User talk:Mzajac

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Start a new topic
Archives Archive
  1. User talk:Mzajac/2004
  2. User talk:Mzajac/2005
  3. User talk:Mzajac/2006

Contents

[edit] 1st Canadian (Armoured) Division

Hi there - just a quick note. Twice now you've stated in separate articles that the 4th Canadian (Armoured) Division was Canada's first armoured division. It wasn't, the 1st Canadian Armoured Division (later 5th Canadian (Armoured) Division) was raised on 27 February 1941, while the 4th didn't convert to armour until 1942. See www.canadiansoldiers.com article on 4th Division. Otherwise, good work on the Fighting Frank articles. I also dont' think "CO" is the correct term for the head of the Canadian Armoured Corps - see Colonel Commandant RCAC. I think the appointment didn't exist until after the Second World War but am not clear on what the senior position was referred to during the war - Inspector General, perhaps? I'd have to dig out Stacey, unless you can tell me?Michael DoroshTalk 01:49, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[Replied at user talk:Michael Dorosh —Michael Z. 2006-09-09 02:41 Z]

[edit] Romanization (Russian)

  • Do you object to my proposed move?
Yours truly, Czech American Ludvik, self-romanized "Ludvikus."
Ludvikus 04:53, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image protection

Hello! When you removed the onion dome article from Template:Did you know and reverted to SharakuTwoActors.jpg, you didn't protect the image. You also undid a spelling correction that I made. Please be more careful in the future. Thanks! —David Levy 04:20, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] F.F. Worthington

Updated DYK query On 12 September 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article F.F. Worthington, 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.

--Mgm|(talk) 11:48, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requested change in redirect for IPA from International Phonetic Alphabet to IPA (disambiguation)

Please comment. --Karnesky 15:39, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. Sorry, but I am opposed to the idea.  —Michael Z. 2006-09-13 16:11 Z
Yes--I figured from your comments on the page before I proposed the change that you'd be opposed. I think it is important to hear from everyone. For what it is worth, I've disambiguated all links to IPA. Thanks again for commenting! --Karnesky 19:15, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] FA status for Nagorno-Karabakh War

Hey Mzajac, we haven't spoken for a while but I figured it would be good to hear the opinion of someone who is so versed in military knowledge to voice his opinion on the article reaching FA status. Some of your friends' opinions are welcome also. See here for its nomination page [1].--MarshallBagramyan 00:37, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:NC(GN)

I apologize for spamming your talk page, but since you had contributed in the past to the WP:NC(GN) proposal, which is currently ready for a wider consultation, I thought you might want to give it another look now and, hopefully, suggest some final improvements. Thanks. --Lysytalk 22:56, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Military history Newsletter - Issue VII - September 2006

The September 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by Grafikbot - 19:45, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pyrohiv

Thanks a lot! A question if I may, what do you think of this replacement of the term demesne by possession. Since neither Ghirla nor myself are native speakers, a third opinion could be helpful. Thanks! --Irpen 16:10, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Hard to say. Demesne is more specific, but a word which many people wouldn't recognize. I would describe it as a feudal demesne to give the reader a bit of a hint, or consider linking the words "feudal possession". —Michael Z. 2006-09-29 16:18 Z

[edit] Bridge on the River Kwai

Do you know for certain the replacement spans were wartime repairs, as opposed to postwar reparations (i.e. compensation)? The bridge was damaged in Nov. 1944, but I could't find when the repairs were done. Clarityfiend 21:13, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pirogovo

