User talk:R9tgokunks: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 16:47, 8 April 2007 editR9tgokunks (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users20,557 editsm →BLOCKED ← Previous edit		Revision as of 17:25, 8 April 2007 edit undoRCS (talk \| contribs)7,222 edits →Blocked Next edit →
Line 735:		Line 735:
	#Removed ", quarter of Sofia" since it isn't relevant, due to the link already stating the country it is in		#Removed ", quarter of Sofia" since it isn't relevant, due to the link already stating the country it is in
	#Removed the description links since it seemed irrelevant and, IMHO, a bit POV to have "German singer; Polish immigrant", after all they are '''all''' humans in the end.-- ] <small>(])</small> 16:34, 8 April 2007 (UTC)}}		#Removed the description links since it seemed irrelevant and, IMHO, a bit POV to have "German singer; Polish immigrant", after all they are '''all''' humans in the end.-- ] <small>(])</small> 16:34, 8 April 2007 (UTC)}}

			== Warning ==
			I have further improved the article Strasbourg . Be aware of my additions and don't delete them by reverting to your own previous version as you use to do . If you have some changes to make, use the "edit this page" button instead. Now you are warned. ] 17:25, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:25, 8 April 2007

Welcome to my Discussion page, leave a message if desired.

2006 Archive

Please add new comments in new sections if you are addressing a new issue. Please sign it by typing four tildes, like this: ~~~~.

Move

Thank you for pointing that out to me. Ameise -- chat 22:12, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Same with me: thx. -Bundesamt 15:59, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Spoken Languages, English is being horribly underrated

I think that the english language is being short handed in the most spoken languags around the world article... Ok, if English is the primary language in Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda, Australia (Australian English), the Bahamas, Barbados, Bermuda, Belize, the British Indian Ocean Territory, the British Virgin Islands, Canada (Canadian English), the Cayman Islands, Dominica, the Falkland Islands, Gibraltar, Grenada, Guernsey, Guyana, Isle of Man, Jamaica (Jamaican English), Jersey, Montserrat, Nauru, New Zealand (New Zealand English), Ireland (Hiberno-English), Pitcairn Islands, Saint Helena, Saint Lucia, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands, Trinidad and Tobago, the Turks and Caicos Islands, the United Kingdom (various forms of British English), the U.S. Virgin Islands the United States (various forms of American English), and Zimbabwe.. then we should probably up the number of primary speakers of English by..... ALOT...... If the US is going on 300 million people, the united kingdom 60 million, australia 50 million... that passed the 400 million mark already and that's not including the other heap of countries that were just listed. I'm not saying that everyone in these countries only speak english or that it's their primary language, but the overwhelming majority of people in each one of these countries speak english as their main language..... And even if someone started with a particular language as a child, the goal is to identify their primary language, as in the most used and applied language to daily life. If you speak spanish to a handful of relatives, and speak english just as well to the rest of the world... I think it's safe to say that English is a primary language, or maybe a person could have 2 primary languages.... You can check wikipedia.com or other census verifying websites to any of the info I've displayed. Another intersting topic would probably be the influence of the enlgish language throughout the world and how english television, music, the internet, and other mediums greatly expand the engish language's territory.

WikiProject North Dakota

I just thought I should point out that you have never added your name to the list of WPND participants. I would encourage you to list yourself so we can know just who is a part of the project. Have a nice day! --Matth e wUND 07:50, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for adding that list of "ghost towns" and other unincorporated communities to the Ward County page. I think lists like that are fascinating and very informative. Hopefully we can get stuff like that going for other counties too. --Matth e wUND 23:06, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

On further consideration, I'm a little worried about adding all of these ghost towns and unicorporated communities to county articles. I mean, a few are ok, but I'm worried that this could really snowball. It seems like anybody could edit a county article and add a made up town of some sort and we might not be able to catch it. I would hate to see people start populating county articles with communities that really don't exist...that would be a bad practice. I'm not sure if it's even possible, but it would great if we could get some type of citations for some of these towns so we would have some proof that they actually exist (or existed). Otherwise, adding all of the undocumentable places are a little iffy, in my opinion. --Matth e wUND 07:40, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Please don't overuse the v-word

Per this edit, please read WP:VAND. This was not vandalism, and overusing of such term is as offensive as calling other editors trolls, idiots and such. Per WP:CIV and WP:NPA, please think carefuly before using such words again. Thank you, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 18:36, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

This is your second warning: if you abuse the term 'vandalism' (like here), you may be reported to WP:PAIN and blocked for incivility.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 00:46, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Ask LUCPOL, not me. It is obvious he is not changing those words in bad faith, thus it is not vandalism.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 01:12, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

WP:RFCU.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 01:20, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

also called my cleanup (under a different IP) of several flag pages "vandalism", see here Flags_of_formerly_independent_states. There were no reasons stated by R9tgokunks, whereas I shortly stated my reasons for deleting the flags.--82.135.28.22 12:32, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

common translations

I just noticed that you fixed some of my common translations! Thanks alot, it was much appreciated. For these actions, i hereby award you this barnstar.

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		I, Chrislk02, award you this random acts of kindness barnstar for fixing some messed up translations I had on my user page! Thanks you, it was much appreciated. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 19:52, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas revert

What exactly is it that you reverted? What you did was edit the article. The "revert" didn't even undo the changes I made (which were legit by the way). I can see others have mentioned that you shouldn't be using the word vandalism as liberally as you do. You should probably listen. Thernlund 03:29, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

My mistake. You did undo my change (GLOCK to Glock). It was legit. I won't change it back as I don't really care how right or wrong video game articles are. I'd recommend putting it back though. As I said, it was legit as per Talk:Glock. Thernlund 03:38, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I see you did put it back. Nice. Games aren't really my area of interest so it wasn't that important to me personally, but I do appreciate the acknowledgement. Thanks. Thernlund 17:15, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

(Northern) Kosovo

Serbian North Kosovo is to Pristina the same thing that Kosovo is to Belgrade. Only recently the bridge connecting Kosovan Mitrovica with its northern part was re-opened, but civil unrest erupted again as some Albanians attacked the north. North Kosovo is separated from the rest.

The north is managed by political parties which boycott all Kosovar elections (also the population of northern Kosovo) - the same thing Kosovo's Albanians do when there are Serbian elections and censuses. The region is unitary governed by a parallel government of the "Autonomous Province of Kosovo-Metohija" which is recognized by Belgrade as the the only legitimate KosMet's governing body. The Serbian flags are only present on institutions in northern Kosovo. And in the end, that's the only part that officially uses the Serbian Dinar, and that is still de facto a part of Serbia (unlike the rest of Kosovo which is only de jure). --PaxEquilibrium 10:58, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Also, please see WP:VAND to find out and finally understand what is vandalism. As I see you have been several times directed at this policy, so that's why I say "finally" (nothing in bad faith). Cheers. --PaxEquilibrium 11:00, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

List of Hungarians

I notice you have twice removed uncited material. As around half the page is uncited and you keep removing the same couple people, what is the motivation for removing those people? Please don't remove things without mentioning it on the talk page. These people are hungarian and there are sources to prove it. sometimes it just takes awhile for people to get around to sourcing things. Acornwithwings 06:12, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps you'd be interested

In Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Requests for investigation.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 18:55, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Your edit to Grand Theft Auto: Vice City Stories

I would ask you to clarify what you meant, when you said "vandalism by numerous users" in your last edit summary for this article. Only one editor added the information that you removed from the infobox, and my first edit to this article today removed a part of that information by mistake. Since some of the information was available at the Playstation.com source , I assumed that it was added to the article in good faith, so I re-inserted the part that I removed. Whether you were including me in your assessment of "vandalism by numerous users" or not, perhaps you should read through this section of Misplaced Pages policy before you make such an allegation in the future. RobWill80 21:07, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Amper?

Your term amper for ampere seemed a bit out of left field, so I reverted it. What are you thinking? Dicklyon 05:20, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

DL-B HS

Isn't DLB in district 7, not 12? I very easily could be wrong though.... My kids go to Burlington Elementary, by the way, and I live in Des Lacs. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by NDCompuGeek (talk • contribs) 18:40, 29 January 2007 (UTC).

Spiders

Oh yeah... not fond of them neither. Bugs... brrrr..... the world would be better without them, yes :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 05:16, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Servian (disambiguation)

I assume you would be interested in the AfD for the article Servian (disambiguation). Duja ► 09:19, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Please don't rush ahead so much with page moves. I appreciate your boldness, but you aren't helping: it took me an hour to clean up the whole Servia/Servian thing: fix multiple mis-links and links to dab page, sort out page histories, move the place articles in line with naming conventions, fix double redirects, format the dab page per WP:MOSDAB etc. Duja ► 09:07, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Didn't Have To Rub It In

On the List of The Colbert Report episodes (2007). I admitted I don't have very good grammer by correcting myself. But you didn't have to rub it in, by calling it childish. Now correct this, teacher! Lugnut215 23:04, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Mühlhausen

I noticed you moved Mühlhausen to Mühlhausen (Thuringia) and made Mühlhausen redirect to Mulhouse. I disagree with this for several reasons. Your rationale that Mulhouse is more recognizable is disputable; I would argue that Mühlhausen is more recognizable because of its importance during the Reformation and the Thirty Years War. Secondly, Mulhouse is primarily known in English as "Mulhouse", not as Mülhausen. Thirdly, Mühlhausen (disambiguation) and Mulhausen have already existed to disambiguate between the cities. While some of the descriptions and links could be clarified, I do not see the need to have Mulhouse be the primary topic, especially when "Mühlhausen" and "Mülhausen" are spelled differently. Mühlhausen should be moved back to its original location; if you would like to move it to a different title, please initiate a move request. Cheers, Olessi 19:13, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Misinterpretation

