks, useing the greatest troop at Plevna distried us. I bag you to make fusion with us, make demonstration, and if it is possible, pass the Danube with your army, as you will. Between Jiu and Corabia, this demonstration is absolutely necessary to enable my movements".
Although it didn`t exist a military convention between the two states, Romania accorded military help. The romanians passed the Danube and the Prince Carol the 1st received the command of romanian -russian troops at Plevna.
After hard fights, Plevna was conquered, romanians struggled also in Vidin - Belogradcik zone.
Hi there, Ghirlandajo! I checked with the Great Soviet Encyclopedia, and it somehow says it was F.M.Volsky in the Kineshma article. Check it out for yourself . Could it be that they are wrong? Cheers. KNewman 17:00, July 22, 2005 (UTC)
Zdravstvujte! Vy obnovili tol'ko chto `etu stranicu. No "On the feast day of the..." ne ukazyvet ni na kakuyu konkretnuyu datu. Raz uzh vy napisali i ob `etom sobytii, ne mogli by vy v toj zhe stepeni podrobno napisat' i ob oficial'nom otkrytii mecheti Kul SHarif, kotoroe proizoshlo neskol'kimi nedelyami ran'she i yavlyaetsya stol' zhe vazhnym sobytiem v duhovnoj zhizni goroda (hotya, pohozhe ne vsej strany vcelom) :) --Untifler13:17, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
Hi there, Ghirlandajo! I'm a bit confused. Is it Ksnyatin, or Sknyatin, or Sknyatino, or Ksnyatino? Your article is named Ksnyatin, but deals with Sknyatino in it. Were there two names for the town? KNewman 14:09, July 24, 2005 (UTC)
I was really surprised by your unmotivated edit at Olga of Kiev. I suggest that you check with the primary chronicle before making such edits.--Wiglaf21:07, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
For ! I was looking for this image since the day I wrote this article, but I lost the newspaper with the picture data :> It's great to have some non-Polish side pic there. I recently saw another one, but again I lost the newspaper before I wrote down the details - it was sth like 'the last minutes (?) of Tsar Dimitri'. Perhaps you can find it? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus14:33, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
Yes :) Tnx :) If you know of any other pictures we could use for Polish-Russian history articles, do let me know, or just add them where possible. I always say good history is a well-illustrated history :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus11:58, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
How can this image be from 1915 if it's in a (beautiful) full color ? Did you colorized it? And if it's not from 1915 are we sure it's public domain? --Alexandre Van de Sande23:07, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
How would you descirbe cultural differences between Slavs, and influence of Mongol culture on some groups in order not ? I don't think that the Mongol control did influence in some ways some Slavic nations is disputed among historians.That is why I provided link to review of such study.I don't want to offend anybody but absolutism, "oriental despotism" are and influence of Mongol culture on this are issues researched by historians.
Good day to you and I am waiting for answer.--Molobo15:31, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
Hello, perhaps you could explain to me why the name spells both Stirlitz and von Stierlitz? I also noticed, that you changed Standartenführer to link back to Colonel, was it intentional? Thanks for your answers. -- pt14:47, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
coor template
you apparently think the link looks unsightly, and I'd be happy to stuff it under external links; I do think, however, that any article about an item with a geographic location should ultimately get a machine readable encoding of its coordinates. This ties in with Misplaced Pages:Semantic Misplaced Pages, and will ultimately allow to sort Misplaced Pages articles geographically, search for Misplaced Pages articles near your present location, that sort of thing. dab(ᛏ)19:33, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
also, it seems rather bad faith to ask "is the one on Red Square not enough" when you have removed that too. What is it that bothers you about these coordinates? They are perfectly pertinent information. dab(ᛏ)19:34, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for noticing a sneaky POV insertion at Baturyn
Hi, Ghirlandajo. Sorry, I just missed what others did before your edit there and initially I thought you were removing my numbers that were actually well sourced. I did a fast-hand restore without realizing that I was restoring to the false numbers inserted just before that.
