User:Mikkalai/artalk5

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Passée Double

Thanks for your note. Yes, I saw that a very few uses were of a different sort of march (and indeed there is a film called May, among other things). But they don't have to be linked, and being unlinked is better than being linked to the wrong place. Still I am pleased to have achieved edits like this one. Rich Farmbrough 18:16 27 June 2006 (GMT).

Re. Japanese dates

Thank you for providing me with this valuable new information, dear Mikka - in fact, I was merely acting because this particular anonymous user had just been reported at WP:AIV as a recurrent vandal, and who had been blocked just yesterday because of the same editing pattern. Aparently, the lack of any explanation by this editor induced everyone to believe he was merely performing a massive removal of information, and that his activity was nothing but a vandalism spree. I recommend you to make this information available to all the involved parties and the blocking admins, and I leave up to you to instrument the unblocking of the relevant IP addresses. Warm regards, Phædriel ♥ tell me - 15:55, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

TfD

I think a potentially very disruptive template is on verge of being kept. If you have time, please take a look at this TfD discussion. [1] Regards. 172 | Talk 21:50, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

FYI [2] 172 | Talk 23:27, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Olonets Raion

I think due to several edits the situation under Imperial Russia and the current situation has become entangled in such a way the article is now incorrect. Could you please take a look at it? I also asked Ezhiki to look at it. Errabee 06:38, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Summary by Alex Bakharev at Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Irpen

Your have endorsed the summary by Alex Bakharev at Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Irpen which misinforms the community. Alex Bakharev wrote about Russian architecture: "There is no discussion on the talk page, no suggestions on improving the article". In fact there was (and still is) a discussion on the talk page and solution has been proposed. (Please see Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Irpen#Comment_to_the_summary_by_Alex_Bakharev_and_others). I suggest you to withdraw your signature under the summary.--AndriyK 08:56, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Russian architecture

It looks like your edits at Russian architecture moved the article towards a compromise. But there is a disagreement about a single sentence [3]. Why this sentece is so important? Do you think any further compromise is possible?--Mbuk 22:45, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Dacha

I don't get what you are talking about in the Dacha article talk page. --GoOdCoNtEnT 18:35, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Myself and User:Grafikm fr

Salut Circeus,

Ben ecoute, je sais bien que Ghirla est caractériel comme tout. Moi j'ai essayé de le raisonner il y a quelque temps au sujet d'une autre remarque de ce genre, j'ai essayé de le calmer sur sa page de discussion, mais j'ai jamais eu de réponse. C'est clair que c'est un gros dilemme... -- Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 21:01, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Circeus

Well, I know Ghirla is terribly emotional. I tried to reason with him some time ago over something similar at his talk page, but I never got any answer. It's a real dilemma

