User talk:Kusma: Difference between revisions

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

Revision as of 10:31, 13 December 2006 editAgathoclea (talk \| contribs)Administrators41,372 edits →217.230.xxx.xxx: at the moment they got bored← Previous edit		Revision as of 10:32, 13 December 2006 edit undoAgathoclea (talk \| contribs)Administrators41,372 editsm →217.230.xxx.xxx: spNext edit →
Line 254:		Line 254:
	::Not static, but in this case very consistant (Although the AFD also has a 85.xxx IP contributing). My theory so far goes that a kid (or a group of kids) want to see their names and strangely enaugh the name of one of their teachers to be found in Misplaced Pages. The reallife evidence matches the same area as the town articles he/they have been editing. I am at the stage where I am about to put an entry on the long-term vandalism page I am just mulling over what header to give it. I'd be tempted to call it ''X the namevandal'' where X would be the name the vandal signed with in the AfD, which is the closest to a username we have. Should that be his real name though I am wondering if that would be a breach of privacy. On the other hand using any of the names used in the vandalism could be referring to an innocent bystander (classmates/teachers). So I am at a bit of a quandry as to how to proceed. ] 20:22, 10 December 2006 (UTC)		::Not static, but in this case very consistant (Although the AFD also has a 85.xxx IP contributing). My theory so far goes that a kid (or a group of kids) want to see their names and strangely enaugh the name of one of their teachers to be found in Misplaced Pages. The reallife evidence matches the same area as the town articles he/they have been editing. I am at the stage where I am about to put an entry on the long-term vandalism page I am just mulling over what header to give it. I'd be tempted to call it ''X the namevandal'' where X would be the name the vandal signed with in the AfD, which is the closest to a username we have. Should that be his real name though I am wondering if that would be a breach of privacy. On the other hand using any of the names used in the vandalism could be referring to an innocent bystander (classmates/teachers). So I am at a bit of a quandry as to how to proceed. ] 20:22, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
	:::I would suggest a more generic name, avoiding privacy concerns. Our LTA page should not be what comes up if you google the name. "German football name vandal", perhaps? Did you see the edit of your dewiki userpage, by the way? ] ] 10:02, 11 December 2006 (UTC)		:::I would suggest a more generic name, avoiding privacy concerns. Our LTA page should not be what comes up if you google the name. "German football name vandal", perhaps? Did you see the edit of your dewiki userpage, by the way? ] ] 10:02, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
	::::Lots of efforts they get up to. It looks though, that at the moment they got bored of adding the same old fakes as well as they already attracted enaugh attention so that the articles they targeted are watched more. So I will leave it as it is at the ~~meoment~~. Maybe over the holidays I'll go back and crosscheck some of the edits if we overlooked something. ] 10:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC)		::::Lots of efforts they get up to. It looks though, that at the moment they got bored of adding the same old fakes as well as they already attracted enaugh attention so that the articles they targeted are watched more. So I will leave it as it is at the moment. Maybe over the holidays I'll go back and crosscheck some of the edits if we overlooked something. ] 10:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

	== "plexiglass" ==		== "plexiglass" ==

Revision as of 10:32, 13 December 2006

Archives

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Please click here to leave me a message.
If I don't reply here, I reply on your talk page.
If I don't reply on your talk page, I reply here.

admin

How do you become an administrator?--Pediaguy16 02:22, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

See WP:RFA for the process and WP:GRFA for some insight into it. Kusma (討論) 06:59, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Untitled comment

That's only your think.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jjhcap99 (talk • contribs) 15:53, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

You mean the templates? I have nominated them for deletion to see what other think. Are you by any chance related to Akanemoto? You both seem to like adding many not-very-useful templates to country articles. Kusma (討論) 15:56, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Kyffhäuser

OK, I've enterd a text for Kyffhäuser monument. Take a look and let me know what you think. Obviously, just copying the photo section from the German page didn't work. Sca 23:44, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, it's just a translation of the German entry, with a little bit of general knowledge thrown in. Not sure where to put the "German" tag or what to put in it.