I am glad we agreed at talk:Berdiansk. I would be interested to know what you think about my proposal at talk:Kamianets-Podilskyi about the sick trend of games with the names.
Also, you may want to take a look at correct this.
Regards, --IrpenIrpen 05:12, August 14, 2005 (UTC)
Amber room (again)
Hi, you still haven't replied (at Talk:Amber Room). I got my copy of the book back, and added information about the authors, and a direct quote of their conclusions, to the talk: page. I have also added information from a number of reviews of the book. Unless you can show me some good reason not to mention their conclusions in the article, I'm going to put back that text you took out. Noel(talk)19:09, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
Can you respond at Talk:Battle of Borodino? The claim you are trying to reinsert is almost certainly false, as I explained in my comments on the talk page. Gdr 15:12:17, 2005-08-15 (UTC)
Hello! There have been a number of recent extensive edits to the Kaliningrad Oblast article. The additions look to be in good faith, but I am not terribly familiar with the great amount of Lithuanian history presented now. I also am not sure if that article is the proper place for that content. You might be interested in taking a look at it. Olessi21:18, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
I am glad we also agreed on some things. Poka! --Irpen 23:18, August 17, 2005 (UTC)
Gytha of Wessex
See my comments on the Talk page at Gytha of Wessex where I present my evidence for the birthdates of her children. They are not based on pure speculation; there is good reason to believe Izyaslav was born 1077/1078, for instance. Missi
If it is, for some reason, difficult for you to tell different East Slavic languages from each other, you may wish to read a few verses of the chronicle, or, if you prefer, the introduction that accompanies it, to learn what kind of events does the the chronicle describe and where did its author live. Or, you may wish to read about it in some monography, such as the excellent Zapadno-russkie letopisi. Or, you may simply google for Byhovca, or perhaps even Byhovca site:ru, and read what does the top link have to say about it.
I would appreciate it if, in the future, you could apply one of my suggestions before classifying other works of Ruthenian literature. Thank you. -- Naive cynic21:17, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
RU/UA/PL related issues
Hi, thanks for bringing up and working on Koleda. The coordinated action was swifted and decisive. On a different topic, you complained that Polish-Lithuanian-Ruthenian Commonwealth created by Piotrus is pro-Polish biased. Actually, I already added some alternative views to the article before announcing it. Is it really that bad? Anyway, you're welcome to neutralize it. And while at it, check a closely related discussion at talk:History of Kiev. --Irpen 18:33, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
Privet! Stat'ya gotova, no k sozhaleniyu napisana na uzhasnom anglijskom... CHast' russkogo teksta lezhit v obsuzhdenii stat'i. Trebuetsya pomosch' znayuschih anglijskij! --Untifler12:57, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
Koe chto bylo uteryano pri pereformatirovanii: naprimer transkripcii nekotoryh nazvanij. Uteryana takzhe informaciya o "Zilantau" (naibolee veroyatno, chto imenno cherez `etot toponim v russkij i proniklo slovo "ZilaNT"). Hotelos' by takzhe korrektno napisat' na pin'jine slovo CHzhelyan - imenno tak u Gumileva pishetsya nazvanie doliny na Altae. O eio suschestvovanii emu stalo izvestno iz kitajskih istochnikov - bylo by neploho dobavit' ieroglify. Kstati, esli nekotoryh simvolov net v anglijskoj klaviature, tablica rasshirennoj latinicy lezhit pod knopkoj "Sohranit'" (`eto vazhno dlya peredachi nekotoryh zvukov). S uvazheniem, --Untifler12:22, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
Stop shameless POV-pushing, or you will be reported. You may use the Swedish wiki for promoting your nationalism, but this is international encyclopedia, so you should be aware that the NPOV policies apply here. --Ghirlandajo10:07, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