Thanks for getting that right. I had actually thought that the user I tagged committed the vandalism that user:Dan500 committed, which is why I used a third level warning. The "Vice City rocks" vandalism would've just been a first level warning, unless that user has a history. Anyway, thanks again. Croctotheface 18:10, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Just a quick note: I've changed the curly brackets used above to straight brackets, because it was adding this page to Category:Suspected Misplaced Pages sockpuppets of Lyle123. —tregoweth (talk) 21:42, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Kalm and German

I ask you again, what does German has to do with the trivia in Død Kalm? The episode is situated in Norway, and doesn't, as far as I know, have any references to Germany whatsoever. And could you please explain what "Kalm" means in German, since I can't look it up in my German-Danish dictionary or on Wiktionary. --Emilsj 14:49, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Yea, sorry, i mixed it up with de:Kalmen

Kalmen (Windstillen, von franz. calme = Flaute)

Searching for Flaute on Misplaced Pages gave me this:

List of compositions by Juan María Solare

"Flaute" , for four flutes. Airplane Frankfurt to Chicago, 19 July 2003, & Köln 6 - 7 August 2003. To Silvina Wainszelbaum -- Hrödberäht 00:59, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

First of all, please keep all discussion in the place that it originated, else it will be pretty hard for other people to follow it. Second, I ask you now for the third time, what does the German word has to do with the article? --Emilsj 17:20, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Do you mind answering me any time soon? --Emilsj 20:33, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Categorizing german dogs

I see that you're busily putting dog breeds into the Category:German dogs but I'm not quite sure why some of them would go there. I put the Plotthound back to a U.S. breed as it was clearly developed in the U.S., even though it had some german dogs in its ancestry. And not sure why the Greater Swiss Mountain Dog classifies as a german dog when it is, in fact, swiss?? Elf | Talk 04:31, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Please refrain from vandalizing my user page again (I'm referring to this edit). Marmaduque 19:52, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Re

It makes sense. It is official name of that organization. "Polonians" is a non-existent word, if you wouldn't be such an ignorant, you would read Polonia article. Auf wiedersehen! - Darwinek 19:41, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Sources for Proto-Germanic

Hi. Regarding your amendments to the article Robert, I have provided sources for all the versions I added, and you really should be able to provide a source for your "Proto-germanic" version. Doubtless what you have added is correct - but without a source, who is to say? I have changed it back until you can do the necessary. Best,HeartofaDog 00:08, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Reminder to cite sources

The unsourced material you recently replaced was not removed by vandals, but rather the result of discussion on the talk page. Please do not reinstate this original research without reliable sources for validation purposes. Sorry for any inconvenience or confusion. Thanks, (jarbarf) 23:54, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Is there a reason you are cleaing this from your talk page? It's no big deal, but a simple acknowledgement would be nice. (jarbarf) 23:58, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Flags in metropolis article

I was wondering why are you repitedly changing the flags of Kazan and and ufa from the Russian national flag to the regional flags of Tatarstan and Bashkortostan? All other cities have their national flags posted next to them, so why not these two? Should we change the USA flag next to Denver to Colorado's flag? Db1944 19:00, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

What are you talking about? These arent regions at all... they are Republics. See Republics of Russia, Federal subjects of Russia -- Hrödberäht (talk) 19:37, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

That's exactly my point! They are sub-national entities! All other cities have their NATIONAL flags posted next to them, but only these two have sub-national flags. Is there a reason why you insist on this? Db1944 22:13, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: “A little left out”

Sorry, I guess the tag requesting that noöne edit the article whilst the flags were being added grabbed mine attention; I had not realised that others had started the work priorly. Unto the extent that you contributed to the work of adding the flags, then you are entitled unto a just proportion of the credit therefor. If you would like a barnstar, as an explicit acknowledgement of the work you put into the metropolis article, then I would gladly give you one, and would not begrudge the request. It would be indefensibly inconsistent of me not to grant such a request. Raifʻhār Doremítzwr 22:53, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Culture of Saint Lucia

I noticed that you classified the Culture of Saint Lucia category under the category Category:Germanic culture. Please could you clarify why you have done this. Many thanks. --Vivenot 15:04, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Ask for a favor

Hi! Since you are an experienced wikipedian and an English native speaker:

I am going to nominate film director Abbas Kiarostami for GA/FA soon. It is now under peer review. It would be great if you could take a look at it and comment on it. Thanks and have a nice day. Sangak 16:44, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Early modern english

Hi,I just wanted to let you know that I reverted your edit to Early Modern English, because it doesn't make sense: Early Modern English is not a form of Middle English. If anything, it's a form of Modern English.

—Ruakh_TALK 21:25, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

LUCPOL

perhaps if he does it again you should report him, but at the least you should try to help this editor in realizing what he has been doing wrong. but then again, it looks like he is relatively experienced, has he been blocked before?

--Jadger 21:07, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I would report him to admin then, he seems to be very disruptive.

--Jadger 01:12, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

I would report it here or wherever it is best suited from the list of noticeboards at the top of that link I just gave you. Also, you have not been breaking the 3RR as you were reverting vandalism, although you rarely hear anyone get away with that excuse anymore.

--Jadger 01:24, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Did you ever make a report about any of this incident anywhere. I'm looking at this and thinking that you may be clear of wrong doing. As you only have 3 revers on Upper Silesian Metropolitan Union where as LUCPOL has 4. If you report anywhere report at WP:AN/3RR. --Wildnox (talk) 02:24, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes you can make a seperate report, and I suggest doing so. Please use the template at the bottom of the page though instead of making a random jumble of information as LUCPOL did. --Wildnox (talk) 02:31, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

I have been looking through his contribs and I see no abusive history. I have notified him of your report. JFBurton 20:07, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

And have you been through his entire block log? JFBurton 20:25, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I have posted a message on his page that he has been accused of sockpuppetry. I'll be willing to help in this situation. Retiono Virginian 17:49, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

If the user has violated WP:SOCK why hasn't he been indefblocked? yet his userpage makes him look as a legitimate user. Retiono Virginian 17:55, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Guess what. I think multiple 3RR'S and Sock violations which has gone on for months is not needed. I'm starting a request for Arbcom. Just to inform you. Retiono Virginian 18:00, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

I have opened the case for Arbcom. See here . Retiono Virginian 18:20, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Tagging the nonsense categories for speedy deletion which he's creating to disrupt us now. Retiono Virginian 18:30, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Please add all your diffs onto the case for Arbcom. I've added for, but we are in need of some more in order to back up our case and get him banned. Retiono Virginian 18:46, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Please state your view on the arbcom. As you are a key user involved in the case. You need to support my case on his socks, disruption, and other incidents. Retiono Virginian 18:56, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Note:I'm now engaging in a reversion war over the Ips he is continually tagging as socks of you. Add some links of this on his Arbcom request. Retiono Virginian 19:29, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Moin! I received your message about your troubles with LUCPOL. I haven't much experience with that particular editor, but it seems to be more of a content dispute than disruptive vandalism. My edit to Silesia was done to mediate between the two of you, not to pick one side over the other; sovereign lands can indeed be referred to as states, although "country" is the most common designation. Instead of going through Misplaced Pages:Requests for investigation, I would advise you to use Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment or contact the Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal. Cheers, Olessi 17:11, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I looked at both sides and I find it difficult to see who is right, AFAICT you both broke the same policies (CIV) and are having a content dispute. I translated LUCPOL's entry, and in this particular case I would advice mediation cabal - if you can find a mediator with knowledge of Polish language to trasnlate to and for LUCPOL (I most certainly will not have time to do that, I am afraid).--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 18:32, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

This is Answer: (translating for Piotrus)
My English is poor, indeed, I had much difficulty understanding R9tgokunks. So:

Case: Upper Silesian Metropolitan Union - Name Upper Silesian Metropolitan Union (polish: Górnośląski Związek Metropolitalny) it's an old, now unused name retired by the new government (after elections of autumn 2006). "Górnośląski Związek Metropolitalny" was replaced by "Silesia". Examples: in : , , in , , , (etc...) and pl.Wikinews. Polish Misplaced Pages for long months had article pl:Górnośląski Związek Metropolitalny, and were politicians changed the name to "Silesia" than Polish wiki gained a new article pl:Silesia (miasto) (english: "Silesia city"). They both described the same thing after some discussions I created a redirect , but we delayed renaming "Silesia (miasto)" as it is a current process and we want to see what happens. But Polish wki article states: "Silesia (dawniej Górnośląski Związek Metropolitalny)" - english: Silesia city (long ago Upper Silesian Metropolitan Union") . So you see: R9tgokunks inserted wrong info into the article and engaged in revert wars , without any knowledge of the "Silesia (miasto)" issue - and he accusses me of vandalism. Further, he removed the name "Silesia" from article which seems to me to be clear vandalism: .
~~Case Frankfurt am Main - Simply, I never edited that article and have no idea why I am accused of editing it.~~I never accused you of editing it....
Other accounts. I am an experienced Wikipedian - Ihave 15 000 edits on pl.wikipedia , 2000 on en.wikipedia , and I decided to have an account on other Wikis for interwiki additions, so they appear under my account and not anon's IP. I don't understand what's wrong with that.
IP (ex: 91.120.107.93, 168.213.1.132, 207.245.84.70, 131.104.218.46, 216.171.96.18) are not mine and checkuser will verify this.
Case Template:Infobox City Poland - As for my revert it's easy to explain: User:Fujicolor changes completly revamped the infobox, and I think it damaged the layout on en.wiki. I disagree with this change, thus I revert it. As simple as that.
Case Silesian - There is no such entity as "Polish Silesia", there is just Silesia region on the territory of 3 countries. Thus I reverted R9tgokunks' edit .
Case Silesia - Old version of the article had "Nation" and my dictionary tells me it translates to Polish "naród" (people); I think "State" is more correct. User:Olessi change to "Country" is fine with me and I consider the matter closed.Yes, User:Olessi solved the problem, and the matter is not problematic anymore.
Case Katowice - I reverted R9tgokunks' edit as it damaged the layout of article (see for yourselves). Panoramas should go at the top, I think it's a common policy.

