User talk:Lars T.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello Lars T., 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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! -- Punkmorten 21:21, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Think about relative influences. Kraftwerk does have no real influence to up-to-date music. All those mentioned did have real influence. Just think about it if you know about music. --Oldnag85 21:55, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

List of Spanish films soon enough will have a cmpleted listing in timeline order to it serves a purpoese categories cannot. See List of Argentine films and you will see what will be done. Feel free to create the list of spanish films in timeline order Ernst Stavro Blofeld 19:34, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Vandal on CIA

Nice catch: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Central_Intelligence_Agency&diff=99715581&oldid=99715499

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:71.128.9.116

I was the one who blocked the vandal Reza Aghaei Laghaei before. Best wishes, Travb (talk) 06:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edit war at Germany

Mozart was born in Salzburg, Austria; his only other home was Vienna. And he never said anything about being German or Austrian, but if he was born and lived all his life (excetping of course the concert tours) in Austria, it's a good bet he was Austrian. —  $PЯINGrαgђ  14:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

You are wrong. [1]: "I am an honest German"; "If Germany, my beloved fatherland, of whom you know I am proud, will not accept me, then must I, in the name of God, again make France or England richer by one capable German; — and to the shame of the German nation." Find me one quote by Mozart where he says he's Austrian. Lars T. 17:18, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hans Filbinger

Please do not add incorrect tags to articles, as you did to the Hans Filbinger article (Tagged it as an autobiographic article and therefor possibly violating NPOV policy, however Filbinger is probably the last person to write his own biography on Wikipedia, especially since he is dead). It isn't funny nor clever. Thank you, Poeloq 23:59, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Warning

In regard to this edit of yours:

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Basedview22 13:31, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please

I have reverted your last comment to Talk:Hans Filbinger because of the personal attack it contained. Please review WP:NPA before coming back. Note that repeating such behaviour will get you blocked. Thank you very much. Str1977 (smile back) 16:55, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

These remarks are completely inappropriate.[2][3] The edit summary is for you to describe your edit, and the talk page is for civil discussion about the content of the article. Name calling has no place here, because it quickly becomes disruptive. Tom Harrison Talk 01:03, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your edits

Please do not delete content from articles on Wikipedia, as you did to John Kim. Your edits do not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use Wikipedia:Sandbox for test edits. Thank you. Blahman1985 01:16, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to blank out (or delete portions of) page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to John Kim, you will be blocked from editing. Blahman1985 01:02, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] John Kim

I have reverted the article back to the sourced version which original existed, and informed Blahman1985 of our policies against repeated reversions. I'm going to start a thread on the talk page, so even if there are future reversions from Blahman, please continue the discussion on the talk page. Leebo T/C 12:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Once again: Please stop edit warring at Transrapid and discuss on talk page instead

See also WP:3RR, WP:V, WP:RS, WP:CONSENSUS, WP:DR, and WP:DE. Thanks. Avb 00:16, 18 October 2007 (UTC) compare to German version and discussion. I tried to find a compromise, maybe it helps. BR --Polentario 13:49, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/USS Watseka (YT-387) follow-up

Lars, you raised good points at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/USS Watseka (YT-387) which has now closed as "keep". I think it's worth having a more general discussion as to the notability of small noncombatant auxiliaries such as harbour tugs and I have raised this question at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Maritime warfare task force#Follow-up. I'm inviting all the AfD participants, both pro and con, to join in with their thoughts on the topic. --A. B. (talk) 17:08, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CIA article

Lars, I am not trying to attack personally, and I am rather sure AJR is not attacking you as well. We both are concerned with balance in the CIA article, and to an American and a Briton with some direct exposure to the intelligence world, the article appears to suggest the Agency is principally a covert action organization, and the material under covert action often reads like a POV accusation.

I have changed the heading of "clandestine and covert activities" to "activities by geographic region", so that analysis, intelligence community-wide estimates when CIA was responsible for them, and then clandestine and covert operations. Obviously, successful clandestine (as opposed to covert) activities are not known, but a number of clandestine intelligence collection things have been disclosed, often by informal US-Russian agreement that the topic is of historical value.

The article length is a problem. As you may see from my userpage, or the hierarchy that starts with Intelligence cycle management, the entire field of intelligence is complex, but lends itself to be broken up hierarchically. Geographic articles on activities would be one way to split out smaller articles (with much cross-linking), not forgetting that there will be a good deal of regional and trans-national (e.g., counterproliferation, drug trafficking, counterterrorism) activity.

I have contributed a fair bit of work to the article, both in editing references and flow, and adding sourced new material (e.g., Directorate of Intelligence, Caribbean/Cuba (mostly Missile Crisis), Korea (Korean War), and starting to put material under southeast Asia. Perhaps you will not be as annoyed as when someone who hadn't done many edits or articles was changing your work. It is my hope that the kind of sourcing and detail I put into my additions might be an counterexample to such things as "CIA trained police" or "CIA set up Operation Gladio" with no other context, or where a discussion of questionable activities doesn't pull together the consensus of multiple sources, instead essentially repeating a series of allegations.

Let's try to work together in good faith.Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 20:53, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image use

Per image policy, each use of an image must have its own fair use rationale. In Image:WDR Dachmarke.PNG you removed the second rationale for the second article its used in. Unless your saying it shouldn't be used in the second article, in which case you also need to remove it from that article. MBisanz talk 08:58, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Well it was about 3AM here when I got to that image and I saw that it still had a warning on it [4] and only saw one Template:Logo fur and 2 file links so I assumed the uploader had messed up and came over here to WP:BITE you. Now I see your using 2 different versions of rationaling. I'm not familiar with Template:Logo rationale, but I know Template:Logo fur can be used multiple times for multiple uses of one image. Image:FirstUnionLogo.png is a good example of an image. Although as a reminder, once you correct an image, make sure to pull off the warning, or else it will still be deleted. MBisanz talk 04:35, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Edit summary on Apple Inc.

Hi Lars, thanks for the help reverting vandalism. However please refrain from using edit summaries like this one which is incivil and inflammatory. Thanks, Gwernol 23:41, 31 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Hitler Youth

Hi, why did you delete my contribution on Hitler Youth?
Vinniebar (talk) 18:28, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Because Hugo Boss didn't design the HJ uniform. Easy enough? Lars T. (talk) 19:33, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
And why do you think he didn't??? Is it so hard to believe? (Because he DID!)
Vinniebar (talk) 12:27, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Easy Enough? No: you were wrong! Please learn to use Google, now I had to Google it.
Vinniebar (talk) 15:06, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for giving us a source that doesn't say the uniform was designed by Hugo Boss - this should settle it for once and all. If you still don't get it, they were one of the companies that produced uniforms. Lars T. (talk) 18:45, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Germany

The Automobile-Image in the Economy section has been deleted. Could you consider to put it back. I have no account, that´s why I´m asking. I also think the recently introduced map (Lost territories) in the is not necessary and messes up the section German Empire (1871-1918). Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.179.3.195 (talk) 22:55, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for CIA contributions

I'm beginning to think the set of articles need to be tuned every six months or so. Believe me, I appreciate your sharp eye catching annoying things that got through.

The Farewell Dossier is part of a larger problem? opportunity? I should have thought of it, but it hadn't registered, even though I know the methodology, that you basically can't measure blast from space. There might be some very special circumstances where you could, but the reality is that earth-based sensors do most of the work.

If they were being figurative and saying there was a large fire that had the thermal effect of a 3KT blast, that is different. Thinking about the thermal sensors, someone might try to estimate blast by measuring the speed of expansion of the fireball, but that gets tricky in several ways.

So, you either found something where a reporter combined random facts incorrectly, or otherwise took liberties. You might or might not find it interesting, but I wrote a first draft of an essay, User:Hcberkowitz/Sandbox-FactsFromPOV, as part of discussion at Folantin's userspace. The discussion is trying to find ways to reduce POV and focus more on fact, and one of the challenges is how to get useful material when all available sources have POVs.

Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 16:21, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Farewell Dossier - or rather the Thomas C. Reed story of the CIA reaction

My problem isn't with Farewell Dossier, and I can easily believe the CIA reacted the way described - but the anecdote as told by Reed in his book, quoted by Safire and taken for a fact by just about any media outlet out there without any fact checking just seems to me like the prototype of an Urban Myth. And what really irks me about it is that I had to search hard to find a story that even doubted that it happened exactly like this. Everybody takes it as proof that the CIA is extremely clever or ruthless, but nobody asks for a second source. Well, I found one article where a KGB veteran said there was a small explosion at the pipeline, but it had nothing to do with any CIA action. And just now this article that calls the story a myth (but has no way to prove it either). Lars T. (talk) 17:33, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

This is one of those times that I wonder about better ways to handle WP:OR. Let us say, for example, that there is a news report that Putin is pregnant. Most news media would ignore it, and it's unlikely that anyone would write "Putin is a man and can't get pregnant".
In this case, while a basic knowledge of physics, and perhaps a more advanced knowledge of space-based sensors, would establish the event Urban Myth. An editor could cite sources saying that blast doesn't propagate in vacuum. The same editor could cite the alleged explosion and that it was supposed to have been observed from space. It wouldn't occur to a writer at, say, Aviation Week and Space Technology to point that out, because the readership would immediately see the disconnect. Here, it might even be called WP:OR or WP:SYNTH if those data were simply listed in the article, and left to the reader to see the connection.
When I read the report, I realized I mentally tuned out the "from space", and assumed -- bad thing to do -- that the blast yield information came from the usual trusted sources, seismographs and microbarographs. Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 17:47, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:ARD-Dachmarke.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:ARD-Dachmarke.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:13, 13 May 2008 (UTC)