The bit about Barbarossa looking like he just woke up is from the German article, but from the pic, I'd say he looks more like he's got indigestion! :-) If I knew more about monument sculptures I could say something like, it's an example of 19th Century bombastic monument style, or Wilhelminan monumentalism, but I'm not qualified for that. I do have a book called From Monuments to Traces — I'll check to see if it has anything about Kyffhäuser in it. Sca 17:23, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

So, I added a bit from that book and added the book to the "further reading" section.

BTW, how do you get "monument" to capitalize in the title line? Sca 18:09, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Using the "move" button, but it seems Olessi already did that. Kusma (討論) 12:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

84.24.8.251

Hello Kusma, I reverted (diff) a spam link to an external website that was added by an anonymous user with IP 84.24.8.251. I see that you already placed a blacklist warning on User_talk:84.24.8.251. --Einemnet 18:52, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll reblock the user if I see him spamming again. Kusma (討論) 12:51, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Are you the admin for Terry Crews page?

I placed a very nice picture of Mr. Terry Crews on his page and now it is gone. Is this not allowed? Was there some question about the authenticity of the picture? I looked for some explaination but did not see one.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dnaposse (talk • contribs) 19:27, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

a small request

Please note that this is only a request from a fellow user and in no way reflects compulsion on your part, nor wikipedia policy. I would be very happy if you would refrain from using phrases such as "killing with fire." I have noticed recently that there is a very adversarial nature about the project, and I am doing my best to avoid getting caught up in it, as well as to prevent its spreading. Instead of "killing foo with fire," you might consider just linking to the discussion where said foo was "killed." Does that make sense? If I'm out of my gourd, please tell me. Thanks, ... aa:talk 09:00, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I think I have only used this expression once, in an obviously ironic situation. I prefer "delete" over "kill". Kusma (討論) 12:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Disruptive person

Kusma, as you're an admin., there's an anon. user at User talk:131.104.218.46 who's been arguing in broken English with Jadger and now is threatening an edit war over Recovered Territories. This anon. seems very disruptive. Also, another anon. placed the following on my talk page:

Hello Sca Hello Jadger, I also came across this 131. person and what seems to be a twin , named Serafin, in the German wiki (Johann Dzierzon) listed as Aserafin. There the person(s) are doing the same exact aggressive POV and personal attacks as on EN wiki. They/he were stopped. Since then this twin team 131. and Serafin continue at En wiki, such as at Jan Dzierzon. If possible, please take a look at the discussions too. Thanks. Labbas

("Labbas" is a misspelling of Labas, the Lithuanian form of Hello.)

Note: Kusma, please have a look at Andrew Serafin (aserafin in DE wiki) and 131. as well, sample Jan Dzierzon and discussions. By the way, Labbas is not a misspelling.- Greetings Labbas 4 December 2006

Sca 14:59, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

There doesn't seem to be much do to yet - all I have seen so far is a POV edit war about what was "taken" and what was "recovered" at Recovered Territories (usually, in situations like this, both is true, but both statements are taken as expressing a POV that implies "correct" present-day ownership). If the user calls Jadger a revisionist again, a {{subst:npa}} is probably in order, though. Kusma (討論) 16:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

The German Misplaced Pages has blocked him for revert warring. I've put the page on my watchlist; Olessi's recent edits seem quite reasonable. Let's see whether he'll revert them... Kusma (討論) 19:44, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Contested WP:PRODs

Please do not re-add a PROD tag after it has been removed. Once the tag has been removed (for any reason other than blanking vandalism), the page should go to WP:AFD as a contested WP:PROD. Thank you, Kusma (討論) 13:55, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Apologies. It was a quick reaction to the prod being removed with no edit summary. I see at WP:PROD#Conflicts that even in that case the prod should not be restored. It won't happen again. :) --Brad Beattie (talk) 15:09, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 4th.