I did not execute no vandalism. LUCPOL 16:06, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

My new answer . I want to reach a compromise with you. This depends from you if to finish matter. LUCPOL 10:51, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Re:User page content - delete ic

So instead of justifying your attempt to edit war something on to LUCPOL's user page you quote WP:USER, a policy with which I am very familiar, as a whole with no comments as to how you are trying to apply the policy. Here are a some points.

Misplaced Pages offers wide latitude to users to manage their user space as they see fit

So, it's generally up to him to decide what is there and what isn't.

In general it is considered polite to avoid substantially editing another's user page without their permission. Some users are fine with their user pages being edited, and may even have a note to that effect. Other users may object and ask you not to edit their user pages, and it is probably sensible to respect their requests. The best option is to draw their attention to the matter on their talk page and let them edit their user page themselves if they agree on a need to do so. In some cases a more experienced editor may make a non-trivial edit to your userpage, in which case that editor should leave a note on your talk page explaining why this was done. This should not be done for trivial reasons.

So in short, don't edit another user's page unless you have a good non-trivial reason which you've discussed with the user.

Now, to give a brief summary of the point of the entire "Ownership and editing of pages in the user space" section. Generally it is not considered a good idea to edit another user's space, especially when they resist you doing so. This does not mean that he has total control, but most of the control is afforded to him. The section is more pointed at the fact that the users cannot override the community as a whole in regard to the content in their userspaces. These community decisions are usually made in XFD discussions or on noticedboards such as AN/I.

Trying to force something trivial onto a user's userpage. despite his/her wishes. could possibly result in blocks for violations including, but not limited to, disruption and harrassment. I most seriously suggest that you avoid editing LUCPOL's userpage, and this goes even more so for trying to edit war in LUCPOL's userspace. --Wildnox (talk) 20:59, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Per my previous comments, please take the matter to WP:MEDIATION.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 21:53, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Germanic culture

The Germanic culture refers to the culture of people speaking the German language. From that, we can assume that Category:Germanic culture should match. I have removed the inappropriate subcategories from the category. Best regards, Angus McLellan (Talk) 15:08, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I had a think about what to call Germanic culture. I mean there has to be a clear, precise name for it. Absolutely no ideas here! But I'll keep thinking, and if I come up with something that seems to be better, I'll let you know. Culture of German-speaking Europe is precise, but ugly! All the best, Angus McLellan (Talk) 15:23, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Vandal report

Hi. You asked me to comment the case since my name was mentioned. I checked what it was about and found out that I only reverted an edit of yours once, since it was not according to the style of the article (it was from Slovenian language, changed Slovene to Slovenian as the guideline says). So, no edit warring with me. I hope you guys find a peaceful solution to the conflict. Regards. --Tone 15:57, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I think we've been through a couple of revert wars in the past but I do not consider you a vandal because of that. I think LUCPOL complains that you are stalking him. Are you ? --Lysy 17:04, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I could only recommend that both of you stop fighting each other and turn to something more useful instead. --Lysy 07:20, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Hrödberäht. You asked me to comment too. I think you like Misplaced Pages very much, but unfortunately a great part of your edits make Misplaced Pages worse, because they have a strong bias (POV). I kindly ask you to stop adding such edits, which includes any edit related to Germany. Misplaced Pages does a great job at carefully balancing the articles to be NPOV. Changing this makes the content more like an advertisement and Misplaced Pages becomes less liked. It also damages Misplaced Pages by taking much time from contributors to revert such edits, which they could otherwise use to add new content. What concerns edit wars, they are banned for a good reason. Most of your edit wars started because you gave an article a POV (sometimes be it only to make it sound more sympathetic to your ideas). So I support the administrators that combat your behaviour. Please take this as no offense and feel free to contact me. --Danh 17:08, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Firstly, I removed the sock tag from your page. Neither you or LUCPOL should go anywhere near eachother's userspace at the moment, espcially not to place sock tags like he just did. I totally agree with the above statement that you are a good faith editor, but have a POV problem. I think the same of LUCPOL for the most part, despite his disruptive use of sockpuppets in past dealings with me. I definitely don't consider you or him to be vandals, because both of you make your edits in good faith. --Wildnox (talk) 18:38, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I believe I stated once (or more) that both of you are overusing (if not abusing) the word 'vandal' in relation to each other. Both of you are acting in good faith, neither of you is a vandal - yet you accuse each another of it. What you need is a mediation (again, I recommened this many times) where you and LUCPOL would (among other things) agree not to call each other names.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 18:54, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

that whole page is a huge personal attack, and I would report him to admin. He even claims you are a anon IP which is proven to be a sockpuppet of another user. I pointed that out, and he reverted it. that whole page is a personal attack, like a black book that are banned on wikipedia. I would report that page to admin

--Jadger 21:22, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Really? See: . LUCPOL 22:08, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

it is a "black book" which will get you in trouble on wikipedia, they are not allowed, ask user:halibutt he used to have one.

--Jadger 23:42, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Part of the issue is that R9tgokunks is also maintaining a "black book", a much larger one. --Wildnox (talk) 04:25, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Reply

I'm not the one who said they were not allowed, I'm unsure about whether or not they are, I just said that you had one too. --Wildnox (talk) 05:50, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Conflict resolution

It's been brought to my atention that you have a page devoted to cataloging the problems with an active user. Such pages are strongly discouraged as they appear to be attacks. I recommend that you make use of the standard dispute resolution techniques afforded by Misplaced Pages, such as RfC, mediation, Arbitration, etc. If you're not in the process of resolving disputes with the other user the page devoted to him serves no purpose and should be removed. -Will Beback · † · 06:18, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Your recent request for Checkuser

You recently compiled and listed a case at requests for checkuser. A checkuser or clerk has requested you supply one or more diffs to justify the use of the checkuser procedure in the case, in accordance with the procedures listed in the table at the top of the requests for checkuser page. For an outcome to be achieved, we require that you provide these diffs as soon as possible. This has been implemented to reduce difficulties for checkusers, and is essential for your case to be processed. A link to your recently-created case which has this information missing is here. Thanks for your co-operation. Daniel.Bryant 06:04, 21 February 2007 (UTC), checkuser clerk.

Name calling

Regarding the edit summary of your recent revert I'd suggest that you reconsider your attitude towards other editors. Calling the editors that do not support your POV vandals does not help your case. --Lysy 07:25, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Reply

Yea, I made a much bigger mistake than you did, and you corrected yours before I corrected mine. I was thinking it was handled like an AFD as far as pages and I went as far as to make a seperate page in the archive, which was already deleted. --Wildnox (talk) 22:56, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Personally I'd avoid it. I've never actually seen a non-blocked user with the sockpuppeteer tag on his/her page and even when LUCPOL was confirmed to be using sockpuppets the tag was removed rather quickly by the admin that originally placed it. Placed removed Even though policy allows for the placement of tags, it seems slightly disruptive to place sockpuppeteer tags on the pages of active users, at least when the tags are disputed so heavily by the user. My suggestion is ment to hopefully promote good will between you and LUCPOL. --Wildnox (talk) 21:58, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Meh, that I'm not too worried about, I had removed the tags before, but I'm not as concenred about that. I see no reason not to mark the IP's that either of you suspect, if you think it is important. I just suggest that you do not mark LUCPOL's userpage. --Wildnox (talk) 04:01, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Edit summary

When editing an article on Misplaced Pages there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field, especially for big edits or when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you. Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 03:42, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Stettin

I hope my revert did not bother you too much, but please understand that Stettin is today the German name for Szczecin. It did not cease to be so in 1946. For one example, the German magazine Der Spiegel which uses Stettin exclusively, see . In the future then please think before adding information that the German name somehow disappeared in 1946. Personally, I think that would be insulting to the memory of those Germans who lived in those cities in the past, and especially those who live there today.Balcer 03:47, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

And another explanation, now for this revert. Torun was lost by Germany to Poland after World War I, so if anything the German name ceased to be officially used in the city in 1919, not 1946. Please, next time check the history of the city before making mindless changes to push your POV. Balcer 04:52, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Be nice

I noticed your removal of a helpful message from someone, who was apparently concerned at the number of changes you are making without bothering to mention why you are making them. That you then accused them with a comment (showing you know how to do one) saying "Revert nonsensical edits(potential vandalism)" says too much about your current attitude. Please consider how your actions appear to others. Shenme 04:08, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Enough is enough

By making this revert you have deleted valuable additions to the article that had been made in the meantime. This is destructive and plainly stupid. I'm really doubting your intelligence. What constructive contribution have you ever made to the article ? RCS 09:34, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Your recent edits, in which you substituted English names with German names (for instance Rhine to Rhein and Szczecin to Stettin in this edit and Tyrol to Tirol in more than 100 articles today), are considered to be vandalism. Remember this is English Misplaced Pages, written in the English language. If you continue this disruptive behaviour, you will be blocked. Markussep 23:56, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Kiarostami: FAC

I would like to invite all those who reviewed "Abbas Kiarostami" during last two months to comment on the article at this "final" stage. The article is now featured article candidate. In case you have any comment, please let me know on the Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Abbas Kiarostami page. Thanks.Sangak 16:22, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Strange edits

Why did you replace "Rhine" with "Rhein"?Rex 19:07, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Alsace

I just wanna warn you that Alsace is french, and it used to be some days a part of the German Empire... but there is quite a while, and since the Napoléonic wars, Alsacians are more attracted to France than to Germany.

