Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:17, 14 February 2009

Welcome!

Hello, Hodja Nasreddin, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

If you are interested in Russia-related themes, you may want to check out the Russia Portal, particularly the Portal:Russia/New article announcements and Portal:Russia/Russia-related Misplaced Pages notice board. You may even want to add these boards to your watchlist.

Again, welcome! Alex Bakharev 00:12, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration 3RR

Speech freedom in Russia -- Andrey Kuznetsov

Добрый день, Андрей. Извините, что на русском, но так быстрее и проще.

Прежде всего хотел бы извиниться за свои может быть, не всегда корректные действия в прошлом.

Теперь о главном. Прежде всего, хотел бы уверить Вас, что наши цели и задачи в общем и целом совпадают. Также как и Вы, я хочу демократии в России, соблюдения прав и свобод гражданина, свободной прессы.

Мои действия ни в коем случае не являются своего рода идеологической войной и т.п. Однако есть один фактор, который Вы, как житель Соединенных Штатов, возможно не в полной мере представляете себе. Неверно, что любая критика состояния России приведёт к положительному результату. К положительному результату может привести только адекватная критика, неадекватная может и приводит лишь к росту паранойи и негативного имиджа Соединенных Штатов, вызывая своего рода защитную реакцию. В любом случае, должен происходить здоровый обмен мнениями, российские журналисты в целом достаточно адекватны. Вы ведь не владеете парой-тройкой нефтяных компаний, чтобы обогатиться в случае серъезного похолодания русско-американских отношений?

Надеюсь на конструктивное сотрудничество на страницах Википедии.

Евгений.

ellol (talk) 07:53, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Rough translation courtesy GOOGLE TRANSLATE.

Good day, Andrew. Sorry, that the Russian, but it faster and easier.

First of all I would like to apologize for its perhaps not always correct actions in the past.

Now on the home. First of all, I would like to assure you that our goals and objectives generally coincide. Like you, I want democracy in Russia, respect the rights and freedoms of citizens, free press.

My actions in no way is a kind of ideological war, etc. But there is one factor that you, as a resident of the United States may not fully imagine. Is not true that any criticism of the state of Russia will lead to a positive outcome. By the positive result could only lead critic adequate, inadequate and can only lead to increased paranoia and the negative image of the United States, causing a kind of defensive reaction. In any case, should be a healthy exchange of views, Russian journalists generally quite adequate. You do not own a pair-troika oil companies that enriched if honest cold Russian-American relations?

I look forward to constructive cooperation on the pages of Misplaced Pages.

Eugene.

Please remember this is ENGLISH WIKIPEDIA Bobanni (talk) 08:19, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh, what's the matter when it's a personal message? I do not use offensive language nor make any veiled or overt threats. Just I can more natively express my ideas speaking in Russian, I hope Biophys didn't forget that language either. ellol (talk) 08:46, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Like do you know, that "Национализм" and "Nationalism" are different notions in fact? -- it's not that easy. -- sorry. ellol (talk) 08:54, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Or like, Japanese have four different words to say "thank you" in different situations; -- language does matter, in fact. ellol (talk) 09:02, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is not a battleground. Any disputes here have nothing to do with US-Russia relations. I can not make these relations worse, just as you can not make them better. Everything in WP has been already described in other sources. None of us is doing original research or propaganda here.Biophys (talk) 13:17, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok. I just wanted to make it clear that in the end we stand on the common ideological ground. ellol (talk) 14:01, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Fine. I am not sure though what "ideological ground" you are talking about. As about "oil companies", it was not me who dropped down Russian stock market. That was someone else.Biophys (talk) 14:43, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, Misplaced Pages is a battleground. There are plenty ways to describe the same event. For exapmle, compare these two statements: Kennedy was assassinated by Osvald. Other sources state that was done by KGB and Kennedy was assassinated by KGB. Other sources state that Osvald did that alone. Both of them are formally neutral, aren't they? And Misplaced Pages is becoming more and more influential, so it can do relation between countries better or worse. Otherwise, there are no reason to play this game.
Best regards,
--Paul Siebert (talk) 15:31, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Good work