Hi, Michael! Could you clarify what exactly I missed here? I don't quite see any differences besides a blank line between the first line and the actual list, but, obviously, that was not the reason for your edit? Thanks!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 19:41, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Nothing of consequence. I mainly edited the page to un-bold Pirogovo, and cleaned up the wikitext a touch while I was at it. (I've gotten into the habit of cleaning up disambiguation pages for consistency when I encounter them, according to MOS:DP) —Michael Z. 2006-10-02 19:49 Z
Ah, I missed the unbolding. Thanks. By the way, I find that unlinked definitions (such as "Pirogovo" in the third line) improve the overall perception when they are bolded. Is there anything in MOS:DP that specifically recommends to unbold such entries? Am I correct that the "no need to emphasize the link with bolding" clause of MOSDAB does not apply because, technically, there is no link? I hope I don't sound as if I'm splitting hairs, because all I am trying to do is to bring the dab pages as close to MOSDAB standards as possible, but since I dislike most of the MOSDAB provisions, I tend to cut corners and customize whenever I can get away with it:)—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 20:39, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Well, I think unlinked items are generally dropped, because in some pages they encourage the addition of everything under the sun which would never merit an article. Personally, I like to remove boldfaced text from just about anything except the leading line of an article. In disambiguation pages, I think nothing should be emphasized as much as the main term in the first line. I'm not crazy about every provision of MOSDAB, but consistency makes things easier to use and prevents arguments. The best solution here would be to add redlinks for the Russian Pirogovos, if we knew where they were. —Michael Z. 2006-10-02 20:44 Z
I guess that makes sense. The only reason why I don't add red links in these cases is because I am still sorting out Russian districts/cities/towns/urban-type settlements, setting redirect and disambigs where needed. Adding all those thousands of villages would simply make it unmanageable, so I kind of "compact" them into one "rural settlements" line as I encounter them to sort them out later. Besides, I don't have a list of all Russian rural settlements, so I don't want to create an impression that every Pirogovo is listed when there may be in fact more than just the three I know of. Anyway, thanks for your tips. Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 20:52, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
I would encourage you to list the ones you know, so someone who comes to the disambiguation page can be aware of the scope of Pirogovity, and may click to start an article. If there are more, someone will add them eventually. —Michael Z. 2006-10-02 20:55 Z
No, I'd rather not. Not now, anyway. We have hundreds of red links about Russian districts/cities/towns/urban-type settlements that could use articles about them, and from what I see there is only a handful of people who consistently work on those articles. If I start adding all those villages (and I have a list of about a quarter of them all), I will be working with backlink logs numbering dozens of entries, which doesn't exactly make it easier to disambiguate and interconnect more important localities. It's an incredibly labor-intensive task as it is. Needless to say, I'll move on to villages once all settlements are documented down to at least urban-type settlements level, and, of course, if someone creates an article about a minor village in the meanwhile, I'll make sure it fits the overall scheme. I will also expand any such entry on request (I did it for Yasnaya Polyana (disambiguation), for example), but I just won't be able to finish the Russia geo-project if I start dealing with villages in bulk now. Those individuals who wanted to help in the past went sour and disappeared soon after they saw just how much it was to be done, and villages weren't even brought up as a part of the project :)—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 21:10, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Fair enough. Cheers. —Michael Z. 2006-10-02 21:12 Z

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Mykola Skrypnyk.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Mykola Skrypnyk.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 fair use images lacking such an explanation 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.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:07, 4 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:T-43 tank.jpg

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:T-43 tank.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. When you use a generic fair use tag such as {{fair use}} or {{fair use in|article name}}, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 fair use images lacking such an explanation 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. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 07:55, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Elijah Wood Everything Is Eliminated

The information on this article is under my copyright. Please restore the pages as I worked on them. Thanks edwpat


I was invited to contribute to Wikipedia and so far the experience for a writer has been absolutely horredous. I invested a deal of time adding to this and other articles, linking etc., only to have it all reversed. I think I am going to abandon Wikipedia. First I tried to link materials to the Elwood site and that was reversed. Now, when asked to contribute, my contributions are spurned. You want contributors, yet you make it difficult for working writers to contribute. It's a bit like a French Revolutionary Tribunal. Well, I am flattered that you recognized the material, meaning you had been to my site independantly (so have 2 million other visitors), so I am not in need traffic or readership (especially since my original thoughts were not credited); however, I don't think I can recommend the Wikipedia experience to any of my writing communities or on my syndicated blog. Thanks for your attention to your interpretation to the rules. Edward C. Patterson.

Hey, I'm trying to help edwpat with his edits. He seems to have taken something personally, not sure what, can we (between us) help him to get through this because, already, he's resigning as an editor because he's been told off too much (some of it down to me). Let's talk about it? Budgiekiller 22:50, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm gone -- outspoken -- BLOGGED and Everything I contributed is Eliminated http://www.dancaster.com/ejw. edwpat

[edit] DYK

Updated DYK query On 9 October 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mykola Skrypnyk, 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.

--Peta 05:13, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] T-44 or T-44?

http://www.morozov.com.ua/eng/body/tanks/t-44o.php?menu=history5.php

Do you know what this is?

Have you done an article about it?

Nicksop 18:14, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't really know anything about that one, and I can't find anything in my books. It's definitely not related to the late-war T-44 which was put into production. Strange beast. —Michael Z. 2006-10-09 18:26 Z
I remember seeing a picture and brief description of this many years ago (but alas, not what the source was). It's memorable because of the unusual (if dubious) design placing the engine in front. On the one hand, the engine would be safer because it was behind the thickest armor — which made it harder to service — and the crew behind it all. It was one of many little-known tank designs being explored in the USSR which were abandoned following the start of the German invasion. Askari Mark | Talk 00:20, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Disambiguation Talk Request

This is a form message being sent to all WikiProject Disambiguation participants. I recently left a proposed banner idea on the WikiProject Disambiguation talk page and I would appreciate any input you could provide. Before it can be approved or denied, I would prefer a lot of feedback from multiple participants in the project. So if you have the time please join in the discussion to help improve the WikiProject. Keep up the good work in link repair and thanks for your time. Nehrams2020 21:36, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] DYK

Updated DYK query On 9 October 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article T-43 tank, 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.

--Peta 23:16, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Opinion

So, what do tou think about this suggestion [2]. Notable? I would have done it myself already If I was more fluent with wikicommons. Mieciu K 14:45, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Pobedanassolntsem.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Pobedanassolntsem.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:07, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Military history Collaboration of the Fortnight

You supported Tank, which has been selected as the Military history WikiProject's new Collaboration of the Fortnight. Please help improve this article to featured article standards. Kirill Lokshin 00:27, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Canadian Forces commands

Thanks for the note - your version is better. Cheers. Greenshed 17:46, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Retouched photos

Michael, re your comment on "airbrushed" Soviet images: you wrote "this was commonly done to make them suitable for the contemporary printing technology"... That's interesting. First, was the printing technology in the USSR so different from that in the west? I've never seen this style of photo in western publications. But more importantly, do you know until when they did that? It might help date some of these images... Lupo 08:27, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ch'onma-ho Article

Thanks for all the help tidying up the language. I'll need as much as I can get. ^_^ JonCatalan 18:22, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

I self nominated the article under October 18th, but nothing yet. :) Admittently, the news sentence was not very innovative or well thought out. JonCatalan 23:34, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Footer section

Hi:

I am writing this here in case the speedy has already taken place by the time you get a chance to follow-up, but, per your post, I am requesting a speedy deletion of the template.

— DLJessup (talk) 15:43, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Wow, that was fast. Sorry if I sounded harsh, but I thought the template was a bit too much of a workaround of a Wikipedia article's basic structure. Thanks.  —Michael Z. 2006-10-21 15:51 Z

[edit] Number of Russian tanks invading Hungary in 1956

The recently-featured wiki article 1956 Hungarian Revolution in the data box near the top of the pages gives the strength of the Soviet forces as 6,000 tanks and 150,000 troops. It is not clear if the editors mean the strength of the invasion force or the total strength of the Red Army. Either way, the figures seem cockeyed to me. Do you think the figure of 6,000 tanks, in the context, makes any sense? Gk1956 21:40, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[replied at user talk:Gk1956#Number of Russian tanks invading Hungary in 1956  —Michael Z. 2006-10-24 23:09 Z]
Thanks Michael, it is the number of tanks quoted, 6,000, not the number of troops, that I find incredible. Do you think the number is credible? Gk1956 23:26, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Translating Military of Ukraine

Hey Mzajac, Firstly, thanks for your tidying up of [[Russian Ground Forces]. I'm intending to nominate it for an A-class review as soon as I get the formatting for tabling the list of units sort out.

Saw you were apparently a Ukrainian speaker. Could you translate the Ukr/version of Military of Ukraine - apparently it's a Ukr-version featured article - so that some of it can be incorporated into the English version? I got nowhere when I tried to babelfish it with the Ru-Babelfish (not a good chance, I know, but I wanted to try). Do you want to put the translation in a sandbox somewhere and then I'll read it and expand appropriate bits of the English M of U article. Thanks Buckshot06 00:46, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi again, Firstly thanks for your input on the presentation of units - I think that's the way to go, and I'll make the changes accordingly. Please leave a formal note of support (if you do!) for the A-class nom as well.

On Military of Ukraine, I think the first history section, then the initial structure and land force sections are most important, so if you do find some time to start translating, I think you should concentrate on those sections. Thanks again for your assistance - there isn't very many Ukr/Eng translators around... Cheers Buckshot06 20:00, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a million - looks great so far. I know what they mean by 'flank region' - it's a reference to the CFE Treaty, and Ukraine must have been in there. Thanks again!! Buckshot06 07:04, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue VIII - October 2006

The October 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 22:18, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Makhnovism stuff

Michael, could you please take over dealing with this fellow at least for the rest of the day? I tried reverting, tried explaining. Now your turn. Also, warning might help too. Other battes involve too much of my energy and I am also trying to do a non-battling project that I will perhaps post soon as a new article. Cheers, --Irpen 00:41, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I'll do what I can. —Michael Z. 2006-10-27 03:56 Z
I saw you are doing all you can. A sugegstion, though. If the editor ignores talk and behaves like a WP:DICK the only way to force him to engage into communication is a threat of the block and, if ignored, a short block itself, if ignored, with an increasing lengths. Hope it won't be necessary. I will leave the fellow to you and will try to stay out. I can't do more than I did, that is trying to talk to the guy. Maybe it is a turn for a stick. --Irpen 18:00, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
Maybe. There are thousands of articles from FA to dreck, and I no longer get uptight about leaving an NPOV tag and letting it get dealt with in the future.
The real encyclopedia is Wikipedia:version 0.5 and Wikipedia:version 1.0. The ultimate solution for this situation to fill the encyclopedic void with a real article about the revolution in Ukraine. —Michael Z. 2006-10-27 18:05 Z
I agree about the ultimate solution. I just do not feel now up to an enormous task of starting the UR 1905-1921 article series. We can leave the POVed if it is tagged. This by itself is a small problem. What will become a problem if the problem will be spread to other articles where the improperly used term will be added with the link to this masterpiece. It already started as the UR (dab) is getting the link. We can leave the tagged article to a fellow to play with for now, but we should at least limit the damage by preventing this from being spread to other articles. --Irpen 18:17, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
Good point. Not today, but maybe I'll write a stub next week. —Michael Z. 2006-10-27 18:32 Z
Note the links that already link to this "article". --Irpen 20:46, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

See Ukraine after the Russian Revolution. —Michael Z. 2006-10-28 00:28 Z

Kudos! One last thing. The UR now redirects to UaRR. I think it is better to have the DAB at UR rather than the redirect? Should we move it there? --Irpen 00:38, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Be my guest. I have to pack it in in a few minutes, so I'll leave it in your good hands. —Michael Z. 2006-10-28 00:46 Z

[edit] Green Army (disambiguation)

I'm interested as to why someone would make this page? Did someone ask you to do it? Bubba hotep 21:15, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I just created it to remove the list of football clubs from the bottom of the Green Army article, and put a more appropriate disambiguation link at the top. —Michael Z. 2006-10-27 21:16 Z

To be honest, I wouldn't have bothered. I would have just deleted them. A general term like "Green army may refer to the many football teams that play in green" (or at least wikified) at the top in italics. After all, this is an encyclopaedia not an urban dictionary. I am a football fan of 20 years, and unless the team's nickname is "Green Army" then it has no valid place on Wikipedia, in my humble opinion. ;) Besides, WP:DAB states that each link must have exactly one clickable link. Unless someone creates them all, it might as well go! Bubba hotep 21:23, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Update: I've deleted the disambig link at the top of the page. What you might want to do is blank the disambig page and put {{db-author}} at the top to speedy delete it. From what I can see, the original bit about the Plymouth fans was added by an anonymous IP over a year ago and is against WP:NPOV, or at least ineffective trivia. I'm not mad really. ;) Bubba hotep 21:32, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Sounds fair, thanks for the info. I'll just delete the page; it can always be recreated if it's called for. —Michael Z. 2006-10-27 21:35 Z