I'm an Alsacian and I'm living in this land for ever, all my ancestor since the year 1512 are alsacian... so I know more than you about Alsace's History. So trust me, Alsace righfuly belongs to France. Thx Bye Paris75000 22:40, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I totaly agree that Alsace used to be a part of the German Empire but Alsacian don't feel and don't want to be german !!! That~'s all !!!! bye Paris75000 00:07, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Village's name are german, i agree, but there are thousands years old ; and in the article, you are speaking about actual alsacian and on this last point, i'm at odds with you beacause actual alsacian are totally agree with the fact to be a part of France !!! no-one there want to be german!!! Paris75000 00:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

What the holy mess you are doing on this page !!! Please stop it right now, or I'll look for an adminstrator. Bye user:Paris75000 00:04, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I warned you, I just looked for an administrator... Sorry, but you don't have to put unverified information. Go to Alsace and see what Alsace is actualy : French and no more. Sincerily. user:Paris75000 01:32, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Zabrze

What is your source of information for the German name of Zabrze you put in here? German Wiki has nothing about that version. I can only conclude that your edit qualifies as vandalism, pure and simple. Overall, I find you latest series of edits disruptive. Please, reconsider your actions, and stop. Balcer 02:39, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I gave everyone a heads up about the current controversy around Upper Silesia on Portal talk:Poland/Poland-related Misplaced Pages notice board. Please state your views on the matter there, if you wish. Balcer 02:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree that we seem to have too many articles to cover one thing. I am sure we can resolve this, but let's do it through reasonable discussion, not revert wars. I hope we will get some reasonable input form people involved on the Polish noticeboard. Balcer 04:05, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I really appreciate that you reverted your own changes. It gives me hope this controversy can be resolved amicably. Balcer 05:04, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Upper Silesian Coal Basin, Upper Silesian Industry Area and Upper Silesian Metropolitan Union are three distinct entities -- please don't redirect these things to one article

I realize that some wikipedians have confused the issue with their edits and unfortunate name choices and article moves, but the truth of the matter is as follows (and largely follows the situation on the Polish wikipedia, with one noted exception stated below):

Upper Silesian Coal Basin (Polish: Górnosląskie Zagłębie Węglowe, GZW) is a geological designation in geography and describes a wide region saturated with coal deposits. Google for USCB or the extended name and you will see it used in scholarly geological and coal-mining literature. Unfortunately, User:LUCPOL has portrayed it as a metropolitan area on both the Polish and English wikipedias. This should be fixed, and is the exception I allude to above, but redirecting this article about a geological/geographic region to another article about an urban agglomeration which happens to lie within the northern portion of this region is not the way to do it.
Upper Silesian Industry Area is the large agglomeration situated within the northern part of Upper Silesian Coal Basin. In Polish it is GOP or Górnosląski Okręg Przemysłowy/aglomeracja katowicka/konurbacja górnosląska among others, but certainly not "Górnosląskie Zagłębie Węglowe" (Upper Silesian Coal Basin). It has about 2.8 million inhabitants, and is centered around and its cluster of neighboring cities such as Gliwice, Bytom, Zabrze, Chorzów, Sosnowiec.
Upper Silesian Metropolitan Union, (Polish: Górnosląski Związek Metropolitalny, GZM) is a proposed union of 14 cities which have the legal status of urban counties. These cities happen to be a large portion of the Upper Silesian Industry Area, but this union is not the same thing as the metropolitan area/agglomeration known as Upper Silesian INdustry Area (GOP). This union has very definite goals (see the section which I added before you blanked the article into a redirect). It is not, however, a new single municipality/super-city. Its combined population is 2.1 million. It should not be a redirect to the article about the agglomeration of which it is part, either.
There is another, smaller, agglomeration/metropolitan area to the southwest of the Upper Silesian Industry Area - it's the Rybnik Coal Area or the Rybnik Coal District (Polish: Rybnicki Okręg Węglowy, ROW). It has 0.7 million inhabitants. LUCPOL argues that the two metropolitan areas have coalesced into one "de facto" metropolitan area, which he calls Upper Silesian Coal Basin, but that's premature - I find no support for this in literature.

In sum, referring to the Polish acronyms which are confirmed/verifiable/acutally used by everyone, it's best to reflect in wikipedia the following reality: there are two metropolitan areas (GOP = 2.8 million, ROW = 0.7 million) within a coal basin (GZW), and that the larger agglomeration includes within its area a proposed union of 14 cities (GZM). That's the facts, and I ask you to not be a party to further making a mess of them with harmful, confusing redirects. Take care, --Mareklug 04:15, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I understand your objection and do not approve of the duplication of texts in the "Upper Silesian..." articles and in ]. Katowice is probably the right home for much of the shared content. The rest of it, I don't know - perhaps it belongs in the article about the union or the one about the metropolitan area. It's a fact that a lot of the mentioned objects are all over that area and not just in Katowice. Please undo your redirects, and I will start removing the duplicate content and try to fix the definitions. I am sure other users will help, too. --Mareklug 04:40, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

United World

Just to comment, I do like your ideas of a united world. Retiono Virginian 20:12, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Tag

A tag has been placed on SUP Magazine, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Misplaced Pages. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (below the existing db tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Selket 00:28, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Sarmatians

You recently did some reverts to the article on Sarmatians. Some of them may be legitimate but you also introduced back an incorrect statement about some Polish expressions (false link between the words "szarmancki" and "sarmacki"). You did so despite the fact that I explained reasons for removing this passage in the talk page, providing an official dictionary source. Please, read the talk page of an article before reverting any alleged "vandalism by anon IPs". 87.244.154.171 02:56, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Strasbourg

From my observations, you seem to revert to previous versions of pages somewhat frequently, undoing the edits of other contributors in the process. I urge you not to do this. While not a poor article by any means, some of the grammar and wikilinking of Strasbourg could certainly have been improved. Stating that such improvements are "unneeded" is rather disappointing to read, since a common opinion is that Misplaced Pages articles are perpetual works in progress and there is always room for improvement.

I also find your assertion that "Frenchification" sounding "horrible" rather odd; not only is it a well-established word in English, but your desired replacement, "Francenized", does not even exist.. Olessi 20:46, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I also find it odd that you restored links to Neu and Stadt; neither article is particularly relevant to Strasbourg. Please pay attention to the copyediting of others and do not blindly remove article improvements. Olessi 20:51, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Moving articles

Slow down. You should not just move important articles at your whim and without discussion. This is disruptive and may result in a block. You moved an article to National Museum in Warsaw which is actually a worse translation of Muzeum Narodowe w Warszawie (the official Polish name) than the previous National Museum in Warsaw, so a strong argument could be made that this move was less than optimal. Please, propose the move on the talk page first and see if anyone objects. Balcer 23:45, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Second.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 23:55, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

German exonyms

Hello,

Thank you for contributing to German exonyms. You added "Österheim" as a German exonym for Esztergom. I personally and also another editor who added a "fact"-tag, have never heard of this name before. Normally "Gran" is used. Do you have a source for "Österheim" - and was it perhaps only used in the early middle ages ? Travelbird 05:16, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I will mark the entry as such. Travelbird 08:25, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I believe that "Österheim" may have been used in the distant past, but it is not common enough to list in the introduction to Esztergom (I was unable to find any references to it using Google Books or Scholar). Olessi 05:25, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Netherlands motto

You deleted the French motto in the Netherlands with the edit summary 'remove nonsense' The motto proper is however in French (not Dutch). This has been discussed on the talk page of the Netherlands in some detail. Hence it is not nonsense but just how it is. Please be a bit more careful in editing when you do not know all relevant elements. Thanks Arnoutf 08:38, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Canvassing

Stop. Read Misplaced Pages:Canvassing. Balcer 05:12, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

You spammed the talk pages of close to a hundred people, putting the validity of the vote outcome in question. I put a notice to that effect in the vote discussion. Please comment there, if you wish. Balcer 05:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

We have Misplaced Pages talk:German-speaking Wikipedians' notice board for announcing this vote, and that annoucement is already there. What you did is clearly spamming, and highly disruptive. Balcer 05:22, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Historical Eastern Germany page

Do you want ot give me a brief summary of what's going on? Kingjeff 05:41, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Messing with Rex' userpage

Why did you do this: ? This was against the express instructions by myself expressed clearly in that same paragraph. It looks very much like a malicious attempt at sneakily sabotaging a legitimate unblock request of a potential opponent in a dispute; which would be, well, beyond just simply vandalism. I'm trying hard to assume good faith here, but I cannot for the life of me think of any reason why you would have done this. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:57, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Canvassing for Talk:Historical eastern Germany

Please don't do anything of this kind again. You can put up a notice in a central place (like the noticeboard or the project talk page, but people won't take opinions that were solicited by talk page spamming seriously. In fact, people might argue that this will invalidate the straw poll. I hope none of the people you contacted will comment. Kusma (討論) 07:32, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I left a comment at Talk:Historical_Eastern_Germany#Requested_move. Can't say I was offended by your "spamming my talk page." Sca 16:05, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Re:Nombre

Close. Please read my userpage for detailed explanation of my nickname.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 22:31, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Vandal

Hi I do not know what you meant on my site. I did not accuse you for being a vandal. Thank you {Fujicolor 03:14, 9 March 2007 (UTC)}

3RR on Danzig

I think Space Cadet is correct. it is Danzig that was used before the horrible events of 1945, Dantzic or the others were used far before that, but were not in common usage I do not believe. it is best to let this little fish go I feel, sometimes users get caught up with their usual adversaries and don't stop to think of what they are reverting. I know it has happened to me many times, from user:Halibutt who when I make spelling corrections as well as change his POV statements into NPOV, he has reverted the whole thing often, notably on battle articles related to the Polenfeldzug.