I don't know how you can handle all the crap you get on wikipedia. Keep up the good work. Ostap 05:53, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I can not handle the crap.Biophys (talk) 12:27, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

But you appear to handle it quite well. I have never seen you lose your composure on wikipedia. Ostap 00:06, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

By the way, I think you might be dealing with a sockpuppet above. Ostap 00:19, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Sockpuppet of whom do you think?Biophys (talk) 02:02, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Kostan1 is the latest of User:M.V.E.i.. The evidence is both striking and I'd say quite conclusive, indeed it is posted all over this wiki. Ostap 02:28, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. Do you mean similar English errors and his habit to post all his "achievements" at his user page?Biophys (talk) 03:05, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

It is far more obvious than that. Take for instance, his first edit. this, those who have experience with him know about this.

He edits the same articles, the same subjects, has the same strong POV, and perhaps most obviously of all has all the same spelling errors. He seemed to be doing better with that early on.

And of course this pretty much makes it certain: Kostan1 "By grand-grandfather was a peasent executed by the NKVD in 1930 because of a lie of his neighbour about "anti-Soviet agitation"

MVEi. "Me whose grand-grand-father was a peasent killed in 1930 by the Cheka/NKVD for "anti-soviet agitation" (and that was alie invented by neighbours " Even his family history is the same. I tried to ignore the fact that he has returned (I am starting to feel bad for him and he is not revert warring with me at least) but if he is giving you trouble you might want to report him. Ostap 03:18, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Ostap. I have blocked him Alex Bakharev (talk) 03:34, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Oops. I didn't really want to get him blocked. He seemed to have acted better, even learned from his past blocks. But I guess others have had more experience with him. Ostap 03:42, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Alex was right. He must be blocked per WP policies.Biophys (talk) 03:56, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

And what about User:Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog? He has very similar pattern of edits as indef-blocked User:HanzoHattori (Chechnya, Caucasus, My Lai events, Ninja in popular culture, Iraq) as anyone can see - , . Alæxis_¿question? 09:50, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Yep it is him, I have blocked Captain as well. I proposed on Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Productive_socks to change the bans into the community restrictions. Please contribute Alex Bakharev (talk) 12:01, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I did not see a checkuser report, but the patterns are indeed very similar. I am sure you both knew that the patterns are similar for a long time ago, but decided to react only now for whatever reason...Biophys (talk) 14:37, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh, crap! Did I start this?! Ostap 16:37, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

No, this is not you. Please see my last messages at talk pages.Biophys (talk) 16:43, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

My condolences

I have seen much of the recent situation unfold. I hope you do not leave due to the harassment and intimidation (which was obviously the plan). Please stay and keep editing. Ostap 03:11, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Probably I will, but I have to spend more time at work. Thank you for support!Biophys (talk) 03:15, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Please, after this terrible situation take a short break but come back soon and continue to do the great work you've been doing. We need people like you here! Biruitorul 04:19, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Co-signing.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 07:38, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! It was not really that bad. Such things only make me more combative. Unfortunately, I must reduce my participation here to bare minimum because my work suffers.Biophys (talk) 12:57, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I fully agree with the concerns above. The speculations about your personality, especially those that could have been interpreted as threats of outing, were completely unacceptable. I hope the message sinks in in the minds of your detractors. That said, I suggest you consider following an advise I gave you earlier. If you care about your privacy, you should restrict off-wiki communication, separate the accounts for editing the articles in the field of your profession and the article on general historic topics, and carefully think before posting anything to talk pages. For example, outlandish remarks like this in public fora are completely outrageous. Please take my advise close to your heart. --Irpen 15:21, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I will now think more carefully. As about remark you cited, I believe it is completely appropriate and precisely on the subject/content of an article. As about my identity, an experienced WP administrator can establish it in ten minutes, simply based on history and content of my edits, and I know this perfectly well (I am not going to tell the recipe though since it can be used to trace other users). Yet, I want to remain anonymous in WP for a variety of reasons. Biophys (talk) 15:44, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad you plan to stick around. I've seen the list of all the articles you've created and you've done even more productive work than I previously thought. If you're too occupied with work take a break for as long as necessary. I've been doing the same the past month. As for the kiddy trolls you'll encounter while editing political subjects, remember that most of them are probably teens in their early years. One thing I've learned from my previous troubled editing here is that wiki policies can either be your worst enemy or your best friend. Cheers. Grey Fox (talk) 02:17, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Right. BTW, if you want to tell something to an administrator, you should use his talk page, not a talk page of another user. Real kiddy trolls are mostly doing vandalism. Those you are talking about can be young, but directed by certain older people.Biophys (talk) 03:07, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