C'est l'impression que les quelques interactions que j'ai eues avec lui (aussi à Template:Languageicon, que j'avais oublié) m'ont laissé. En tout les cas, je persiste et signe concernant le block. Il a été averti par l'ArbCom en Janvier, et de manière répétée par plusieurs utilisateurs depuis. C'est tout juste s'ilne s'est pas bloqué lui-même. Circeus 21:07, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
That's the impression my other interactions (notably at Template:Languageicon, which I hadforgotten about) with him left me with. In any case, I stand by my block. He got warned by the arbcom in January and repeatedly by various users since. He practically blocked himself
Je suis tout à fait d'accord avec toi. Mais bon, comme on dit "on ne se refait pas". Je vais essayer de lui parler, mais comme il répond meme pas à ses messages, ça va etre un peu difficile... -- Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 21:08, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
I agree totally with you. But as they say, one never changes on his own will. I'll try talking to him, but since he doesn't even answer my messages, that's going to be difficult.
J'avoue que je me demande s'il a même remarqué que le block a(ou devrait être, à tout le moins) expiré. Je suis tenté de lui proposer d'annoncer aux 90 utilisateurs qui ont fait de moi-même et BrianGotts des admnistrateurs qu'ils ont remis des pouvoirs de sysop entre les mains de trolls, mais ça serait un peu exagéré, je crois. De toute façon, ce n'est pas comme s'il tenait à écouter qui que ce soit. Circeus 21:14, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
I almost wonder if he has notice dhis bloc has (or should have, at least) expired. I'tempted to offer him to go and tell the 90 users that made me and briangotts admins that they put the Sysoppowers in the hands of trolls, but that would be toomuch, I think. Besides,it's not like he wants to listen to anybody.
Le truc en fait, c'est qu'en ce moment, il y a un conflit giganstesque sur la partie russe de Wikipedia, dont Ghirla s'occupe beaucoup. Il y a des guerres dans tous les sens, c'est un peu le Bronx... Donc en fait, les gens qui sont déjà pas très patients par nature, comme Ghirla, démarrent au quart de tour et en général, ça explose... :( -- Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 21:18, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
What's going on is that there's a gigantic edit warring in the russian content of Wiki, in which he is very much involved (the russian content, not the conflict! - Graf). There are conflicts everywhere and it's a big mess. So people who are already cranky by nature, such as ghirla, areset off and it all explodes.
Je savais que Ghirla était (avait été?) impliqué dans plusieurs disputes concernant l'Ukraine, la Pologne, le Kievan Rus, des translitération et trucs du genre, mais je connaissait pas les détails. Circeus 21:22, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
I knew Ghirla was (had been?) involved with several dispute involving Ukraine, Poland, the Kievan Rus, transliteration and similar stuff, but I wasn't aware of all the details.
Ce qui se passe actuellement, c'est qu'il y a un conflit gigantesque un peu partout entre, en gros, le point de vue consideré comme "pro-russe" ou "pro-sovietique" d'un coté, et des editeurs ukrainiens et/ou polonais un peu radicaux. Personne n'est parfait dans cette histoire, mais ça degenere tres tres vite... -- Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 21:30, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
What's going on is this widespread conflict between, roughly, a point of view described by some as pro-russian or pro-soviet, and somewhat radical ukrainian and/or polish editors. Nobody's perfect in that story and it degenerates very, very quickly...

Circeus 00:33, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I've tried to be as accurate as possible, although some expressions and phrasings are harder to translate properly. "somewhat radical" is much tamerthan it sounds once translated. "kinda radical" might be closer. Circeus 00:40, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
I changed a few sentences in my own phrases as to stick a bit closer to what I had in mind
And don't translate gigantesque by big-ass, it is way too rude. Gigantic is better :) -- Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 00:44, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Sorry. It's justthe first word that came to me. Circeus 00:52, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Talk:BMI

I notice you deleted this earlier - thanks - the trolls are back to the tak page now!

Thanks/L/wangi 01:12, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

John

I noticed you reverted back or it has been anways. I just want you to know that if you are not going to other John's that I put on that page then then all of the those John's should be in the disambiguation page then. It's pointless to leave out a number John's that should be listed.

Oh and I am moving your comments to my archive. Mr. C.C. 07:31, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Vokzal on deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Vokzal. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, your reasons on how or why you did so will be greatly appreciated in the above review. --W.marsh 13:13, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

The Kven editor

For your information: Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Stopping your vandalism. Tupsharru 14:19, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

A suspected sockpuppet of the blocked user User:Subhash_bose has begun a revert war in Babri_Mosque removing the <fact> tags of this controversial article. Please take action. [4], [5], [6] Anwar 16:21, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

What a humorous person this Anwar Saadat is. Please see [7]. --Msiev 09:41, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
I found at least in one instance that a bot knows bettter!. --Bhadani 16:38, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Прапанова аб Вікі ў правапісе 1959

Чалом! Азнаёмцеся з прапановай: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages. Дзяк.

Irfan

As long as it's sourced, there's nothing wrong with criticism as such. Arun Shourie wrote for example this:

What about the "Medieval Sources Project"?, I asked. After some search, the ICHR has supplied the following list of the scholars to whom the work was assigned, the subject he was to cover, the money sanctioned to each, and the result: 1. Satish Chandra & Co.: Hindi translation of "Early Sources of Akbar's Reign"; Not completed, money not indicated. 2. Irfan Habib: Akbarat-e-Aurangzeb: Rs. 27,000/-; Not completed. 3. Moonis Raza: "Atlas of the Mughal Empire": Rs. 22,400/-; Not completed. 4. Anis Faruqi: Tashir-ul-Aqwani: Rs. 9,000/-; Not completed. 5. Satish Chandra: Documents on Social and Economic History: Rs. 23,000/-; Not completed. 6. P. Saran: Tarikh-i-Akbari: Rs. 18,500/-; Submitted but not traceable -- but on that last entry, more in a moment.