--Jadger 07:46, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

False accusations of vandalism

Please, think before you accuse other users of vandalism without justification. Recently you made a number of reverts in which you accused User:Space Cadet of vandalism (example). I think these justifications were not justified. The edit wars you two engage in are over a content dispute, not vandalism on his part. I have reverted a number of your changes acccompanied with unwarranted vandalism accusations. Please avoid this kind of behaviour in the future. Vandalism is a very serious offense on Misplaced Pages that could get a user banned, so such accusations should not be made without very good cause. For more about this, read Misplaced Pages:Vandalism. Balcer 03:07, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I have noticed that you have created a potentially inflammatory userbox User:LUCPOL/Userboxes/User schlonzk in the userspace of another user. Are you sure you have permissions from User:LUCPOL to use his space in such a way? Would not it be more logical to create the userbox in your own space? Alex Bakharev 08:00, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

User:83.28.235.97

This IP did exactly one edit (on January 20, 2007). Even if the IP belonged to User:LUCPOL it does not look like an attempt to circumvent a block or an attempt to circumvent the 3RR or something of that sort. Most probably he just forgot to login or a software glitch logged him off. Let assume WP:AGF. I do not see any justification for the {{sockpuppet}} on the userpage of this IP, please do not recreate it again Alex Bakharev 12:01, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

WP:AIV

Someone has created a report on you at WP:AIV about you. Just to inform you. Retiono Virginian 14:42, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

You have been blocked for 48h for excessive revert-warring on Alsace. Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:06, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Explanation: You made 4 edits on 10 March (counting series of subsequent edits as one). Each of them reinstated the contested phrases "sudden and unprovoked annexation" and "still feel that it rightfully belongs to Germany". That's the 3RR violation. Then you continued the same edit war with one more revert on 11 March, with the same content plus reinstating yet more contentious old material. Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:30, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I was reverting Space Cadets vandalism, he kept removing my citations also! And now that experienced editors have clean up that intro it seems really good to me. I will desist reverting it though, if you can assure me that you will stop the intro from being changed to something else. And also, you removed a completely NPOV statement... "Although German is the native language of Alsace, at the beginning of the 21st century, the language most spoken in Alsace was standard French." -- Hrödberäht (gespräch) 17:31, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Your edit to Template:Country data Italy

Please do not remove existing flag aliases from Country_data templates. Your edit to Italy (replacing "old") broke hundreds of pages that replied on this string. Andrwsc 20:30, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but it doesn't matter since you cannot see the image at all... And I even added 2 more anyways. -- Hrödberäht (gespräch) 20:34, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

It most certainly does matter! You don't understand. Many, many, pages used {{flag|Italy|old}}. When you renamed that flag alias to "1861", all those pages broke, because they were expecting "old" to render that flag. It's ok to add new variants to those templates, but don't delete or rename existing ones!!! Andrwsc 20:47, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

You're correct, i do not understand, because even if you use that template its useless since it does not show the image which is supposed to be next to it.-- Hrödberäht (gespräch) 22:50, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, it does for me. What specifically does not work for you?

replace this text with the fragment of wikicode that you are having problems with.

Also, have you started using the "ROY" and "CRO" names yet? I think they would be better as lowercase words instead of uppercase abbreviations that you created. (e.g. "royal", "1861-state", "kingdom", etc.) Our nomenclature within the Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Flag Template project is to use uppercase abbreviations only for standard country codes (e.g. ISO 3166-1 alpha-3, or other well-known abreviations like UK, PRC, USSR, etc.). Thanks, Andrwsc 23:04, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Be ready for ARBCOM

You can't call Brno as Brunn in 1921 in the article about František Graus. German equivalent is in the original Brno article. ≈Tulkolahten≈ 20:33, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Correct english name ???

Here ? German names are not correct english names, I would call you as someone somehow as in the 1939-1945, but I avoid personal attacks and I will report you. ≈Tulkolahten≈ 20:45, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

You perfectly know I mean Mähren and Brünn, leave Zürich there, but stop changing czech names ! ≈Tulkolahten≈ 21:00, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Check Britannica and stop your POV pushing. ≈Tulkolahten≈ 21:17, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Lands of Czech crown were formal member of Holy Roman Empire, they were not ruled by German emperor, hence Germany did not existed in these times. You should know that. Membership in Roman Empire doesn't mean occupation or germanization as obviously you think it was. Bohemia was sovereign and independent until 1620 and the battle of white mountain. ≈Tulkolahten≈ 23:03, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Holy Roman Empire doesn't mean we were Germans or belonged to Germany. Your arrogance is terrible. ≈Tulkolahten≈ 23:05, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Your nationalism is obvious. ≈Tulkolahten≈ 23:23, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 4 days in accordance with Misplaced Pages's blocking policy for 3RR on Brno and edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. John Reaves (talk) 00:01, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

John Reaves (talk) 00:01, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

R9tgokunks (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

HEY HEY HEY! I ONLY REVERTED IT 3 TIMES *

   * 
   *

AND THE USER I REVERTED KEPT REMOVING CONSTRUCTIVE INFORMATION THAT I WAS ADDING! AND THEN WHEN I ADDED A SOURCE HE STILL REVERTED IT!!!

EVEN SO, IF IT IS 3 REVERSIONS AND NO MORE THAT GETS YOU BLOCKED, THEN HE SHOULD BE BLOCKED ALSO!!!!

   * 
   * 
   *

AND IF ITS FOR ADDING "BRUNN" INSTEAD OF BRNO THEN I CAN PUT THE SOURCES THAT I FOUND THEM IN! HE KEPT REVERTING IT BECAUSE HE DIDNT LIKE IT... SEE: AND User_talk:Tulkolahten#Ignorace

Decline reason:

It does look like you were edit warring, just wait for it to end — _InBC 01:10, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

You were not blocked just for this, but also for your continuous edit warring. ≈Tulkolahten≈ 00:17, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I ALREADY KNOW That-- Hrödberäht (gespräch) 00:20, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

R9tgokunks (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I only reverted 3 times....The first time was where i added the information that the user reporting me called "original research".

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Brno&diff=114921934&oldid=114921823 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Brno&diff=114922284&oldid=114921934 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Brno&diff=114923446&oldid=114922977

The user that kept reverting reverting me kept removing constructive information i was adding. Then when i added the source used he still reverted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Brno&diff=next&oldid=114922284 And if it is 3 reversions and no more, that gets a person blocked, then he should be blocked as well...

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Brno&diff=prev&oldid=114921489 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Brno&diff=114921934&oldid=114921823 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Brno&diff=prev&oldid=114922977

The edit warring he referred to in the report(it was in all of his given links on the 3RR report) was where i was adding "Brunn" (The name of Brno before 1918)(it is mentioned as that in my 2 books; Quote "...both my Barnes and Noble Atlas of World History(circa 2006), and my Parragon Atlas of World History(circa 2005) show it as Brünn until the World War I era."See also the Wikisource 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica article: http://en.wikisource.org/1911_Encyclop%C3%A6dia_Britannica/Br%C3%BCnn(see: http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Tulkolahten#Ignorace) , and from things I've seen on Misplaced Pages have mentioned it). I had a feeling he kept reverting it because he didn't like it (see:http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Silesia&diff=114207220&oldid=114182839 )& and he has been blocked once already for 3RR(see: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Tulkolahten)

I wasn't INTENTIONALLY reverting what he had done to start an edit war(only he sees it as an edit war), I was adding the correct information to the articles he reverted.Plus he reverted irrefutable facts such as: the name "Zürich"(which is what it is in english), reverted to "Zurich". Quote:"...check out the article Zurich-oh wait-OOPS actually thats a redirect to the correct name: Zürich..."

This was added by a user to the 3RR discussion:

Quote: "Both editors have participated extensively in edit warring. Tulkolahten has searched for articles containing "Brünn" and removed it. He did that almost with the speed and indifference of a bot (in one minute he managed four different articles at one point). R9tgokunks has followed this track of deletions and reverted these edits. It would be of no use to start a conversation on the talk pages of about 30 articles and Tulkolahten should have started a discussion first. In addition to that, in his name-deleting, Tulkolahten wrongly marked many such edits as "minor", accused R9tgokunks of renaming Czech cities in his AN/I report (when in reality it was him who changed the naming), labelling R9tgokunks's reverts of them as vandalism.Granted, R9tgokunks continued to revert after his block and that shouldn't be supported, but of his edits in the past 24 hours, there are many normal edits among them (if I counted correctly, his reverts are in the slight majority), whereas every edit in the article space of Tulkohlaten in the past 24h is a revert (34 succeeding reverts). Regarding edit warring, Tulkohlaten was just as guilty as him. Regarding this 3RR, both have reverted for three times in the article concerned. But Tulkohlaten, who started to revert, misleadingly reported Rotgokunks' first edit as revert, so it was no 3RR violation. I personally think 24h for each user would be suitable." Sciurinæ 02:47, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You were editwarring, but it takes two for that. I've reduced your block to 48h and have also blocked Tulkolahten for the same duration (see his talk). You two need to talk this naming issue over, calmly, once the block expires; consider getting a third opinion. — Sandstein 06:43, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

R9tgokunks (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The edit warring referred to in the report(it was in all of the given links on the 3RR report) was where i was adding "Brunn" (The name of Brno before 1918)(it is mentioned as that in my 2 books(shown below; Quote "...both my Barnes and Noble Atlas of World History(circa 2006), and my Parragon Atlas of World History(circa 2005) show it as Brünn until the World War I era."