No, Biophys, I think you are wrong. This is much simpler. Our "best friend" turned out to be a foreign resident with no background in the Soviet Union due to his age as he himself once confessed. Colchicum (talk) 15:26, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Confessed where? You do not mean Grey Fox, right?Biophys (talk) 15:35, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I mean M. Colchicum (talk) 15:38, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Agree.Biophys (talk) 17:02, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

My advice to you is edit more with an open mind, there seem to be a lot of editors with the Idee fixe that everything Russia does is good, but I got the idea that you have the Idee fixe that everything that Russia does is bad and will only get worse (for example your claim that Krim will soon be attacked by Russia lacks a smoking gun). We need people like you to control the Putin-fan club but I don't want to see wikipedia turning into the Putin hate club. I will try to get rid of my Idee fixe that everything Yulia Tymoshenko does is great.... naaaa too late.... Mariah-Yulia (talk) 21:21, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! But you got me wrong. I do not hate anyone, including even FSB, and I edited very little article Putin. Please see epigraph at my user page. That is what I really feel. And yes, I am well aware of the danger of Idee fixe - as a scientific worker. I study the subject before making any claims.Biophys (talk) 21:35, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Miyokan has been community banned. Grey Fox (talk) 23:05, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

If you feel threatened

Biophys, if you feel threatened that you are being outed, I strongly advise you to invoke RtV at this account rather than go out of your way to seek the resolution of this problem. You can then return to editing under a new account name. Additionally, if you plan to edit topics in your professional field of speciality AND articles on unrelated to your RL profession political issues, you can do it from different undisclosed accounts as long as you never edit the same article from two accounts and do not vote with both in surveys.

I am not sure you are being outed indeed, but if this is true, this is very unfortunate. Several editors in the past fell victim of their stalkers. I also recommend that if you insist on editing privately, to avoid email communication and any talk page comments or usernames that would allow to suggest your RL background like profession place of origin, college, etc. I don't make such an effort myself but I realize that individual circumstances may be different from person to person. --Irpen 18:20, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion, but I have a problem with RtV policy. It tells: "The "right to vanish" is not a "right to a fresh start" under a new identity. Vanishing means that the individual, not the account, is vanishing. There is no coming back for that individual.". I have no intention of leaving WP forever, at least right now. Also Alex apparently deleted whole my talk page. Was it really necessary? Could he only delete certain threads?Biophys (talk) 18:30, 15 September 2008 (UTC).

I see your page is restored. You do not need to read RtV literally. As long as what you are doing would seem reasonable to most reasonable people, you can do it. This is how the WP works. Abandon this account and start editing from a different one if you feel this account is being compromised. I am not aware of any editing restrictions on you. So, you don't even need to notify any admins of your actions. For better privacy it may also help to disable your email. No one but yourself can make these choices for you. --Irpen 18:34, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Info for yourself

I must say that the lack of WP:AGF in regards to my edits is not a good thing. At the bottom of Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Biophys, you will see information which has been placed by myself on edits and/or merges performed by myself, which have been undone by yourself. Read the entire lot please, and especially take note of the very last part. I will let what I have written speak for me; the rest is up to you. Cheers, --Russavia 03:44, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

I can see that you are a productive editor: . I suggested you peace. OK? Biophys (talk) 07:07, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