The Misplaced Pages Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 2, Issue 49	4 December 2006	About the Signpost

Arbitration Committee elections open	The Seigenthaler incident: One year later
Wikimedia celebrates Commons milestone, plans fundraiser	Misplaced Pages wins award in one country, reported blocked in another
News and notes: Steward elections continue, milestones	Misplaced Pages in the News
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

DYK

On December 5, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article St. Stephan Mainz, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for keeping an eye for German DYKs KusmaBlnguyen (bananabucket) 07:47, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Re:Finding new Poland-related articles

Thanks for the tip!--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 16:26, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Keeping fingers crossed we get the bot :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 21:41, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Business in the Community

You deleted the above page as spam (which it was)

I'd seen it when looking through New Pages, and feel that although it was spam, this organisation does warrant a page, any chance you could copy the deleted page into a subpage of my user-page so I can de-spam it? Cheers, Davidprior 20:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Your input is requested

Your input would be appreciated at this Request for Comments. Kelly Martin (talk) 17:15, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

The deletion of Night Sun

Hello! You just deleted Night Sun, and as messy as the article was, it didn't fail WP:MUSIC, since it had a member that went on to be in another notable band. I think the article would have been okay, it just needed a cleanup. --Lijnema 22:29, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I think the correct way to clean up this article is a complete rewrite, which in my experience is more likely to happen from a red link than from a bad article. The only information that would have survived after cleanup is the names of the band members and of the album, all of which were unreferenced. If you want to work on this article, I can userfy it to a user subpage of yours, but it should not be kept in article space and thrown on the one-year backlogged cleanup pile. Kusma (討論) 22:34, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Sure, I wouldn't mind working on it in my userspace. I don't think I've written anything I don't really know anything about before, but I'm willing to give it a shot (I should be able to find sources, and if I can't the problem is solved as well ;). Thanks! --Lijnema 22:37, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll see what I can do with it. Fingers crossed! --Lijnema 22:43, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I Do Not Have All The Details

And I have no desire to get involved, yet I hae noticed that User:Arbiteroftruth and User:Universalgenius and I think User:Aquarelle are having edit wars that have spanned onto 3 talk pages (two of which aren't any of their's). Not sure what needs to be done but I think it should be taken care of quickly. -WarthogDemon 09:13, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't have full details either, but I don't think anything beyond warning people against calling each others vandals needs to be done to the editors right now. Perhaps the page might need to be protected if edit warring continues. Kusma (討論) 09:24, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Oddly enough, it seems these people constantly check their histories. (At one point I tried to revert some large messy accusations.) Sorry to have brought this onto your page now. >_< -WarthogDemon 09:26, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually, NOT oddly enough . . . I do that too. Though not for this. -WarthogDemon 09:27, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm getting tired of this already. I have protected the article. Kusma (討論) 09:32, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I apologize if I've gotten you unwillingly involved in this. I shall now withdraw, log off, and catch some shuteye lest I find myself involved. I nearly fell into an edit-war a few days ago and I've no desire to get into this one... -WarthogDemon 09:39, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism?

Doesn't malicious editing and incessent deletion of certain texts from pages construe as vandalism? Universalgenius has been reverting articles to his favor, despite the fact that consensus has been reached in certain matters. That IS vandalism. Arbiteroftruth 09:24, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Looks like a content dispute to me. He can be blocked for disruptive edit warring, but not for vandalism. Kusma (討論) 09:26, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Block him away then! He needs a lesson! If Aquarelle or me gets blocked, what kind of message are we sending to Wiki editors? Arbiteroftruth 09:27, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

The message is "Edit warring is bad, no matter who is right". Kusma (討論) 09:29, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, at least protest France 24. Arbiteroftruth 09:32, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I have done that already. Did I choose the wrong version? Kusma (討論) 09:34, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

