User talk:Burann

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome

Welcome!

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

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 Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

[edit] Moving articles

I don't object to your reasons of moving articles but "cut and paste" is simply not the way. I explained my reasons at article's talk. I hope you agree with me and you are welcome to make a case to move the articles to the location you proposed. --Irpen 01:47, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I got it. Replied at the discution page of that article. Thanks Burann 01:49, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Russia portal

Hi again, you may be interested in the Russia portal here at Wikipedia. It has two importnat announcement boards: one for new articles and the other one for general announcements. You may want to add the boards to the watchlist. Welcome again, --Irpen 01:54, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you, I will be checking there from time to time Burann 10:44, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
You are also welcome to add Portal:Russia/Russia-related Wikipedia notice board and Portal:Russia/New article announcements to your watchlist. --Ghirla | talk 12:20, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for a suggestion. I am checking those places sometimes as well, though I contribute to Wikipedia quite rarely due to lack of time therefore I don't actually post there much. Burann 14:03, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] History of Russians in Latvia

To preserve the image you uploaded from deletion, please add a source. There are pretty aggressive deletionists out there. I will tag it "fairuse" (for now) unless the source qualifies for a more liberal license. Once you add a source, we can decide on it. --Irpen 21:45, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Source for the image is Mosnews ( http://www.mosnews.com/news/2005/05/27/latviaminority.shtml ; original source is www.chas-daily.com , but I cannot find the particular article there now) - so yes, I think fairuse is probably the most applicable licence. Burann 22:18, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

OK, I added the source to your image. I think they are pretty safe for now. If you have anything to say on the issue at the article's page in connection to the discussion, you are always welcome. I think the article is largely off-topic now, unfortunately, which I am trying to point out to our Latvian friends to no avail so far. See you around. --Irpen 23:29, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. I generally stick to smaller edits as my English is not great, but when I have time I might do an occational larger edit as well. That article indeed has went quite off topic. Too much information is not as bad as too few probably; but I think hwever the agreement should be reached, maybe in talk page or in a subarticle (that is, something like "History of Russians in Latvia/New") what should be left and what can be removed from the article. I did not watch it much previously, but as I understand the reason for such off-topic expantion was that some people tried to insert some facts while forgetting the others regarding some events, thus making a sided opinion in article, then the other side added other facts and so on; basically, instead of finding one or two sentences that would be accurate and describe it NPOV, people started to reproduce history of Latvia there. This is not the best way to solve NPOV disputes I guess. The article was shortened somewhat since then, but some more things could be shortened, yeh. Burann 23:56, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vitovt/Vytautas

Please see Talk:Vytautas the Great Max Kanowski 22:50, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

New comment on Talk:Vytautas the Great Max Kanowski 01:48, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Move warring

You should wait for response from other editors before starting hysterical move wars. The words "massacre", "aggression", "invasion" and "liberation" are highly discouraged in articles retaining to Eastern European history. What is "massacre" for one, may be interpreted a legitimate destruction of Fascist nationalists for another. Please remember WP:NPOV and cool off. Inflammatory wording leads us nowhere. --Ghirla | talk 12:50, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

While I find words "occupation" and "liberation" to be non-neutral in many cases (I prefer using annexation, overtaking and such instead), I cannot say the same about the other words you have mentioned. Invasion for example is a very neutral word - it merely means that the army of one state crossed the border to another state. I don't know any other possible word to call such situation. Similarly, I don't think that the word massacre is POV on itself - there are many articles in Wikipedia which names has word massacre. Burann 12:56, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
There have been enormous and still ongoing discussions on whether the Polish-Soviet War should be renamed Polish invasion of Russia and who invaded Cieszyn - Poland or Czechoslovakia (to name only a few acrimonious and lengthy exchanges arising from a single inflammatory word). --Ghirla | talk 13:02, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm... --—Ghirla | talk 11:06, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Cannot I correct mistakes of other people in talk pages? You said nothing when I have corrected you here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Portal%3ARussia%2FNew_article_announcements&diff=40571470&oldid=40570926 so I thought that is ok. I wanted here to tell that the vote is at the talk page, not in the article itself. Everything here is GFDL, after all. Burann 11:29, 22 February 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Image Tagging Image:Latvia2.jpg

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Latvia2.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

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

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Hetar 06:19, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../b/u/r/User_talk%7EBurann_c91b.html"