Deletions of POV-pushing addition to the long established NPOV article is restoring NPOV. If you add information illustrating one point of view, you should ass as much infomration illustrating the other. Otherwise, your actions will be classified as nationalistic POV-pushing. --Ghirlandajo10:15, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
I would add info on the anti-normanist theory if there was anything to add. Sadly, evidence is strangely lacking.--Wiglaf10:24, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
You might have noticed that I don't interefere with articles on Swedish history, although I mig ht have cited much unflattering stuff pertaining to your country. So please let the articles on Russian history to the Russians. --Ghirlandajo10:15, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
Dear Ghirlandajo, could you explain why the presence of foreigners in Russian history is unflattering?--Wiglaf10:22, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
Dear Wiglaf, where did I say that the presence of foreigners in Russian history is unflattering? I just said that it is hardly constructive to flood the articles on Russian history with Russophobic interpretations. --Ghirlandajo10:30, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
I redirected it to Ukr. L. and explained at talk. Check history. I plan to address the issue soon. I explained my actions at talk in detail. --Irpen 00:13, August 30, 2005 (UTC)
Also, I agree with your recent comment at Russification article. The difference is though that Russification article starts with an acceptable definition, and I actually think your new definition is better. Also the article has some factual info. Even if presented with biased view, removal of factual info to a redirect actually reduces WP. I would welcome an objective broad definiton of Ukrainization as a start for a new article. In fact, I am trying to think of it right now. I am worried about the problem with sources, as I said at talk, but we should be able to handle it with time. --Irpen 06:50, August 30, 2005 (UTC)
revert stuff on Early Swedish History
Hi. I encouraged Wiglaf to write on Talk:Early Swedish History instead of engaging in revert stuff. I hope you could take a look at that page too, and post your comments.
Dear Ghirlandajo, your addition about the Haithabu connection reminded me that the House of Rurik and the House of Hedeby have something in common - both are said to be of Swedish origin. That is very relevant in the article! Good Job! :D--Wiglaf15:29, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
I corrected your new mistake by pointing out that there had been no "Sweden" and no "Swedish origin" prior to Haithabu. --Ghirlandajo15:32, 31 August 2005 (UTC)Example of photochrom I added to the article on St Pete
OK, I will not revert this time, but you should know that Adam of Bremen is not an authority on matters of mediaeval genealogy at all. I suspect that this long-discarded info comes from one of the much later scholias, which the reputable historians normally discredit. I will be back after checking this point. --Ghirlandajo15:54, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
I might be wrong about this image belonging to Kustodiev, but this image is certainly not a photo. I think it's quite obvious when you look at it, that it is a painting (whatever they say in the Library of congress). Also, on ru:wikipedia it has been attributed to Kustodiev (although I'm not sure about that). If you find out who is the author, please do put in the details, but meanwhile I'll get in touch with the person on ru:wikipedia and see what he says...--Dyadya S`em 20:21, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
Briangotts wrote "I have read the haithabu hypothesis in very few publications, to describe it as consensus of W authorities is going too far". Don't try to blow up your favourite theory to majority view.--Wiglaf09:13, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
A long discussion has just ended concerning that article and how to mention the relationship between Germany and USSR in it. Some kind of compromise has been reached. Therefore, please, think carefully before introducing new changes, so that the battle does not start again.Balcer14:49, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
Inveterate Russophobe ?