See also: the Wikisource 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica article on "Brünn"(below)

http://en.wikisource.org/1911_Encyclop%C3%A6dia_Britannica/Br%C3%BCnn)
http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Tulkolahten#Ignorace
http://en.wikipedia.org/Image:Europe1328ujabb.jpg (clearly shows it as "Brünn")
http://en.wikipedia.org/Image:Austrian Germans in western Austro-Hungarian Empire.gif (clearly shows it as "Brünn")
http://commons.wikimedia.org/Image:Austria-hungary.png (clearly shows it as "Brünn")
http://en.wikipedia.org/Image:Austria_hungary_1911.jpg (clearly shows it as "Brünn")

This was added by a non-involved user to the 3RR discussion:

The facts are:

It was Brünn when it was ruled by the Holy Roman Empire, the Austrian Empire, and Austria-Hungary, it was officially Brünn until 1918, and well according to the Czech Republic article it was formed in the 9th century(801-900) and wasn't independent until 1918(WWI), and according to history, the first political entity it was ever a part of was in/as the Holy Roman Empire(circa 1050 AD), From 1477-1490 it was under the rule of Hungary for a short time, and the rest of its history it is under the Holy Roman Empire, Austrian Empire(Hapsburg Monarchy sort), and Austria-Hungary, and believe it or not but it was part of the Austrian Empire during the Napoleonic Era! So hmm....

Germanic tribes for 900 years (Boii, Marcomanni, Suevi, Huns) (apprx.500 BC-400 AD)
Mixed Germanic-Slavic-Turkic tribes for 332 years (Avars -Vandals -Huns -Mongols -Bulgars -Magyars ) (400 AD - 732 AD)
Slavo - Ugric tribes for 318 years (732 AD-1050 AD)
Holy Roman Empire(1050-1477; 427 years / 1050-1803; 753 years)
Moravia to Hungarian Empire(1477-1490;13 years)
Moravia to Holy Roman Empire(1490-1803;313 years)
Austrian Empire/Hapsburg Monarchy(1803-1867;64 years)
Austria-Hungary(1867-1918;51 years)
Czechoslovakia(1918-1938;20 years)
Germany (1938-1945;7 years)
- Sudetenland to Nazi Germany(1938;7 years)
- Czechoslovakian Government-in-Exile/Nazi puppet government of Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia (1939-1945;6 years)
Czechoslovakia(1945-1968;23 years)
Czech Socialist(Communist) Republic/Federation of Czechoslovakia(1969-1989;20 years)
Czech Republic/Federation of Czechoslovakia (1989-1993;4 years)
Czech Republic (1993-present(2007);14 years)

Both my Barnes and Noble Atlas of World History(circa 2006), and my Parragon Atlas of World History(circa 2005) show it as "Brünn" until the World War I era(1918), and i have seen it on maps mentioned and linked

Decline reason:

Throwing fact after fact ad infinitum does not preclude the fact that you have edit warred. We don't care about your citations of prominent facts and figures, but we do care that you have been edit warring, plain and simple. Please sit it out, and cite your examples on the relevant talk page. —physicq (c) 23:32, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Request for comment on alleged block evasion

Hello. It has been alleged that you edited as 71.137.204.255 (talk · contribs) on 14 and 15 March 2007, evading your block. Could you please comment on that? Sandstein 10:47, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Although I am interested in if it was R9tgokunks or not, I did not want to report that edit, that comment was a comment to your comments (too many comments, huh). ≈Tulkolahten≈ 11:53, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. As far as I'm concerned, the matter is settled. Please both go to Talk:Brno to find a consensus on how this city should be referred to during the various periods of its history. For instance, try to find historical sources that show what its inhabitants (or rulers) called it in this or that period. If you don't get ahead, try to get other editors involved via WP:RfC or WP:3O. I think we had similar issues with Gdansk/Danzig, Istanbul/Constantinople etc.; maybe you can take a look at how these cases were handled? Best, Sandstein 19:42, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Re:Serious Problems

~~Well, from the looks of it, both of you are bordering on vandalism.~~ I think this is because both of you are using blanket reverts rather than smaller more precise edits. I will readd the unreferenced tags myself, since that is the only part of this that I actually see as not being part of a content dispute. There isn't anything special I can do to help this situation. My suggestion is that you make a request for mediation between you and LUCPOL, they specialize in this kind of situation. --Wildnox (talk) 17:13, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to rephrase my first line, both of you are being somewhat disruptive in this situation. --Wildnox (talk) 17:16, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

motion to close mediation

hello there,

there was a mediation offer quite a while ago concerning the issue of Trentino-South Tyrol. I am happy to announce that the issue has been discussed, voted upon and settled. However the mediation offer still needs to be officially closed. Please take a minute to visit the page Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-10-20 Trentino-South Tyrol and put your signature at the bottom if you agree with the decision, thank you. sincerely Gryffindor 20:30, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

A very important note. This mediation offer concerned the greater overall naming convention to use in this region, not just the name of the region itself. We came up with a very good compromise for the regional name itself. I for one am still looking forward for Lar to help us out. Taalo 21:31, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

wilsonian armenia

Treaty of Sèvres was never ratified. Turkish / Armenian/Russian border was determined by several agreements, then there is Treaty of Lausanne. And is this related to Karabakh? deniz 19:30, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

As far as I know Armenia now recognizes the Turkish borders. If it does not, it is the only country that does not respect Turkish integrity, I am not sure that Armenia has even the right to not recognize the Turkish borders (it was upto Turkey to recognize Armenia or not, and as far I know Turkey was one of the first ones to recognize) and again and again this is not related to Karabakh. Can you please remove that sentence?

And what about Winston Churchill and hating it? Good politicians don't hate, don't love agreements, treaties. Britain did not get everything they wanted (though they eventually got Mousul), that's it. Churchill was a high ranking admiral back then, the defeat at Gallipoli against Ottomans resulted in his demotion, he might have had a personal dislike, as well.

deniz 20:15, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Quote

Please if you don't mind keep discussion about Brno on its talk page only. ≈Tulkolahten≈ 20:56, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

WP Munich

WikiProject Munich has over 20 members now which should make for a good WikiProject. To help organize the project, please put down some ideas at the talk page. Kingjeff 02:33, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Munich Portal

I've started the Munich Portal. Kingjeff 15:47, 23 March 2007 (UTC) Can you maintain the Munich Portal with me? Kingjeff 18:17, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

The main thing right now is just getting it set up. As you can see from the red links, there is still some work to do on this. Kingjeff 18:41, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
If there is one area you can start with, maybe it's the aniversity section. Kingjeff 19:29, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Question

I thought you vandalized because on special:Recentchanges, someone put "Revert vandalism by R9tgokunks" on the edit summary. Han Amos 22:31, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

If you didn't vandalize the page, then User:LUCPOL might have been the one who vandalized the page. Han Amos 22:36, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

User:LUCPOL has admitted that you have vandalized pages, but I don't know about it. You may need to ask the administrator if you don't know whether your edits are vandalism or not. Han Amos 23:16, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I have a question. Are you really going to report me for stalking? According to your edit summary on my talk page, it said you will report me for stalking. I don't remember stalking you. Or is User:LUCPOL the one who is stalking? Han Amos 23:35, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

So User:LUCPOL was stalking you by calling your edits "Vandalism", right? Han Amos 00:35, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Is he mimicing (copying) you? Han Amos 00:49, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Reverts and questionable edits

Hello R9tgkunks. I'm sorry I had to revert a couple of edits by you. I'm not sure what exactly you're up to, but I find many of your contributions confused and poorly judged. Please stop accusing me of "vandalism". Cleaning up behind your edits is not something I enjoy doing.

In detail:

Old Europe: There is no source stating that e.g. the Vatican or Israel have been considered part of "Old Europe". The fact that New Europe contains a similar list doesn't mean we should repeat the same mistake here.
Flag of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation: There's no source saying how the one flag was "derived" from the other. They aren't even particularly similar, except for the fact that they are both blue.
Category:South Tyrol and Netherlands: The category "Germanic culture" is used only as a supercat for other categories that deal specifically with culture-related articles (such as "music of..."); look at its contents to see that articles about whole countries don't normally go there.
Homyel: The exact same transliteration was already stated, except for the acute accent - which is not part of any standard transliteration scheme for Russian or Byelorussian as far as I'm aware
Frisian language: your addition makes no sense there as it doesn't even get displayed near where you want it.
German: Please read Misplaced Pages:Disambiguation to see what entries should or shouldn't be on dab pages. That page was chock full of entries that were either poorly structured, irrelevant, duplicate, or weren't really confusable with the other senses of "German" at all.
Borsa: ditto. Dab pages are not topic lists of vaguely related "see also"'s.
Dauphiné: "Dauphiny" doesn't seem to be particularly archaic, it's still used. Also, it's "seigneurie", not "seigneur" (a "seigneur" is a person, a "seigneurie" is a piece of land).
Tocharian languages: No need for German as yet another Germanic language in that table. Or do we want for people to start adding Italian, Spanish, French, Polish, Czech, Danish, Faroese tomorrow? Besides, several of the German entries are wrong. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:31, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Leonhard Lechner: The English spelling is "Tyrol", not "Tirol", live with it.
Leona: Leona is not a German name. Never heard of it here in Germany. And "Léon" doesn't mean "like a lioness".
Leonard: Please stop adding those huge lists of "see also"'s just for sounding vaguely similar or being somehow remotely related in meaning. This is not what dab pages are for.
Arabic influence on the Spanish language: Glossing "Galicia" as "Gaelicia" makes no sense at all, it is both etymologically wrong and irrelevant in the context of that page. That Lat. "papaver" should be related "to Babel, and babble" is bizarre and of course unsourced.
Lithuanian language: The hypothesis of a Slavic-Baltic unity is a widely accepted view among linguists. "Disputed by many linguists" is hardly correct (and unsourced).
Also please stop randomly changing British to American spellings ("-ise" to "-ize" etc.). On Misplaced Pages both national variants are legitimate; if an article was begun using British spelling this should generally not be changed later.