New developments. Vandal Universalgenius called both me and Aquarelle stupid and childish, while he touts his NPA rules like a evangelical priest. Ban this vandal please. Arbiteroftruth 09:37, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Is he vandalizing, or is he making personal attacks, or is he making personal attacks by calling other people vandals as you are? I think it is time for the lot of you to calm down and concentrate on something more useful (like, analyze what the content dispute is about) than getting people blocked. Kusma (討論) 09:42, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Universalgenius has reposted the massive amount of information that you just deleted from the France 24 talk page. --Aquarelle 10:02, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the talk page. How do we go about resolving this dispute so that the article can be reopened for editing ? --Aquarelle 10:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Try to state on the talk page what the dispute is about, without name-calling, and if parties seem to agree to stop edit warring about this conflict, the article can be unprotected. The most necessary thing is that everybody has to calm down a bit. Kusma (討論) 10:08, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I think you can understand my frusteration with this particular user (but please keep in mind that I haven't called him names), especially after seeing him in action, reverting the changes you made to the France 24 discussion form. --Aquarelle 10:11, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

very likley User:Enlighter1 -- Agathoclea 13:41, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, thanks! Kusma (討論) 13:52, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about that. Netsnipe and I lifted the block on Enlighter1's main IP address yesterday because of a requested unblock. I've reinstated the block, this time indefinitely. Mackensen (talk) 14:09, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Very good. Thank you for checking! Kusma (討論) 14:25, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Adminship

thank you very much. I am very busy at the moment, so waiting until after the 16th would be a good idea, so I have the time to answer any questions that are fired at myself. I will most likely end up dealing with cases like Enlighter or the Florian Rosenberg vandal so I also need some guidance as to how to deal with those. Agathoclea 14:08, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good! I'll have something prepared by the 16th, if you'll accept me as nominator. I don't know if I'm the right person to tell you about dealing with troll socks, as you can see from my naive "this is a content dispute" answer to the mess above. I should have followed my instincts and blocked indefinitely right away after I had seen the trolling about the Jimbo pictures at the fair use templates... Well, he's blocked now. Happy editing, Kusma (討論) 14:11, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Brilliant. Well getting the balance right between WP:AGF and seeing a longterm pattern of abuse is where I have to be carefull. Agathoclea 14:21, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Did you know?

Did you know? was updated. On 7 December, 2006, a fact from the article Kyffhäuser Monument, which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--GeeJo ⁄_(c) • 15:58, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Middlebury

Kusma, I would beg to differ. You have a rather odd understanding of slang.

Are you responding to complaints from the Middlebury administration? I am trying to add pertinent information about the campus culture to the entry. Currently, the page is nothing more than a santatised advertisement for Middlebury College.

A quick survey of Middlebury students would confrim that the hippies do trip on shrooms and the rich kids do blow aderol. This is the prevailing perception of the campus culture. Of course, who outside of Middlebury would know that because you keep removing any unsavory information from the wikipedia entry.

Misplaced Pages is supposed to be more than just a advertising tool for Middlebury College. Middlebury College does not own the Middlebury College entry. Unless of course they are paying you to keep "their" entry pristine.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Petitepassionz (talk • contribs) 19:01, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

3nd AFD nom for List of Battlefield 1942 mods

You may be interested in the List of Battlefield 1942 mods AFD. Bfelite 14:07, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Question regarding one of the deleted article

I am wondering if it is possible to recover the unchallenged-deletion article. I like to try to re-maintain the article. Article in question is ALSong, deleted at Oct. 31th 5:51 UTC. Thank you. +-- Dooly00000 (talk · contribs · count) 23:01, 07 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it meets WP:SOFTWARE, but have restored the article (and not yet listed it at WP:AFD to give you some time with it). Happy editing, Kusma (討論) 23:08, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. +-- dooly00000 (talk · contribs · count) 14:13, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Tag wrongly

I recieved your message and I noticed you didn't delete the articles. Was that because you don't believe they meet the criteria or because I tagged them wrongly? Alan.ca 07:55, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

No, I'm not incrediby partial to them. I was flying through pretty quickly as my first spin on new page patrol. I admitedly outpaced myself and went too far. Thanks for the notice. Alan.ca 08:05, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Help with copyright dispute

I'm having trouble figuring out how to dispute an image being used in an article that I know is copywritten not for free use by the copyright holder. How do I dispute the image? Further, we found a free use version, but someone keeps replacing the better looking copywritten version in its place.Alan.ca 09:16, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