User:Russavia

I've long been wondering about this editor in the aspect: who is really behind this nick? I mean, it cannot possibly be just one normal person. I've looked up his recent edits: he appears to have been at it (i mean editing here) for no less than 20 hours without a respite, his principal task obviously being whitewashing any "compromising material" in Russia-related articles. And he does it quite professionally in every sense, including the obvious lack of genuine interest in the end result, just doing his bit and time. It appears to me to be a mere a proxy for a group of ...(do not want to speculate). And this kind of thing must be illegal here, i assume. I am writing to you as i am not really familiar with the En WP system: it differs quite a bit from the Russian one. On the latter, most issues that require admins' intervention can be raised on ru:ВП:ЗКА, and there does not seem to be an equivalent page here?Muscovite99 (talk) 22:05, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed the same. This is WP:ANI link and look at links provided there. But you must study this first, and this is only a part of the story (excluding history of his first block, his pursuit of FaysalF, his recent talk with Jimbo and arbitrators, and his other recent activities).Biophys (talk) 23:21, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. It is a bit funny that the interwiki link on the ru:ВП:ЗКА goes elsewhere. As to the main subject, i do not really think anything can be done administratively (unless he is provoked to violate 3RR, which seems to be easy). It is just that the case seems pretty bizarre to me. Look, if there were several persons behind this thing, what practical purpose would be served in using the same account? In fact, it is apparently counter-productive, as the sole account can easily get blocked as it has been. I had been, by and lage, away from the En WP since last spring. I haven't the slightest doubt that the RF agencies (most likely the Foreign Ministry, i should think) had been tasked to "create a positive image of Russia globally" -- it was, in fact, officially announced by Putin some 3 years ago -- including through this resource which has become so influential due to the fact that Google provides links hereto among the top hits on its research findings list. But what struck me now (as opposed to about a year ago) is that back then there were a handful of editors pursuing this task (it is easy to see if you look up the history page of Putin from last winter). Now, we have just one left (there might have been some budget cuts due to the crisis -- no jokes), but he is unnaturally active. It is just curious, after all. Come to think of it, we need to find some RF government decisions on this "positive image" thing and put it in Putinism (ha! i keep speaking in puns to-night).Muscovite99 (talk) 00:16, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but I have to disagree. I know the people, and everyone is here. Please note that article Putin is not good or neutral. Look better at the history of Web brigades - I can not edit there; and I can not edit any Russian government-related pages, even those on human rights. Also look at the history of 2008 South Ossetian war - even the title is completely misleading - it is impossible to change the title (this should be Russian-Georgian war), much less improve the content. One can not even touch Holodomor, and so on. No, this is not what you think. Everything is much worse than it was a couple of years ago. Few to none people edit seriously on the modern Russia-related political subjects: I am not doing anything after being outed and stalked by several users; HanzoHattori was community banned after having a psychological breakdown; Colchicum is not really active; several good users from Eastern Europe stopped editing after being harassed by other users or unfairly treated by administrators. Even worse, the entire English WP seems to be in a state of meltdown: old ArbCom was constantly attacked (I have never seen anything like that before), and I have huge concerns about new ArbCom. As about Russavia, he was doing mostly technical edits, prior to paying attention to me after the beginning of Georgian war.Biophys (talk) 04:16, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

• You are most likely right. I am not as familiar with this place as you are. Then, i have never been as active as you or many others. Enjoy my talk with Rssavia on his talk page. I am now indeed a very short distance from being totally banned from the RuWP, ostensibly for articles such as ru:Крещение Руси, which of course is a mere pretext; but i think i have made it very plain that their actions are shown as totally against the basic WP Policies.Muscovite99 (talk) 19:07, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Please note, that discussion and accusations of other people being in the employ of Russian security services and the like was found by the WP:ARBCOM to be unhelpful. And yes, I did tell Muscovite what I did on my talk page, because due to it being yourself Biophys walking a very thin line by making these veiled accusations against myself and other editors. There are no MFA/MVD/FSB/KGB/etc agents on Misplaced Pages, as per Arbcom's findings, and as Arbcom's findings, it was also said that continuing such accusations are disruptive and do nothing for creating a harmonious environment on WP. The correct course of action would have been to tell Muscovite about the Arbcom's findings of fact, and encourage him to drop such things in the future, instead of directing him to something that was proven to be untrue. Now, I realise that this will be removed without a response, but I will note that you have been reminded about such things if the need should arise. Thank you, --Russavia 09:19, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

power vertical

Was this term (властная вертикаль) dwelt upon anywhere here?Muscovite99 (talk) 19:23, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