Despite your calling me "Russophobe" I don't have anything against Russians. OTOH, I've seen your edits on several Lithuanian articles
already before, and was under the impression that you were presenting quite a nationalistic POV, so I was not suprised by your last edits on Russification. I would however like to ask you again to disscuss your controversial edits before actually introducing them. Threatening ("if you want edit war on Lithuanian articles, you'll get it") is not actually what I meant when I asked for discussion and this is not something that will help your case. Cheers, --Wojsyl21:25, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
The only Lithuanian articles I recall having written are those on Galindians, Gedyminas and Svitrigaila, and these haven't been acussed of POV as yet. Anyway, I'm tired of contributing articles on the most glorious persons of Lithuanian history, while ethnic Lithuanians are busy slandering Russians in the articles on modern Russia. Perhaps, instead of obstinately revising Russification you'd better pay more attention to Algirdas? --Ghirlandajo21:41, 10 September 2005 (UTC)File:Arkaim.jpgThe Arkaim image
seriously Ghirlandajo, you should stop spamming the Arkaim image to unrelated articles;
Andronovo culture, Indo-Iranians, Indo-Aryan migration are all fair enough, but Mandala? At the top of the article, too? I think you are being to enthusiastic about those clearly pseudoscientific/esoteric claims about the site. The settlement was round. The similarity with swastikas and mandalas ends there. dab(ᛏ)17:04, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
If you had looked at the edit histories, you would have noticed that I added this image to all those articles in just one hour several days ago. If you feel that the image is redundant and that unillustrated article is better, just remove it. --Ghirlandajo
It's okay
Sorry if I were brusque about that article: I had much trouble fighting the Russophobes at Russification that day. I didn't know that the military series were compilations, to boot. You should know that your work is appreciated. And thanks for the award, too ;)) --Ghirlandajo21:22, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I reverted your addition of Russian architecture to the "History of western architecture" series, because it is a series about the history of architecture rather than the architecture of individual countries. You will notice that the other articles refer to the architecture of a certain period only. Thus, an article on Stalinist architecture, for example, would be a more appropriate addition if that style of architecture were sufficiently influential. Burschik14:30, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
So please explain why Sumerian architecture (which may hardly be termed "western", BTW) and Byzantine architecture made their way to the list? I don't see how medieval Russian architecture was less influential than the Byzantine one. Moreover, the "History of Western architecture" in EB 2004 includes a section on medieval Russian architecture up to ca. 1700. --Ghirlandajo14:59, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
Well, on the discussion page of the template, I said that I was not sure Sumerian architecture belonged in the series. Feel free to remove it. If you think Byzantine architecture had less influence than Russian architecture (on the Western tradition) please feel free to remove it also. But the main point I wanted to make is that the article on Russian architecture is not an article about a specific period in the history of architecture, unlike the others in the list. You will note that the list does not include German architecture, French architecture or Italian architecture either. Burschik15:25, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
I have nothing against Sumerian architecture, whilst the presence of Byzantine architecture is peremptory. I just want to point out that neither German architecture nor Dutch architecture nof Swedish architecture are truly individual, as they are covered by terms "Gothic", "Romanesque", "Renaissance", etc. The Russian architecture, on the other hand, had been isolated for centuries, so the terms like gothic or renaissance are hardly applicable to it. In other words, removing R.a. from the list makes a void which other entries would not compensate. --Ghirlandajo15:42, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
As for this battle, I saw that it was listed by you at RU-portal for a while now. It's just that it is unlikely that anyone but you or KNewman will get to it soon. Also, check your gmail inbox. I left you a message there. Poka, --Irpen19:33, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
The Category for Supercentenarians is NOT for unverified cases.(I may not believe in registered accounts,but I have studied supercentenarians for years and essentially introduced coverage of them to Misplaced Pages,besides compiling a widely known standard list).He belongs under Longevity myths only.--Louis Epstein/le@put.com/12.144.5.219:08, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
Louis, if you are the alt.talk.royalty regular I recall from my Usenet days, you'd better register, for registration makes Wiki-discussion much easier. Although I will not revert anymore, I'm sure Shirali fits into the category for Supercentenarians. Otherwise, we should set up separate categories for Verified Supercentenarians and Unverified Supercentenarians. --Ghirlandajo19:21, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
Yes,that's me,and I've done well over 3000 Misplaced Pages edits since 2003 without registering.I never register for websites.I don't see any reason to accord category status to the unverified.--Louis E./le@put.com/12.144.5.202:55, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
Actually, I haven't. I plan to add more articles on Naryshkin structures, as well as new entries on Stroganov baroque, Petrine baroque, and Moscow Gothic Revival. --Ghirlandajo18:01, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
Great Northern War
August had no right to start war on behalf of Poland (This was Poland, nobles' democracy, ok - king had no right to start the war). Therefore, he started war only as king of Saxony. Poland was NEUTRAL and the fact that it shared king with Saxony had not changed that situation. In other words, Polish armies were not fighting against Sweden, Polish senate sent congratulatory notes to Charles XII and it was Charles XII who by invasion break that neutrality. But even when Swedes were deep inside Polish territory some Poles still were considering themselves neutral and thought it is merely war of Saxon king, not Polish king.