The image is Image:Hamiltoncoa.jpg. I had spoken with my city government, their link and they had advised this image, the one on their web site, is not for free usage. There is no statement to that effect on the link I included so I'm not sure what to do. Please advise. Alan.ca 09:20, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

As the image was apparently created in 2001, any rendering of it, also Image:Hamiltoncoatofarms.gif might fall under copyright as a derivative work of the original coat of arms. Therefore, I think we can only use either of these images under fair use, for which the article about the city should at least mention, if not discuss, the coat of arms to provide a decent fair use rationale. I don't know whether it makes more sense to use the GIF or the JPG rendering (from a copyright POV). I suggest you ask at Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. Sorry that I can't be of more assistance, Kusma (討論) 12:04, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Welcomes

Hi! thanks for the info, I was unaware of this. I am placing the welcomes vi WP:VP as they appear on my recent changes list. the template used is {{Anonwelcomeg}} Could you advise what needs to be changes please? Richard Harvey 14:44, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the template work, That should automatically change the welcomes I have done. The greeting is supposed to read as an anonymous welcome, not a welcome to an anonymous user, which can be placed on new Registered users, or Anon IP's alike, for those editors, who do not wish to put their username on the template. Not all VP users are administrators, some may be unable to supply sufficient information when requested for help. This way the new user is encouraged to use the Helpme template instead. Richard Harvey 14:57, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

No problem I will do that now. The Anonymous welcome line was being generated from the Custombuttons.txt file, inside VandalProof, I have now corrected that. Sorry for the confusion. Richard Harvey 15:06, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

All welcomes since template substitution are now amended! Richard Harvey 15:57, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Did you know?

On 8 December, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Philipp Jenninger, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--GeeJo ⁄_(c) • 16:40, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Bonn Minster

Thank you for notifying the WikiProject Germany about the stub. I signed up for the WikiProject I'm trying to use the minimal information that I can find to turn the article into an informative one, but the most informative article that I've been able to find is the German Misplaced Pages's "Bonner Münster" article. My German is pretty weak so someone with a higher degree of fluency in German should probably take a stab at translating. -- Sapphire 06:24, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Article for Deletion

Hi Kusma,

This is clearly an attack page and needs to be removed immediately in accordance with the Attack Page Protocol. It is a clear violation of Misplaced Pages Policy to reveal the real names of WP Users. Moreover, it is libelous and makes WP liable for defaming the subject.

Misplaced Pages is not a forum for people to anonomously defame people and reveal their personal information.

Please follow WP Protocol that clearly states that this page should be removed. Moreover, the Oversight Protocol lists 1) Revealing identities of pseudonymous or anonymous individuals, and 2) Adding potentially libellous information when the subject has specifically asked for the information to be expunged from the history as prohibited on Misplaced Pages.

Please understand that I am not asking you to edit the page. Please do not edit it, as editing it will destroy the context of my comments. Please just speedy delete that page in accordance with Attack Page Protocol.

Thank you,

Matses —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Matses (talk • contribs) 15:04, 9 December 2006 (UTC).

I don't have the oversight privilege. I think we should let the AfD process run its course and then blank the discussion page so the dispute won't show up on Google. Kusma (討論) 18:17, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Sasori image

Why do you delete my image? I want to know the reason. Causesobad 14:12, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I assume you are talking about Image:Sasori2.jpg, originally uploaded by Dante Shamest. It was uploaded under a claim of Fair use, but not used in any articles for more than a week. We do not keep non-free images around unless we use them in articles, so I deleted it per speedy deletion rule I5. Kusma (討論) 14:54, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