Ah, you're admin! Wasn't expecting that! There's me telling you how to speedy it. Ooops. Anyway, if you do get trouble let me know because it is patently wrong. For a start, they said they were the "only team to play in green" - wrong, Yeovil do - also claiming that is why they are called it - wrong again, Birmingham City fans call themselves "Blue Army", Liverpool fans call themselves "Red Army" (better check the Soviet troops page, eh?) - in short, we all do it. Sorry if I come across as unhinged on this subject but I've just about had enough of football and Wikipedia today, i.e. what people think is Wiki-worthy is just a pile of fanzine stuff (cruft is it called). Anyway, the main thing is - your article doesn't deserve to be blighted by such trivia. Bubba hotep 21:41, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Are you admin? It's just that the page went very quickly, I thought you deleted it yourself? Bubba hotep 21:45, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Cheers. I also have a hard time looking at fan articles, especially those which write at length, encyclopedically and unselfconsciously about events within a novel, television show, or video game, barely acknowledging their fictional nature. Also, those long lists of trivial mentions of a real thing. Nuke 'em whenever I can.
Thanks for setting me straight on the football. Yes, I'm an admin. Shouldn't be any trouble: I don't worry about deleting non-stubs I created, which no other editor has a stake in. —Michael Z. 2006-10-27 21:48 Z

That's good, thank you for your understanding. I can now go to bed and dream of endless 900kb pages of the season's football results (by division, with every scorer, booking, attendance figure, and referee, updated on a daily basis, all available on the respective clubs' website or at least three other fan sites) going the same way! Na dobranich. Bubba hotep 22:03, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

And I've just got to the part in your user page about the Cyrillic alphabet. You may like to peruse my user page for an anecdote about that (and make corrections as you see fit to the Days of the Week section!) Really, I've taken up enough of your time now. ;) Bubba hotep 22:10, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Line Art

I started the thread on that forum, which is a community which is relevant to NationStates, because I didn't want to directly ask him. He's done some work for me before for that game, but this is the first time he's done anything like this for Wikipedia. I can ask him, although given some time, because I don't think he would appreciate me asking him for too much work. He also had some problems with the GNU, although I persuaded him finally to release the Ch'onma-ho image. He doesn't like the idea that somebody could use it and alter it, which may influence any decisions he may have in the future concerning drawing for Wikipedia. Did you have any tanks that were priority? I also draw line art, although honestly I'm nowhere as good as him; nevertheless, I would probably be more available than he would to draw and I'm honestly that that bad, and getting better! I think I might draw the T-26 for the T-26 Wikipedia article so you may want to see if that's of any worthwhile quality. Nevertheless, I will ask Jason at some point if he would be interested to do some more. JonCatalan 20:12, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tabbed interface

I found your comment at Wikipedia talk:NavFrame interesting. Could you take a look at an old project of mine at Wikipedia:WikiProject Usability/Color Tabs and see what you think? I have limited knowledge of programming so I was unable to bring anything to fruition, but if others can that'd be great! - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 03:26, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Romanization of Russian

Please don't edit-war over major changes to articles when other editors disagree with you. The previous version of the table had the support of editors' consensus, since it has been stable for a long time. What you are proposing is a major change, so please describe and justify it on the talk page. —Michael Z. 2006-11-01 16:55 Z

I was going to. But first of all, I needed to finish the changes I wanted to make in order to have a completed version. You reverted my changes so quickly I'm nearly sure you've not even read what I wrote. Now there are two versions: yours and mine. I think we can begin a vote to decide which one is better than the other. For myself, for example, I can't see why ё should be transcribed by o. I've never seen that anywhere. Or why transcribing г by a h is better explained by "When it is a commonly accepted convention" than by "Optionally, when it's the transcription of a h from a germanic language." (we can replace "germanic" by foreign if you want.) Švitrigaila 17:06, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
[responded at talk:Romanization of Russian#Conventional transcription of Russian names  —Michael Z. 2006-11-01 18:53 Z]


[edit] DYK

Updated DYK query On 1 November 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ukraine after the Russian Revolution, 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.

--Allen3 talk 22:06, 1 November 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Hello

Can I quickly sum up this story ?

Ok, in the article Poland, runners of this articles and others contributors let links to some polish websites in foreigner langages, not in polish languages. It was a reference to some international websites surrounding the polish culture. There was a list about it.

In this list, they were also private forums and private blogs.

I just have added my website : http://swietapolska.com , this is a french newspaper about Poland with articles in french langage. There is some forums, but also a system for adds, for editing articles, free picture albums ( like the wikipedian project ) about Poland and France. This is a Portal of the polish community in the french speaking coutries, like France, Switzerland, Belgium.

I have added this link, because I have seen some other links to some english newspapers about Poland, I have thought that it could be a source of richness to bring some information ;)

Nevertheless, sometimes, when I have been back to the article "poland" on wikipedia, all the time this link has been deleted. I needn't to use wikipedia like a directory project. I all the more needn't it because , like some webmasters, I am the runner of some directories on the web, so, if I want this link to be famous, I needn't to spam the wikipedia project.

I have been to the discussion part of this article, and I have asked why some "unknown" people use to delete some contributions.

I have been answered by Jacek Kendysz that I should read the policy about the external links. Problem 1 : in any case my link was able to respect the wikipedian policy. Problem 2 : this list of external links in this article was written with some other links which did not respect the wikipedian policy, and never those links had been removed Problem 3 : links to some blogs or forums where not deleted, but mine, with a newspaper, was all the time deleted. Problem 4 : it gives impression that some administrators of this page are working for some particular sites !

So, I have answered them than this link can find a right place here.

An other administrator Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus said that it is spam.

I just answered him that it is not spam. I also given my thoughs, that there is a problem with what they are going to do and to organise with this page.

I just have answered them that if they really want to keep the impression to do a serious job on wikipedia, they have to do it entirely.

The real problem, most of my answers had been deleted, we were just able to read their answers ( wiki policy and spam  !)

So, in that case, if we are not so free to discuss, it is not use to let this contribution in this discussion page.

Why ? because, even if I have just let a link, the real problem is that link is appearing with a stupid story coming from the fact that those administrators has done a bad work, and did not succeded in it.

They are just able to use their rights of administrators so as to let is link to my site with their stupid comments, which can contribute to a bad advertisement to my site.

This situation has no meaning. They can let the link if they want to let people arguing about it. This is stupid to let contributions with the link of my site added to some argumentation about how to organise a job on wikipedia . And I do not think that the aim of wikipedia is to encourage battles between people.

This is why I have asked them that if they do not let such a free expression, they can delete my entire contribution. But I know that I can freely express myself to others pages, on wiki, an the www. So, they can let this link if they want, nevertheless, I can defend myself too ;)

So as to sum up the situation :

I will not give up my account to wiki ? why ? wiki sounds good

In this fact, I am a new user about it, nevertheless, I found 2 administrators who are very far away do their job correctly. History of poland does not reflect reality, poland is not only katowice, some serious work has to be done on some links,.....

Maybe we can not be so free to express ourselves on those pages about article "Poland", nevertheless, on other wikipedian pages, we can be free to do it.

This is why I like wiki, because their are lots of people, and it could sound like democratic ;)

[edit] Native speaker advise

Could you pls look at here and here? The native speaker's opinion is indeed whether the usage of the term "allegations" implies that there was no factual basis. I suggested a rephrase, but it is somewhat sloppy, I think. --Irpen 05:57, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] German Cyrillic alphabet

You started this article. What is your source? -- Evertype·✆ 13:10, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nested Hide/Show

Hello. I created a pretty complicated template using the Hide/Show code ({{US Census tract}}). I also created a template for this to nest in- you can see an example at west Dallas. Anyway, there's a hide/show element to show the list of census tracts, and for each tract, a hide/show element to show the numbers and graph. If you click 'show' on the outside element though, all the inside elements go automatically to 'show' but the 'status' on the top right still says 'show', as if its hidden. I hope that made sense? Anyway, is there a way around nested hide/show elements opening up along with their parent?

Thanks! drumguy8800 C T 23:11, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Machines shouldn't dictate writing style

Hello Michael- Thanks for making that argument. I was lazier when I encountered the Hyphen-Destroyer. -Eric (talk) 15:20, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. This is the second such disturbing find for me. The previous was an editor changing links from Russian Federation to Russia and similar changes in hundreds of articles—not merely the links, but their text too. It took a half-dozen editors to convince him that this wasn't perfectly reasonable in every case.
Such automation is bound to improve, allowing editors to apply more power and sophistication to subtly degrade thousands of articles at once.
I've left a reminder for AWB users at Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser#Don't automate writing style. —Michael Z. 2006-11-14 15:51 Z

[edit] A concern

I would appreciate if you could refrain from using edit summaries like this one. Such wordings are not helpful. I'm rather surprised to have to read that from a Wikipedian with your profile. --Ligulem 18:49, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

It was merely an allusion to the hackneyed American saying about guns, making the point that the effects of mechanical power can be hard to undo. I sometimes use edit summaries in talk pages which try to entertain while summarizing my point. I'm sorry that this one backfired. —Michael Z. 2006-11-14 18:54 Z

Ok. BTW, just let me know if I can help reverting bad serial edits. I'm sure we find a solution. It's true that AWB/MWB can be misused and I understand that this can cause frustration. Thank you for catching that one. As Martin pointed out: since you are an admin, you can remove any AWB user from the list of enabled users as an emergency measure or as a permanent solution — as you see fit. --Ligulem 19:13, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I don't see any evidence of abuse, just enthusiasm and imperfect judgment. SDC made hundreds or thousands of edits, so tracking down and fixing the problems would be a big job.
So I posted the reminder at the AWB talk page, to help prevent further occurrences. I don't see any solution, except to preëmptively educate users of increasingly-powerful automatic editors. Cheers. —Michael Z. 2006-11-14 20:01 Z
"SDC made hundreds or thousands of edits, so tracking down and fixing the problems would be a big job." — nevertheless I could take a look into this. We might even be able to build an AWB inverter. I do have some experience in AWB hacking (I made that MWB fork).
As I see it, SDC's first offending (offending in kind) edit was on October 31st: [3]. The last one was today: [4]. I think I might be able to revert all these. Of course, there might be some merging needed, as the articles might have been edited in the mean time. At least we probably could learn from this task for future mass reverts. Being unable to revert an action is completely unwiki, so we could benefit from looking into semi-automated mass reverting. --Ligulem 23:47, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
If there was a painless way of browsing the diffs, perhaps it would be easier to scan through and pick just the ones that need reverting or merging. I'll try to have a look at a sample to get an idea of how common the problems are. I found a few in a random sample of five edits, but maybe that was a spike and there are only a few that really need attention. —Michael Z. 2006-11-15 00:18 Z

[edit] talk:Orange Revolution

Michael, could you please look at this discussion over the using of the term. We could use a third opinion. --Irpen 03:54, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] annoyance

Michael, I responded to his assault at the article's talk but, perhaps, more could be said to it.

I am talking about this fellow known under several alliaces of which KPbIC is the most recent one. I do not want to go lengths here about the issues I have with this editor's POV-pushing, stalking myself and using various sneaky and annoying tricks. There is one issue though that is especially annoying: persistent refusal to log in and editing from ever changing 134.84.5.xxx dynamic IP's and even rv warring from such IP's slighltly changing from edit to edit. I asked him countless times for one and one thing only, that is to log in. His refusal is telling much of good faith. Anyway, I presume I can take it to ArbCom to get an injuction but maybe you can convince that fellow to log in at last. Since he is occasionally writing too, when he is less in the mood to bug, I do not want to put a formal process in motion if possible. Anyway, let me know what you think. --Irpen 04:19, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Irpen, my little dictator. There are likely to be many things you are annoyed by. You may be annoyed by people riding a bus with you, by people driving on highway with you, by people eating pop-corn in a movie theater with you. My advice would be - get used to that - because you have as many rights as anybody else. Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia, and this very part is the part I like and respect about it. I'm well aware of the benefits of registering an account, but at the end, it's my choice, my freedom, my rights to contribute without maintaining an account. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by KPbIC (talk • contribs).

LOL. This above is a good demo of exactly what I was talking about. --Irpen 05:25, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Did you know

Updated DYK query On 20 November 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ems Ukaz, 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 (t)⁄(c) • 10:12, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ems Ukaz

I left some comments at Talk:Ems Ukaz about sentences that could use more context. Circeus 15:41, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pronunciations

Hi... curious, is there a time when adding a pronunciation isn't appropriate? I added one to the top of the Dallas, Texas article. I figure pretty much every proper noun (that isn't of course some other word.. for instance the California article, Texas, Oklahoma, etc) could use a pronounciation up top. If I add them to articles like that will that be frowned upon? Just wanna know before I make a fool of myself ;) drumguy8800 C T 15:59, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue IX - November 2006

The November 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 22:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dnepr

Thanks for the cat clarification on dnepr. They were generically listed under British Cossack motorcycle sources as Russian with Ural, Dnepr, Voskhod and Minsk. Hopefully the rest are "russian", but feel free to change them if this is not the case? Seasalt 02:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Identity Problem"

Hello, Michael! I've recently experienced an "identity problem" for the second time since joining Wikipedia and David Kernow thought you might be able to help. Recently, my signature code has somehow changed (not by me and apparently not by vandalism) from [[User:Askari Mark|Askari Mark]] to [[User:User|Askari Mark]]. The changes are "retroactive" to many — but not all — older edits, and was made to my preferences as well. I went back and corrected all of these yesterday.

A couple months ago, it was my talk page link that went from [[User talk:Askari Mark|Talk]] to [[User talk:User|Talk]]. When I first went to the user page for "User:User" and checked what was linked there, a random assortment of my posts appeared. All tended to go to posts with messed-up talk signatures, but not all of the messed-up signatures were represented. There was no sign of this yesterday when I checked there.

I haven't a clue what's causing it. Spasebo, Askari Mark | Talk 23:45, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] new toy

Kirill Lokshin and me have developed a new toy (discussion):

External images
Front
Rear

Implemented in an article it can look like in Mongol bow (including some misunderstanding) or Indian Wars. While we (mostly me) think it is a great thing (contrary to the long frustrating negotiations for images that can not keep up with the rapid expansion of articles and new requests), it would require some people to use it and not overdo it. You just have to google missing images and insert the url with a short description. I would really appreciate it, especially for the feedback. Thank you a lot. Greatings Wandalstouring 07:00, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

finished template with guidelines. Wandalstouring 17:14, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] References style

Noted yr different referencing style to one I originally copied, and used in Satra, is that the wiki-correct way to do it? Just wondering as yrs does make more intuitive sense. Seasalt 01:03, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ot

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Ot, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at Talk:Ot. You may remove the deletion notice, and the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. TheRingess 07:21, 2 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] White Canadian

Hi there. I saw you leaving some comments at Talk:White_Canadian. I think that what you had to say lines up with my thoughts about the topic. I've listed the article as a candidate for deletion. This may be inappropriate (To be honest, it's the first time I've done that about an article), and I thought I might invite comments from people who have posted on the page's talk page. I have been around Wikipedia for a little while, but I haven't gotten as deeply involved as some have. I'm certainly happy to be wrong, but most importantly I'd like to have some other people at least think about whether I am or not, rather than have a couple of people (the one or two users most interested in the article - I must include myself there, now, I suppose) dictate it's future, because it obviously has the potential to be an inflammatory discussion. Thanks!!! AshleyMorton 20:16, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sneaky Stats Vandal

I'm sorry, I have only a vague recollection of dealing with edits that fit what you're referring to at Wikipedia:Long term abuse#Sneaky Stats Vandal, but it seems to me that it was quite a while ago. I didn't see any in your report that I had reverted. Did I miss something? -- Mwanner | Talk 02:24, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Romanization of Ukrainian... into French

Do you know what the established system is for Romanizing Ukrainian using French orthography? I know that Yushchenko comes out as fr:Iouchtchenko, and Kuchma is fr:Koutchma, but I want to know if there is a table or something I can refer to. I want to do some work on Ukrainian foods on the FR. Can you help?

Nevermind. I see it now. Kevlar67 01:16, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
I'll just go with the one on the table unless they tell me otherwise. Thanks. Kevlar67 01:26, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] One other thing

Now that I'm thinking about it. This there an official system for the Cyrillization of English in the Ukrainian alphabet? It is better to go by the "sound" (transcription) or by a system? Do you just guess? Is it Стівен Гарпер or Стивен Харпер? The "ph" in Stephen would normally be a ф, wouldn't it? But in this case it makes a в sound. Just wondering. Kevlar67 01:36, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

The lack of the ф strongly sugests a "spell it as it sounds" attitude. Interesting, isn't it: there's no uk:Стівен Гарпер, but there's a uk:Стельмах Едвард. I guess you can tell who's Ukrainian, can't you?  :-) Kevlar67 02:09, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] White Canadians

Thanks for your work at white Canadians; nice job finding the StatsCan references on population groups. It hasn't satisfied our correspondent though; I'm not quite sure what his angle is. - Eron Talk 13:47, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NSAU logo

I got your message, I'll upload a new file with the spelling corrections in a few, I was going off what I could see in the old logo and couldn't make out some of the letters, a corrected version will be up shortly. Orthuberra 22:27, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Hehehe, alright I'll change it up again but this is the last time. ;) Orthuberra 03:46, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/z/a/User_talk%7EMzajac_a30f.html"