See redirect Power vertical (possibly an incorrect one).Biophys (talk) 01:52, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Please pay attention: Russavia removed references from this article, just after my reply to you.Biophys (talk) 02:33, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I see , .Biophys (talk) 17:42, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

• And it looks like Jacob Peters (see his socks,and his case) is back.Biophys (talk) 00:13, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for arbitration/SemBubenny/Evidence

Please see the above. Cheers, Tiptoety 21:49, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know. I replied.Biophys (talk) 23:54, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Image for Putinism

You know what i have been thinking: could we use, as some have suggested, a photo of a cover of Politkovskaya's book "Putin's Russia"? I am just very bad at Commons. What would you say?Muscovite99 (talk) 08:20, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

I have already removed the photo, and have reminded Muscovite on our policies, regarding WP:COPYVIO and WP:NFCC. A cover of the book can be used only to illustrate the article of the book in question, not on such a topic. People have suggested a simply portrait photo, but this does not seem to be within Muscovite's desire, to quote him, to paint the "most grotesque" article possible. If I were yourself Biophys, I explain to Muscovite that we are not here to advocate but to build an encyclopaedia, and just like on ru:wiki, such aggressive POV-pushing and deliberately creating WP:BATTLE condition is not tolerated here on en:wiki, and is in fact the subject of discretionary sanctions. Perhaps you can get this through to him, where others can't. --Russavia 09:23, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

• • How come? It was you who downloaded this image; now you claim it to be a copyright violation; and you accuse another user of WP:BATTLE. I think this is outrageous. Could you please leave me and other users alone?Biophys (talk) 17:05, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

It is obvious that neither of you are familiar with WP:COPYVIO and WP:NFCC. I am very familiar with them. I suggest you read these policies, and keep them in mind. That is all. --Russavia 10:51, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

FYI

You were mentioned and thanked by Greg in his final remark (I just found about it today by accident). Read his post here.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:46, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I agree with almost everything he said. It is pity. One more good person has been chased away.Biophys (talk) 01:22, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Phone call to Putin

Hi Biophys. It has been brought to my attention on my talk page that you are currently engaged in a edit war at the above article. After reviewing the page history it is blatantly apparent that both you and Igny are once again reverting one another. Now, two things, while I do not condone Igny's behavior any more than yours he does appear to have consensus on his side, consensus you should respect. Second, I really do not want to see you blocked, and as of right now I could have easily chosen to do so instead of leaving you this message, so please until consensus says otherwise respect the decision brought upon on the talk page and stop edit warring. Thanks, Tiptoety 05:34, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I am not sure what consensus you are talking about. It was indeed consensus to keep this article, according to official closing by a wikipedia administrator. Now this article has been effectively deleted by User:Igny on a ground that it should be merged with another article about a criminal case. But the criminal case and a neologism are obviously completely different things. So, this is actually Igny who acts against the rules.Biophys (talk) 23:30, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Is it so hard to understand that the article is being kept only under a different name? (Igny (talk) 23:51, 13 February 2009 (UTC))

Is it so hard to understand that a criminal case and a neologism/expression are completely different things? The article about the neologism/expression has been effectively deleted by you.Biophys (talk) 23:55, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Weren't the neologism eSStonia and Anti-Estonian sentiment (which is, umm, not a neologism) two completely different things at the time of your merge vote here? (Igny (talk) 23:59, 13 February 2009 (UTC))

But how this is relevant to article Phone call to Putin?Biophys (talk) 00:26, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

(reindent) It is not only relevant, it is the same thing. (Igny (talk) 00:44, 14 February 2009 (UTC))

• Fine. Probably I have to be more actively involved in debates.Biophys (talk) 16:16, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

  The consensus I was referring to is here. Please understand that AfD is simply to discuss a possible deletion of the article (as in the technical feature), but is not there to discuss its other merits. As such, the AfD decided the article should be kept but does not provide consensus on whether or not to merge/redirect it. The consensus I liked above does and it is rather clear that a merge is appropriate. Cheers, Tiptoety 23:17, 14 February 2009 (UTC)