217.230.xxx.xxx

The namevandalism we were communicating on earlier seems to have larger implications. Thanks to the vandal giving me another clue I found a few more names he is inserting (including the French and Svedish wikipedia) and this most interesting AfD on de-wiki. Agathoclea 15:16, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the pattern is, since unfortunately Deutsche Telekom IPs are usually not static. The only way to stop hoax insertion of names is vigilance by knowledgeable editors... Kusma (討論) 17:03, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Not static, but in this case very consistant (Although the AFD also has a 85.xxx IP contributing). My theory so far goes that a kid (or a group of kids) want to see their names and strangely enaugh the name of one of their teachers to be found in Misplaced Pages. The reallife evidence matches the same area as the town articles he/they have been editing. I am at the stage where I am about to put an entry on the long-term vandalism page I am just mulling over what header to give it. I'd be tempted to call it X the namevandal where X would be the name the vandal signed with in the AfD, which is the closest to a username we have. Should that be his real name though I am wondering if that would be a breach of privacy. On the other hand using any of the names used in the vandalism could be referring to an innocent bystander (classmates/teachers). So I am at a bit of a quandry as to how to proceed. Agathoclea 20:22, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I would suggest a more generic name, avoiding privacy concerns. Our LTA page should not be what comes up if you google the name. "German football name vandal", perhaps? Did you see the edit of your dewiki userpage, by the way? Kusma (討論) 10:02, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Lots of efforts they get up to. It looks though, that at the moment they got bored of adding the same old fakes as well as they already attracted enaugh attention so that the articles they targeted are watched more. So I will leave it as it is at the moment. Maybe over the holidays I'll go back and crosscheck some of the edits if we overlooked something. Agathoclea 10:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

"plexiglass"

Please discuss this issue on Talk:Plexiglass Tstrobaugh 20:49, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Vandal

I'd like to suggest that you impose a long-term ban on edits from the IP address of 208.123.149.134, based on the last three edits made today and the previous history of vandalism by this IP.Matt Gies 00:01, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

The vandal has stopped for the moment, and the last edit was apparently not vandalism, so I won't block right now. For a faster response (I was offline), you should report vandals at WP:AIV. Kusma (討論) 06:55, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 11th.

The Misplaced Pages Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 2, Issue 50	11 December 2006	About the Signpost

From the editor: New feature
Board of Trustees expanded as three new members are appointed	Wikimedia Foundation releases financial audit
Arbitration Committee elections continue, extra seat available	Female-only wiki mailing list draws fire
Trolling organization's article deleted	WikiWorld comic: "Redshirt"
News and notes: Fundraiser plans, milestones	Misplaced Pages in the News
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

Walter Fritzsch

Hallo dear Kusma, the problem with the internal link was fixed. Regards from Saxony User: Nadia Kittel

Editing discussion page

Thank you. Not aware discussion (comment) page not collaborative. I assume you'd know. Could not find page explaining. Link please? Or is that because of "Please do not remove entries for deleted pages from here until the circumstances of the deletion have been reviewed by an administrator who is familiar with the situation." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Arosa (talk • contribs) 16:36, 12 December 2006 (UTC).

Dresden

Heya:

I am quite confussed knowing that the author of that article is a German guy,I can not understand why you deny what it was a WAR CRIME (I repeat to you and your souces Dresden was not a military target) or when the red army took over Dresden and Leipzig killing and raping womans and kids,Is that not part of the II war world? or just the jews corps count only?

I am not saying what the nazi did were correct,we just have to be fair with the German history and call what happened by their own name.

I know the situation in Germany,Germans are afraid to talk or to say something hardly in favor of the nazi regime,but it has nothing to do with it.

Hope you leave for a second your blessed sources sit down and think about...WHAT IS A WAR CRIME?,JUST FOR RESPECT OF THE INNOCENT LIVES THAT PERISHED ON THAT TERRIBLE NIGHT.

Best regards

Martin.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.6.127.60 (talk) 08:38, 13 December 2006 (UTC).

I may personally I feel that the bombing of Dresden (and, for that matter, of several other German cities that nobody talks about) was a war crime, but this is not about my personal opinion, but about presenting the status of historical research about this in a neutral fashion. Some people say it was a war crime, some say it wasn't, and both sides have arguments, which are given in detail in the Bombing of Dresden in World War II article. The Dresden article should just present a short overview of the most important facts - most of baroque Dresden was destroyed, people have argued it was a war crime, some of the most famous buildings have been restored, some with help from those people who destroyed the city sixty years ago. The rest of the discussion belongs to the subarticle. Kusma (討論) 08:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC)