User talk:Ulayiti/archive02

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of ulayiti's talk page. Further comments should be made on my main talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.

This archive contains 25 discussions between the dates of 18 August and 04 September 2005. The views expressed here do not necessarily represent the actual opinions of anyone. - ulayiti (talk) 10:28, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Old messages on this talk page are archived at my talk archives:

Contents

Re: Welcome

Thanks for the welcome. Hope my small contributions are useful...

PaulJones 20:46, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

re: Welcome

Thanks for the note.--Biff Dong 00:17, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

re: Welcome

Thanks for the welcome. I should be in Helsinki as I write this but life conspires sometimes. Ironduke 08:20, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks and congratulations

Thanks for additing the Abitur link to the IB programme page. I was convinced that it was spelled with an r after the A, and puzzled that I couldn't find a link to it in the English or German wikipedias, but it never occurred to me that my recollection of the correct spelling might be in error. I'm glad you caught my mistake quickly.

And congratulations on completing your IB! I finished mine in 1987, in Geneva, and even after earning my Ph.D., I count getting through the IB exams honorably as a significant accomplishment in my life. I hope you will feel the same about your IB diploma. Mamawrites 11:58, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

On coincidences

Thank you for very timely notice of my actions on the Fidel Castro article. I assure you I am fully aware at the moment of reversions I make to the material at what times. --TJive 22:57, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

Pleaser

That editor knew exactly what they were doing. I have no regrets, they were warned. Zoe 08:12, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

Adolf Hitler

How can you say that you are an inclusionist, if you simply delete what you personally do not agree with? I mentioned that Hitler was a brave solder and fought in some of the world's bloodiest battles. This is NOT propaganda but fact. Similar comments are made about Americans and British soldiers, eg, Audie Murphy and Sergeant York. Hitler may have done bad things after that. But as at 1918, he was OK. I have British papers from around 1935 that say similar things. So please do not try to rearrange history to suit yourself. Lesitung 11:28, 25 August 2005 (EET)

Seems to be rather difficult to say anything good about certain people, eg, Hitler. Does Wilipedia suggest that some people are so evil, that one must NEVER say ANYTHING good about them? If these are the rules, I will obey them. However, I personally don't believe any completely evil person would get to his position. I also doubt that anyone is totally evil all his life. Lesitung 12:24, 26 August 2005 (EET)

Ulayiti, if this is really what you are doing, then I think you should stop doing it. Adolf Hitler was responsible for our history's biggest crimes towards humanity, but that doesn't make him an inherently evil Force Of Darkness that no one is allowed to write anything positive about. Verified facts about what Hitler did are encyclopedic material. — JIP | Talk 10:44, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. Actually, if you remove the Hitler-praising first sentence of his addition, it's actually quite factual and verifiable. However, the personal attack was completely out of place, he should not have done that. I admit to having read his comments on your talk page before reading yours on his. — JIP | Talk 11:08, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
JP, Thank you for your support. If I put similar praise in for US or British soldiers, this would be passed. What I objected to was that all my updates were being reversed. If was as if I was being liquidated. I was really annoyed. It is typical that the strong are always backed by others at the expense of the weak. If the weak try to fight back, threats are made to call the referee, who it implied will always support the more forceful one. I still stand my my viewpoint that Hitler was a very brave soldier in the Great War. In addition, he was very popular among his fellow troops, who were delighted to see him back from Home Leave. The quote at the Beer Hall Putsch trial would have been an attempt by the Prosecution to denigrate him. Most of the early attempts to denigrate Hitler are in fact British propaganda. It is very ineresting how they change their tune over time. It really annoys me that brave soldiers are denigrated by others, who have never fought, and who may not be as brave in similar circumstances.
Lesitung 13:50, 26 August 2005 (EET)
I think you have every right to add the paragraph about Hitler fighting against overwhelming odds in World War I and being given an award for his bravery. But to say that Hitler "fought bravely", or "selflessly cared for" his wounded comrades, or to say that few soldiers have been through such horrors as Hitler, is POV. Hitler fought against the enemy, cared for his wounded comrades, and was given an award. That's it. And please don't make personal attacks against other users. — JIP | Talk 12:14, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Leistung

Everything single thing I am writing now is reversed by you. You say I am free to write what I want, but then delete everything I write. Probably you have more rights than I do. I have no doubt that you will take me to the authorities of Wikipedia over these remarks. Lesitung 13:09, 25 August 2005 (EET)

Zambian Boys

Hi there, thanks for your comment, I am more and more convinced that you are right. Actually, Zoe and I were not debating the article per se, but her accusations that my vote to keep it was 'trolling'. I may be wrong (it looks increasingly as though I am) but the initial vote was in good faith, and based on the information that I had at the time. Thanks for pointing this out, Yours Trollderella 21:07, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Done! Thank you! Trollderella 21:21, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome

I have a couple of questions. How do you email others? I understand that if I enter my email address in preferences others can email me without them seeing my email address. How does that work?

Can a watch I have on an article generate an email message to me if the article is changed?

Thanks.

--Transonline 07:20, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Vaasan Palloseura

I created an article about Hietalahti, Helsinki. I noticed that Vaasan Palloseura links to it. The article doesn't mention Helsinki, and anyway I think it's odd that a Vaasa sports club would play its home matches in Helsinki. Is there a Hietalahti in Vaasa too? If there is, the articles should be disambiguated. — JIP | Talk 10:06, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Quote on the AIW members page

I was wondering where you got the quote that you have after your user tag on the Association of Inclusionists Wikipedians' meta article? Its a good quote, I'd like to verify it and use it my self... HoratioVitero 15:51, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

thanks, appreciate it...

pantograph

You linked to pantograph on the Mexico Metro page. But that is the wrong link. The pantograph (rail) is the appropriate link. I changed it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Geo Swan (talk • contribs) 20:54, 30 August 2005 (EET).

VfD and redirects

  • Thanks for the tip. The articles I nominated today, however, are special cases. There were existing redirects with those titles, which a new author replaced with the completely unrelated "dicdef" content and also a "see also" note for the original redirect. If I were to "be bold" as you suggest, I would be deleting the content that the new author contributed, without replacing it anywhere else. In this situation, I thought it better to nominate the articles on WP:AFD. --Russ Blau (talk) 17:15, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

check the contribs

It wasn't isolated. Look at this diff. There's a difference between a Wikipedia:newbie experiment and Wikipedia:simple vandalism. But go ahead and unblock if you prefer. I never argue with other admins. Uncle Ed 20:16, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

3RR

Please remember the Three Revert Rule (as well as WP:DR), not everything you disagree with is vandalism. The only exceptions to the three revert rule are listed at Wikipedia:Vandalism. --fvw* 01:28, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

If you're referring to my reversions on Urdu language, I believe the edits I reverted fall under 'Sneaky vandalism - Vandalism which is harder to spot. Adding misinformation, changing dates or making other sensible-appearing substitutions and typos.' They were done by anonymous IP's with no explanation whatsoever and using misleading edit summaries (such as [1]). - ulayiti (talk) 11:46, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
I don't see how "clean" is a misleading edit summary, though you may disagree with it of course. Whether edits are made anonymously or logged in has no bearing on whether they are vandalism. Everyone who edit wars thinks that the opposing party is adding misinformation or misleading content, otherwise there wouldn't be an edit war. We have plenty of methods of solving disagreements, WP:DR is there and if you want to avoid an edit war you can try WP:RFPP. Being right or disagreeing with the person you're edit warring against doesn't mean 3RR violations will be tolerated however. --fvw* 21:59, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

Scimitar's RfA

Thanks for supporting my request for administrator powers, which has been successful. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me on my talk page. Thanks again! Scimitar parley 17:13, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Marxism

The dispute on Marxism is not technically vandalism, but a content dispute which should be handled through other channels than WP:AIV. {{subst:user:83.22.36.10}}/{{subst:user:GallantRider}} is in violation of the 3RR, and I have warned GallantRider. --Canderson7 21:46, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

Re: Welcome

Thanks...hopefully i can add more info to wikipedia... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SidJ (talk • contribs) 01:03, 2 September 2005 (EET).

RfA

Allow me to be the first to say I wish you good luck on that RfA. P.S. add an 'A' after your screen name at Esperanza once you get in :) Redwolf24 (talk) 23:39, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Wow, sorry, brainfart. You're not in Esperanza but I know you from some association or another, is it WP:BEARDKEEP? or WP:CCW? I'm too lazy to do any research :P
Good luck all the same :) Redwolf24 (talk) 23:42, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Re:Welcome

Hey! Well I just wanted to say thanks for the welcome!... Now hopefully I can be of some use here at Wikipedia. :-) Blue muffin89 17:34, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Abdullah Ocalan

why hve u deleted the word of "terrorist" from the article about Abdullah Ocalan? he is a terrorist leader in Turkey and his terrorist group (PKK) is in the terrorist list of European Union. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 138.40.1.12 (talk • contribs) 00:55, 3 September 2005 (EET).

Thanks for your support!

Dear Ulayiti, thanks for your vote of confidance at my RfA, and for your kind comment. I'll try hard to make the soggy mop proud! — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 00:10, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your support

Hi Ulayiti, just a quick note to thank you for your support on my RfA. I was pleased to see so much support, especially from people such as you who I do not know very well, if at all. Now that I am an administrator I will do my best to please the community’s expectations. Best regards, Sam Hocevar 17:28, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Please review

Can you check This out and tell me what you think. I did it all my self, but still don't like it. It's ugly and does not seem to read well.--Irishpunktom\talk 18:13, September 3, 2005 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for your help, it is much appreciated! --Irishpunktom\talk 12:59, September 4, 2005 (UTC)


The above discussions are preserved as an archive of my talk page. Please do not modify them. Subsequent comments should be made on my main talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../u/l/a/User_talk%7EUlayiti_archive02_1c38.html"