I could go on and on. I read through your list of contributions and there is hardly an entry I don't want to revert. There were some edits by you that really seemed to border on vandalism. Please be more careful in what you write. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:31, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I completely agree with Fut.Perf.. Please consider to take some time to think how you can best help wikipedia. --Danh 10:37, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

In the wake of Fut.Perf. & Danh, I'm also here to beg u to stop right now your pro-german activities which are a step too far from the line... In addition, I can add to the list made by Fut.Perf., theses articles : Alsace, Strasbourg and a lot of small alsacian cities. Thx user:Paris75000 10:44, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

"Former" German names

I've noticed you have often added "former" before the German names of cities in territories formerly belonging to Germany. Unless you have sources stating the German names are out of date (which some no doubt are), adding "former" seems like original research, which is to be avoided. You have also sometimes sought to clarify in the introduction when names have historically been used. I have raised these issues before at WP:NCGN; there was no support for such actions. The changing of a locality's name should certainly be mentioned in an article, but this should be done in the History section or in a separate Names/Etymology section, not by cluttering up introductions (which should be concise). Olessi 03:04, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Your edit to the Italy article

Please check for vandalism before you make an edit so that your edit is not removed with any vandalism that was there before. Sicilianmandolin 05:41, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Dutch (ethnic group)/ Paul111

Hi R9tgokunks , I don't know if you found for yourself already, but Paul111 is trying to get the article Dutch (ethnic group) deleted. Please make yourself heard and stop him.Thanks.

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Dutch (ethnic group)

Rex 13:11, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

List of former Danish colonies

Hi! You submitted this article to the English Misplaced Pages in German language. Normally these articles would be deleted, but I have translated the article in question. In the future, however, please add a translation request to Misplaced Pages:Translation if you want to have a foreign language article translated. Thank you. --DorisHノート 15:34, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

WP Munich membership

I'm giving WP Munich members a choice of being active members, semi-active members or inactive members. Please sign up for the correct one. Kingjeff 23:56, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

List of best-selling video games

Please discuss at the talk page instead of reverting, thanks. -- ReyBrujo 01:30, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Again

Okay, R9tgokunks, you've come out cleared by the checkuser as far as the sockpuppetry goes, and I apologise for the wrong suspicion I raised. (Coincidences were weird, though.) - That doesn't change my stance with respect to your edits. I do not enjoy having to clean up after you every morning. I am not stalking you nor harassing you, nor am I committing vandalism, and I strongly warn you to stop claiming I am. I politely raised specific objections against specific edits of yours on your talkpage several times (above); you failed to react in any way. Please at least try to enter in a constructive discussion. Fut.Perf. ☼ 05:24, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Alsace

Again... What the hell you have to revert every move on this page... Please stop without explaination. Bye user:Paris75000 20:36, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Sources

Could you please add sources for the edits to rivers that you are making, such as for the Elbe and the Alle? Olessi 00:11, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

“There wasnt anything that i harmfully reverted in that.”

This is your response to my request—which you have chosen to delete—that you stop your reverts of edits on the Wrosław page.

I beg to differ. Your reverts are harmful because you are reverting 1) material that is better (more properly informative and better formulated) than what you replaced it with, and 2) the rendering of the city’s name that is typographically correct (i.e., including the “ł” character) with one that is, though acceptable, less desirable from an accuracy perspective. And finally, you give no explanation for your reverts. If I (we—if you’ll notice, several people have been undoing the same of your reverts for a couple of days now) thought you had a valid reason for your reverts, we might also find them acceptable.

So unless you can give a valid reason for reverting, please stop! Jim_Lockhart 08:38, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Once more: Please leave the Wrocław page alone for a little while. I can’t fathom why you have again changed the introduction: Olessi’s changes are both logical and consistent with other articles of similar nature. Rather than revert repeatedly, I suggest you track his changes so you can learn how it’s done! That doesn’t mean I unconditionally agree with all his changes, but they are neither absolutely wrong nor inconsistent; in short, they are constructive! I’m sure you’re trying to be constructive, too, but I think you need to learn more about editing processes. Regards, Jim_Lockhart 01:48, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

What???

If you are unsure of what to work on, there are several possibilies at Portal:Germany/Things you can do. There are also plenty of things listed at Misplaced Pages:German-speaking Wikipedians' notice board. Olessi 19:30, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Please stop boldening alternate names in introductions. The convention is to only bolden the current name or clearly-established English names. This is a convention that has been carefully developed over the last several years on Misplaced Pages by numerous editors. Using different styles is disruptive to other contributors, as you may well have noticed from French and Polish editors recently. I urge you to reconsider your editing style. Olessi 23:48, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Alsatian cities

Please, yes please, I beg you NOT to see a GERMANFUL world everywhere, here is the ENGLISH Wikipédia... Those city are yet in France, and if someone wanna have the GERMAN version of the article, let him go to the GERMAN Wikipédia.... So if I follow ur mind, why not put the Japanese translation for those village... or the spanish version... I really think that we do not need always a GERMAN translation for those cities' name. THX Bye user:Paris75000 21:53, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Listing the German and Alsatian names of localities can be useful to readers, considering the region's history between France and Germany. There is no need to bold such names, however, nor should the names be included within infoboxes. The majority of readers probably do not even know about interwiki links, and I find it unrealistic to force them elsewhere to learn a simple name. Olessi 23:09, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Your edits to German

I am highly offended by your offhand assessment of my edits as vandalism. Please remain WP:CIVIL. Also, please participate in the talk page discussion to explain your edits. They do not conform to standard style guidelines described at MOS:DAB, and that is turning this article from an effective disambiguation page into a "kitchen sink" of links. Disambiguation pages are intended to help find similarly spelt articles, not serve as a navigation tool for similar concepts. Please understand the difference. Andrwsc 21:23, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Interwiki links on German

I'm not sure what you mean in this edit summary? The interwikilinks are perfectly relevant. For example the interwiki link ] takes you to which is clearly the Italian Misplaced Pages's version of the German dismabiguation page. Gwernol 21:34, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

You are mistaken. Those are not regular links they are interwiki links. These are special links that point to the equivalent page on a different language Misplaced Pages. Interwiki links do not have to have the same words as the disambiguation page. I am going to restore the links. Please do not delete them again or I will block you for disruption. Gwernol 21:44, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Börse

An editor has nominated Börse, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Misplaced Pages is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Börse and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 21:34, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Redirecting the Börse article while an AfD debate is in progress is highly disruptive. The AfD notice specifically instructs you not to remove it. Please respect the AfD process and do not further disrupt Misplaced Pages articles. Gwernol 21:41, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week in accordance with Misplaced Pages's blocking policy for persistent disruption. Please stop. You're welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Gwernol 02:58, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Gwernol 02:58, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

R9tgokunks (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I HAVENT DISRUPTED ANYTHING..... WHAT IS THE MEANING OF THIS????? I HAVE BEEN PEACEFULLY EDITING ARTICLES FOR THE PAST 5 HOURS....AND THEN I AM BLOCKED FOR "DISRUPTION??? I HAVE NOT DONE ANYTHING WRONG...IS ANYONE GOING TO ANSWER ME? GET AN ADMINISTRATOR OVER HERE. IS ANYONE EVEN ON WIKIPEDIA?WHY IS NO ONE HERE? I DEMAND ADMINISTRATOR ATTENTION. I HAVE NOT "DISRUPTED" ANYTHING IN OVER 5 HOURS, AND DESERVE FAIR TREATMENT. LET ALONE IT ONLY BEING ONE ARTICLE: German WHICH WAS ALMOST 6 HOURS AGO.Gwernol PROBABLY BLOCKED ME BECAUSE OF börse AND I WAS TRYING TO IMPROVE THE SITUATION BY ADDING A REDIRECT BUT HE THINKS I INTENTIONALLY REDIRECTED IT TO ANNOY OTHER USERS WHICH IS IMMATURE IN THE FIRST PLACE. OH NOW HE REVERTED MY ADDITIONS TO German, WHICH BY THE WAY WERE ALL ACCEPTABLE PER WP:MOS. CHECK THEM OUT YOURSELVES. I HAVE ALSO BEEN WORKING ON Template:History of English(history) FOR THE PAST 3 HOURS: IS THAT SO DISRUPTIVE?