150.254.130.18013:05, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
Print from image you added
Hey,
Do you know where I can get the high-resolution file or a print from this image:
I can't get the image to load off the link you supply. Also, how do I ask the Russian State Library for help? The info is in Russian. I can't even email them! I'm sure they have a high resolution copy of the image. I just can't get to them to ask. Can you help with that? SRHookEm
Hello again. I think you're looking at the wrong image. I want the image of Boris Godunov looking at his son Feodor drawing the map. It's not an image of the map but of the father and son together. See my link--doesn't it display the image "Boris Godunov at the study of his son"? Also, the email address you list comes back to me. SRHookEm
Please look in Gdansk Vote.According to it Krolewiec has to be used.At the time it was part of a Polish fief and thus "shares history".According to the vote it must be double named with Polish name --Molobo16:39, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
Irrelevant. The vote was made towards all locations with "shared history".They don't have to be connected to Gdansk.
--Molobo19:58, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article D.S. Mirsky, 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.
Like so many descendants of the Rurikid House of Smolensk, the Oginskis lost their princely dignity in course of time. The provenance of Ostrogskis is still disputed, but their descent from Svyatopolk II seems to be corroborated by the records in the medieval synodics, as represented there. I already contributed Ostrogski back in January and plan to enlarge on the Rurikids as the inspiration strikes. --Ghirlandajo09:15, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
Intelligentsia
All the etymologic dictionaries I was able to consult cite it as a Russian word. Ir entered English first in a negative context associated with the revolutionary activities of the so-called nihilists. If borrowed from Polish, it would be inteligencja not intelligetsia, of course. --Ghirlandajo14:29, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
You mean single "l" instead of "ll" ? I'm not sure if the word did not have double "l" in Polish in 19th century. Do you pronounce the "лл" in Russian now ?
I think you may be right about the way it was intoduced to English (with the nihilists). Some evidence on how and when this happened would be helpful, though. --Wojsyl20:15, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
Yikes...this is getting crazy. The only thing I could do was delete Russian architecture and move Architecture of Rus back to that title, since ARchitecture of Rus had all the original history. I apologize if anything was lost by deleting the second Russian architecture article. Adam Bishop15:34, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
Soviet sportspeople
Thanks for your kind message. I didn't announce, because I didn't know :) But should expanded stubs be added there or just new articles? BTW, after I knew about Vasily Alexeev's achievements I thought I should add inf. about him before I contributed into the article about Leonid Zhabotinsky. Cmapm23:03, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages is not a "Russian Orthodox Encyclopaedia"
Please stop pushing Russian Orthodox POV to the articles. Please pay attention that canonicity
is viewed somewhat differently by Orthodox and Catholic Churches;
is not recognized by Protestant Churches;
is not recognized by most of people in the wold that are not Cristian at all.
Andriy, I twice moved your notice to the appropriate talk page and answered you there. If you wish to restore it on my talk, let it be, but I wish to draw you attention to the fact that it's for me to edit my talk page in the way I find convenient. --Ghirlandajo15:00, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
If you think G's edits violate policy in general or are in bad faith, his talk and especially policy pages are appropriate for that but you should be specific and show what violations are the user makes systemically. For article's disputes, article's talk are better since it is viewed by a larger number of conserned editors. --Irpen17:18, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
I looked at recent discussion at Ivangorod fortress. I think you are right that trying to repeat countries' histories that needs paragraphs and paragraphs of writing in short articles is unproductive and can only produce confusing texts unlike links to relevant pages.
I raised this issue some time ago at here. There are several Ukrainian towns (see for instance Drohobych, Kamianets-Podilskyi), whose articles try to retell the complex history of Ukraine in 10 words. Because it is impossible, the fights occasionally erupt about every word (like annexed/captured/occupied when the story is more complex). I think we should avoid doing this altogether, when possible. --Irpen22:30, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Of course I would, but I don't think that I'm up for the job just now. I'm not an expert in 20th-century politics, you know. Hopefully, when I complete writing new articles from my to-do list, I'll be able to start Yaroslavl Portal or at least to provide a decent account of my native city. I'm thinking about 50 articles connected with Yaroslavl. But it would take me months to do all that. --Ghirlandajo17:07, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
Boris Godunov
Dobryy vecher, tovarishch. The word "abominable" was one that I particularly wanted removed because it is irrelevant to the context of the sentence. The sentence is making the point that Boris strengthened his position at court by his marriage to not just some unknown woman but the daughter of Ivan's favorite. The fact that he was Ivan's favourite was the point of the marriage. Whatever personal attributes, good or bad, Malyuta Skuratov may have had, have no place in this sentence. If readers want to find out more about him, they can click on the link. Soglasno? JackofOz11:42, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
I just hate seeing the EB1911 articles butchered like this, as if they were written by illiterates. Every racy word is being removed. I don't object to this particular edit, however, now that you condescended to give the rationale for it. --Ghirlandajo11:53, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
Thanks. I have a different view of the EB1911 articles. In the main they're fine, but they do contain some wording that is now quite out-moded and not nearly as concise as they could be. They do have some fascinating historical facts that don't seem to appear anywhere else, but the way they're presented does not always gell with current styles of writing. Nothing should be regarded as sacrosanct on Misplaced Pages, otherwise the point of this wonderful collaborative project would be lost. Cheers JackofOz12:23, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
Please answer. If you do not have any interest to the discussion. please inform us so that we could start the mediation procedure without you.--AndriyK11:00, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
Sergey Nesterov
Hello! According to the Nesterov article, the town was renamed that from Stallupönen after Sergey Nesterov, a World War II pilot. However, the German wiki says that the town was renamed after Pyotr Nesterov, a World War I pilot. I have been trying to find out which is true, but found nothing on yahoo about a WWII pilot Sergey Nesterov. Unfortunately, I do not speak Russian and am therefore limited in my searching abilities. At your leisure, could you investigate and see which is the correct source? Olessi03:56, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
Supposedly the most magnificent of all Teutonic castles was Neu Marienwereder, somewhere in today's Lithuania. Are you familiar with it? Do you have any sources on it? If so, please let me know where it was located and what is the modern name of the location. Thanks, Space Cadet16:42, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
How can I help you if New Marienwerder yields zero hits in both Google and Yandex. I'm neither a German nor Poles or Swede to be particularly interested in the Teutonic forts. There are Russian websites on Teutonic castles, and they mention Marienwerder as their strongest fortress. Therefore I believe that your source implies Marienwerder. Perhaps there were old and new castles there, and Neu Marienwerder may stand for the new one. Just a guess. --Ghirlandajo19:51, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
I found nothing in a search for Neumarienwerder either. Space Cadet, what context was "Neu Marienwerder" used? What source was it listed in? That could help a little toward finding what it means. Olessi20:18, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
I'm writing to you because I've noticed you on Tale of Igor's Campaign article. I'd like to make a translation of Tale of Igor's Campaign on Wikibooks. What do you think? Would you join me in translating it, or maybe know someone who would? Nikola20:56, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
Mstislav of Chernigov
Thanks for expanding the Chernihiv article. A question about Mstislav. I thought that a different one is more commonly called "the Bold". You probably have more info but these are links that should be enough for a stub Mstislav of Chernigov, , . I could write it too. I am sure one character will move it to Mstislav of Chernihiv or even to Mstyslav of Chernihiv in no time but that's a separate issue to deal with. --Irpen00:44, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
Halibutt's RfA
Dear Ghirlandajo. I believe there was some misunderstanding about my comment at Knyaz's talk page. I explained the situation at my RfA page and I hope you will read it. In reality I actually defended your contribution to wikipedia. You surely have your ways and your POV, just like I have mine. Your frequent problems with other editors not willing to accept your edits is a proof of that. At the same time you make tons of great contributions and write lots of articles on things or people barely anyone would think of (or know of), not to mention have enough knowledge to write articles on them. That's what I wrote and that's what I believe. I did not encourage anyone to revert anyone's edits, and I'm sorry that you assumed that. Encouraging people to be bold is not equal to encouraging them to revert others.