Decline reason:

Regardless of the blocking circumstances, I can't see any reason to unblock you given how much you are SHOUTING and how volatile your current mood appears to be. I suggest posting {{unblock}} again tomorrow when you have calmed down. John Reaves (talk) 04:14, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

I won't comment on the block, but your latest "additions" to German were in fact deletions, and they were unacceptable deletions. MOS:DAB clearly states that descriptions for each entry are "sentence fragments" that are "sufficient to allow the reader to find the correct link". It does not say that you should have no descrption per entry. Please re-read that page and you'll see that almost every example, except for place names, has a descriptive phrase per entry. This edit follows the MOS guidelines for disambiguation pages nicely. Andrwsc 03:35, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

ADDITIONS/IMPROVEMENTS:

REMOVED "__NOTOC__" SINCE IT DIDNT HAVE ANY SECTION SYNTAX
SPECIFIED THE VAGUE COMMENT: "* ], a nationality" TO "*] of ]" WHICH FITS THE GERMAN LANGUAGE CULTURE AREA OF EUROPAS COUNTRIES
ADDED German cuisine, FINE ISNT IT?
ADDED German Shepherd, FINE ISNT IT?
ADDED German silver, FINE ISNT IT?
ADDED Germanic peoples, FINE ISNT IT?
REMOVED ] SINCE IT DID NOT EXIST
REMOVED ] SINCE IT ONLY HAD ONE DISAMBIG LINK PERTAINING TO GERMANY
REMOVED ", quarter of Sofia" SINCE THAT ISNT RELEVANT, DUE TO THE LINK ALREADY STATING THE COUNTRY IT IS IN

-- Hrödberäht (gespräch) 03:43, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

You neglect to mention that you removed the short descriptive phrase from every person on that list. That wasn't helpful. Andrwsc 03:55, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

IT WASNT AN IMPROVEMENT AND IF I HAD NOT BEEN BLOCKED SO QUICKLY I WOULD NOT HAVE DONT THIS AT THE LAST SECOND: IS ANYONE GOING TO ANSWER ME?....GOD, HAS WIKIPEDIA REALLY DIED?-- Hrödberäht (gespräch) 03:48, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Just so you are clear. I told you quite clearly that removing the interwiki links from the German dismabiguation page was disruption and if you continued to do it you would be blocked . A few hours later, you went ahead and deleted them . You were then blocked for disruption. Gwernol 12:16, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Please do not mark edits such as these as "minor" - they are not, in fact some of them implicate major interpretative changes. They definitely are legitimate content edits and I am not going to revert anything, but please make sure in the future not to mark them as minor and explain your edits using the edit summaries. "bad format" doesn't explain any of the changes you brought. It is misleading for other editors. Cheers! Baristarim 08:15, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

The rationale for your edits to German entirely escapes me. I cannot see any valid reason for removing (a) descriptive text that helps a reader determine which of several possible articles is most relevant to their search, and (b) interwiki links to comparable disambiguation pages in other languages. It seems likely, especially given the page history, that you are intent on disrupting Misplaced Pages to make a point. I am, however, posting here to give you an opportunity to explain your actions and, if there is some reason for your edits of which I am not aware, to indicate what it is. --Russ (talk) 14:29, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

This user is asking that his block be reviewed:

R9tgokunks (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

OK, I am going to try this again. I had been editing peacefully for 5 hours and then all of the sudden...I am blocked for "disruption". It was for my edits on the article German.Gwernol probably also blocked me because of my edits at börse, but I was trying to improve the situation by adding a redirect , which of course now i know actually worsened the situation and he got angry, thinking I added the redirect in an effort to annoy other users. All my edits on German, are in my opinion legitimate per WP:MOS. Further, i was disrupted last night by the block having been working on Template:History of English(history)

ADDITIONS/IMPROVEMENTS (in my opinion) to German:

Removed "__NOTOC__" since it (the article) did not have any section syntax
Specified a vague comment: * ], a nationality to *] of ] which fits the German Language/Culture area of Europes countries
Added German cuisine, I hope thats not against WP:MOS.
Added German Shepherd, I hope thats not against WP:MOS.
Added German silver, I hope thats not against WP:MOS.
Added Germanic peoples, I hope thats not against WP:MOS.
Removed ] since it Did not exist
Removed ] since it 'Only had one disambig link pertaining to Germany
Removed ", quarter of Sofia" since it isn't relevant, due to the link already stating the country it is in
Removed the description links since it seemed irrelevant and, IMHO, a bit POV to have "German singer; Polish immigrant", after all they are all humans in the end.-- Hrödberäht (gespräch) 16:34, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=OK, I am going to try this again. I had been editing peacefully for 5 hours and then all of the sudden...I am blocked for "disruption". It was for my edits on the article ].] probably also blocked me because of my edits at ], but I  was trying to improve the situation by adding a redirect , which of course now i know actually worsened the situation and he got angry, thinking I added the redirect in an effort to annoy other users. All my edits on ], are in my opinion legitimate per ]. Further, i was disrupted last night by the block having been working on ](<small></small>)
:'''ADDITIONS'''/'''IMPROVEMENTS''' (in my opinion) to ]: 
#Removed "__NOTOC__" since it (the article) did not have any section syntax
#Specified a vague comment: ''* ], a nationality'' to ''*] of ]'' which fits the ''German Language/Culture area'' of Europes countries
#Added ], I hope thats not against ].
#Added ], I hope thats not against ].
#Added ], I hope thats not against ].
#Added ], I hope thats not against ].
#Removed ] since it '''Did not exist'''
#Removed ] since it '''Only had one disambig link pertaining to Germany''
#Removed ", quarter of Sofia" since it isn't relevant, due to the link already stating the country it is in
#Removed the description links since it seemed irrelevant and, IMHO, a bit POV to have "German singer; Polish immigrant", after all they are '''all''' humans in the end.-- ] <small>(])</small> 16:34, 8 April 2007 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=OK, I am going to try this again. I had been editing peacefully for 5 hours and then all of the sudden...I am blocked for "disruption". It was for my edits on the article ].] probably also blocked me because of my edits at ], but I  was trying to improve the situation by adding a redirect , which of course now i know actually worsened the situation and he got angry, thinking I added the redirect in an effort to annoy other users. All my edits on ], are in my opinion legitimate per ]. Further, i was disrupted last night by the block having been working on ](<small></small>)
:'''ADDITIONS'''/'''IMPROVEMENTS''' (in my opinion) to ]: 
#Removed "__NOTOC__" since it (the article) did not have any section syntax
#Specified a vague comment: ''* ], a nationality'' to ''*] of ]'' which fits the ''German Language/Culture area'' of Europes countries
#Added ], I hope thats not against ].
#Added ], I hope thats not against ].
#Added ], I hope thats not against ].
#Added ], I hope thats not against ].
#Removed ] since it '''Did not exist'''
#Removed ] since it '''Only had one disambig link pertaining to Germany''
#Removed ", quarter of Sofia" since it isn't relevant, due to the link already stating the country it is in
#Removed the description links since it seemed irrelevant and, IMHO, a bit POV to have "German singer; Polish immigrant", after all they are '''all''' humans in the end.-- ] <small>(])</small> 16:34, 8 April 2007 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=OK, I am going to try this again. I had been editing peacefully for 5 hours and then all of the sudden...I am blocked for "disruption". It was for my edits on the article ].] probably also blocked me because of my edits at ], but I  was trying to improve the situation by adding a redirect , which of course now i know actually worsened the situation and he got angry, thinking I added the redirect in an effort to annoy other users. All my edits on ], are in my opinion legitimate per ]. Further, i was disrupted last night by the block having been working on ](<small></small>)
:'''ADDITIONS'''/'''IMPROVEMENTS''' (in my opinion) to ]: 
#Removed "__NOTOC__" since it (the article) did not have any section syntax
#Specified a vague comment: ''* ], a nationality'' to ''*] of ]'' which fits the ''German Language/Culture area'' of Europes countries
#Added ], I hope thats not against ].
#Added ], I hope thats not against ].
#Added ], I hope thats not against ].
#Added ], I hope thats not against ].
#Removed ] since it '''Did not exist'''
#Removed ] since it '''Only had one disambig link pertaining to Germany''
#Removed ", quarter of Sofia" since it isn't relevant, due to the link already stating the country it is in
#Removed the description links since it seemed irrelevant and, IMHO, a bit POV to have "German singer; Polish immigrant", after all they are '''all''' humans in the end.-- ] <small>(])</small> 16:34, 8 April 2007 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

Warning

I have further improved the article Strasbourg . Be aware of my additions and don't delete them by reverting to your own previous version as you use to do . If you have some changes to make, use the "edit this page" button instead. Now you are warned. RCS 17:25, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Category:

Requests for unblock

Revision as of 17:25, 8 April 2007

Move

Spoken Languages, English is being horribly underrated

WikiProject North Dakota

Please don't overuse the v-word

common translations

Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas revert

(Northern) Kosovo

Vandalism

List of Hungarians

Perhaps you'd be interested

Your edit to Grand Theft Auto: Vice City Stories

Amper?

DL-B HS

Spiders

Servian (disambiguation)

Didn't Have To Rub It In

Mühlhausen

Re: Misinterpretation

Kalm and German

Categorizing german dogs

Vandalism

Re

Sources for Proto-Germanic

Reminder to cite sources

Flags in metropolis article

Re: “A little left out”

Culture of Saint Lucia

Ask for a favor

Early modern english

LUCPOL

Re:User page content - delete ic

Germanic culture

Vandal report

Reply

Conflict resolution

Your recent request for Checkuser

Name calling

Reply

Edit summary

Stettin

Be nice

Enough is enough

Vandalism

Kiarostami: FAC

Strange edits

Alsace

Zabrze

Upper Silesian Coal Basin, Upper Silesian Industry Area and Upper Silesian Metropolitan Union are three distinct entities -- please don't redirect these things to one article

United World

Tag

Sarmatians

Strasbourg

Moving articles

German exonyms

Netherlands motto

Canvassing

Historical Eastern Germany page

Messing with Rex' userpage

Canvassing for Talk:Historical eastern Germany

Re:Nombre

Vandal

3RR on Danzig

False accusations of vandalism

{{User:LUCPOL/Userboxes/User schlonzk}}

User:83.28.235.97

WP:AIV

See also Land, Lane, Lund, Lunde, Luna

Your edit to Template:Country data Italy

Be ready for ARBCOM

Correct english name ???

Blocked

Request for comment on alleged block evasion

Re:Serious Problems

motion to close mediation

wilsonian armenia

Quote

WP Munich

Munich Portal

Question