Dear Halibutt, my opinion of you has been steadily growing since you started addressing my concerns. Anyway, you should agree that it's not for nothing that Russian articles here are reasonably NPOV, whereas the Polish segment is brimming with nationalism. Misplaced Pages is not a suitable place to assert your collective sense of historical injustice. --Ghirlandajo11:14, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
Sorry to disapoint you, but - please don't be offended - I don't trust your judgment when it comes to Polish-Russian disputes. You are a valuable contributor on neutral issues, as your help with that fortress proves - but you seem to have a fairly strong nationalistic Russian POV. That's good - it helps you spot some real anti-russian bias and edit it out - but that also means you tend to see attacks where they are none, and often go against the true NPOV (at least, as I see it - and I of course have my own bias). That Halibutt is supported by such users as 172, Mikkalai or Michael Z. proves to me that he is not anti-russian, but if he doesn't meet your criteria - well, you are entitled to your POV. All things consider I do believe that on this issue we will have to agree to disagree on this issue. Best regards, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus05:57, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
Piotrus, you should really start addressing Wiglaf's (and my) concerns as to your regular unblocking of hysterical Molobo. It appears tlike you attempt to construct a network of admins pushing a nationalist Polish agenda, with the power of unblocking each other and your crony Molobo. --Ghirlandajo11:14, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
Ghirlandajo, your comment right below mine shows that, unfortunately, we speak at two different levels. It's not that anyones' is higher or anything, it's that simply I try to talk about concrete examples while you talk about your own feelings. Note that I cannot dispute your feelings or make you change them as I do not know them. On the contrary, I could discuss specific issues if you were kind enough as to list them.
Having said that, I don't agree that Russian articles are in general NPOV and I do not agree that Polish ones are POV either. Such remarks are simply too general. Tell me what articles you have in mind and we could start speaking seriously. Otherwise it would be a loss of time, both for you. Halibutt17:55, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
Halibutt, when opposing your adminship, I thought I would be the first and only one to do so, given a scope and quality of your contributions to the Polish segment. No that I see your nomination opposed by a much larger number of editors that I thought feasible, I really doubt if you deserve all this. Perhaps it's not so bad when so many editors know you and have their opinion on your editing. If you're interested to know my opinion, I believe the current situation arose from you and Piotrus not being careful enough to dissociate yourselves from the trolls who disrupt normal functioning of this project, such as puerile Molobo, a tireless revert warrior Space Cadet, and Witkacy with his paranoic Black Book. There is no need for great editors like you and Piotr to connive their trolling just because they are ethnically Polish. Look, I don't connive Nixer on the basis of his living in Moscow. Whatever the result of current voting, I hope that the lessons will be learned and I don't think I would oppose your nomination the next time it surfaces. --Ghirlandajo11:18, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
yep, there is no guilt by association, unless you do, intentionally, associate yourself with people. All the fools are not in the other camp, and to have a fool in your own camp is a predicament, you have to show that the foolishness is not inherent in the position. dab(ᛏ)13:34, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the wishes, Ghirlandajo. However, I got an impression that they were a tad double-faced. After all some of the arguments you still hold against me are quite bizarre. For instance, you hold that being of the same nationality as another wikipedian is my guilt. Sorry, but I cannot do much about it. I was born 24 years ago, other wikipedians were also born quite some time ago and there's little we can do about their nationality. If Molobo offended you in any way - it should be treated as an argument against his nomination, not mine.
Also, you still hold that the fact that you took my comment out of context or simply did not understand it (Talk:Russophobia) is an argument against me. You continue to quarrel about Talk:Ostashkov, even if it was you not to be able to use the talk page, and not me. You continue to claim that the conflict was about expansion of that article and not about deletion of parts of the text which seemed important to all who took part in the discussion. You continue to claim that I duplicated my contribution by placing it in both articles on Ostashkov and Stolbnyi Island, eventhough I never edited the latter article in my whole life. You continue to state that some of your invitations to the voting displeased me while I clearly explained this to be untrue. You continue to claim that I asked User:Knyaz to revert you (thus assuming my bad will) whereas I explained that you're wrong on that one. Sure, you apologized Aegis for wrongly calling him someone's sock puppet, but not at the page where you offended him and people can still see your offence there. You continue to claim that there is something wrong with my behaviour since I do not find Knyaz a sockpuppet of anyone or never had any interest in that. You still believe that our usage of Polish at our talk pages is something wrong eventhough you have always had an option to ask for translation - or ask us to use English only. In fact when you noted that I promised to use English only, yet you still hold that one against me (eventhough it's perfectly in accordance with wiki rules)...
So, allow me to note that your wishes of best luck are somehow similar to Best luck, you vandal, conspirator, revert-war-proponent, bad-will-assuming andsockpuppet-supporter, which is not what I would like to hear on my 2nd anniversary here. Halibutt23:34, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
Also, the fact that you continue to accuse me of various, mostly false things on many wikipedians' talk pages make me think that your comment on my talk page was some kind of a joke only. Halibutt02:32, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
Nixer
hi Ghirlandajo -- note that I didn't block Nixer. User:Angr did. I did, however, voice support for the block. I agree that Nixer is a rather annoying editor, and quite unlikely to ever make any contributions that will make worthwhile the bother everybody has with putting up with him. But that's Misplaced Pages. The really good contributors are hardly noticed at all, and the useless ones grab everyone's attention. dab(ᛏ)10:45, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
Molobo
well, I do not care much whether his trolling du jour is done on Germany or on Russia related articles, or on Mickey Mouse related articles, for that matter (I couldn't care less about Gdansk vs. Danzig or the flag of Macedonia, but I have to recognize that some people do care a lot). I have seen some very nasty varieties of Slavic nationalism on Misplaced Pages, and I realize there will be no end of fools, so it cannot be our purpose to educate them or make friends with them, you'll get two fresh ones for every one tamed or banned. What we do need is an efficient way to protect Misplaced Pages from all this nationalist mudslinging with as little side-effects as possible. There will still be some effort involved in each case. You cannot do an RFAr without going through an RfC first, and you will have to compile evidence in any case. My recommendation is that you drum up people involved with Molobo, so that they may collaborate in compiling an overview of events. Only then will I actually be able to form my own judgement of how bad this case really is. If I get the impression from the RfC that the case is sufficiently serious, I may well press an RfAr myself. From the descriptions I get, Molobo is a particularly bad case, because he is intelligent. You would think it difficult to be blindly nationalistic and intelligent at the same time, but history tells us it is possible. Most nationalist trolls I've had to deal with so far were almost pitifully stupid, they just kept running their heads against the wall until they got tired (some sooner, some later; Nixer is persistent, but he doesn't make enough sense for me to decide if he is motivated by some weird flavour of nationalism, or just by voices in his head). If an intelligent editor uses his intelligence not to strive for fairness and factual completeness, but to play mind games with other editors, it will show up eventually. I hope you will succeed in compiling an overview of evidence that will make clear why everyone is so upset about this particular case. dab(ᛏ)13:34, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
21:28, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