What about the much-touted "Translation Project", I inquired. It began in April, 1972, the ICHR says, when the National Book Trust proposal for translating the volumes in the Bhartiya Vidya Bhavan Series on the history and culture of India was received in the ICHR. A committee consisting of the usual eminencies -- S. Gopal, Tapan Raychaudhuri, Satish Chandra, Romila Thapar -- was constituted. This Committee resolved that the Bhartiya Vidya Bhavan volumes -- which in fact are the very best and most outstanding of works produced in the last fifty years -- "are not suitable for translation into Indian languages," and that this proposal should not be pursued any further. The Committee suggested that alternative titles be selected for translation.

And, lo and behold!, the largest number of titles which the eminent historians selected were of the eminencies themselves, and of those who advocated their line! R. S. Sharma, a Chairman of the ICHR : five titles; S. Gopal : three titles; Romila Thapar : three titles; Bipin Chandra : two titles; Irfan Habib : two titles; his father, Mohammed Habib : two titles; Satish Chandra : one title...

What amount has been spent on this Project, I inquired, how much royalty was paid to the authors, I inquired. The ICHR has incurred an expenditure of Rs 4,189,000, the Ministry said, and added, "Authors of the books selected for translation were not paid royalties."

Having got to know their ways by now, I persisted. Had I used the wrong word ?, I inquired. Had they got payment under some head other than "royalties"? The ICHR has now said that in fact authors were paid, "a lump sum for translation rights" : Rs 1000 per language per volume if the book was more than 200 pages, and Rs 500 per language per volume if the book was less than 200 pages. Hence, R S Sharma got a total of Rs 47000 for his books; Bipin Chandra, Rs 14000; Irfan Habib, Rs 11000; Romila Thapar, Rs 12000... --Msiev 09:49, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

However, the Wikipedia contributor should not distort the original criticism into something stronger. Thus Shourie states Irfan Habib was sanctioned money for a project he did not complete. He *does not* say this money was handed over to him, which is a completely different matter. Similarly he doesn't directly accuse Irfan Habib of plagiarism (He can't, since Habib was not the author of the work discussed!). But the contributor Bharatveer does all this, while claiming he is only citing Shourie. And why should allegations against other historians find place in the entry on Irfan Habib?

Amberhabib 10:35, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello

We are meeting after a long gap. I just wanted to share with you a translation: Yes Sir. Regards! --Bhadani 16:35, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Capitalization of L/lindy H/hop

Hey Mikkalai, a few of us over at the lindy hop pages noticed that you moved many of them to capitalize the dance names. Would you mind posting your reasons here? There was a discussion on the capitalization issue there, and at least semi-consensus from the regular editors seemed to be reached. I think it would suppress some frustration if you joined in. (Another discussion was about it was here.) Thanks!--Will.i.am 21:40, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments on the Lindy Hop discussion. I am aware that admins don't have extra authority when editing articles, but that admin title still gets a little more respect from us little wikipeople. :-) You mentioned starting a discussion on the Dance Wikiproject. I had actually done that, and one person even took the discussion to the Wikipedia language reference desk. None of these discussions seemed to come to a resolution, which is why I was rather confused when you started changing the article titles. I see that the discussion has resumed, so maybe we can make progress again. My personal preference is to not capitalize dance names, but I don't feel strongly either way. I'm more concerned that we have some consistency about capitalization since right now, some dances are capitalized while others are not, and there doesn't seem to be any logic behind it. --Cswrye 14:04, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Rory Demetrioff

Hello, I would like to enquire why you have deleted Rory Demetrioff. Thank you for your assistance.


Hello, please reinstate this article. Thank You. Wil Everett. (not a firm a person / creator of this article regarding a notable Canadian speaker. 07/10/2006 Wil

The article was restored out of due process, i.e., without request at Wikipedia:Deletion review. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rory Demetrioff. There is no claims of notability in the article, neither you provided any information to this end elsewhere in wikipedia besides saying "yes he is very important". If you don't know what notability means, please look into Len Domino article for comparison. `'mikka (t) 00:25, 11 July 2006 (UTC)


Why would you deny people from Canada to have access to researching this individual. He appears on the government of Ontario and Government of Canada registry for active lobbyists. I think this needs to be opened up to a wider discussion. How can that take place. Also, it should be encouraged to review already public information on google and on the government of Ontario Integrity Commission website at: http://lobbyist.oico.on.ca/Integrity/RegistrationGeneral.nsf/PublicFramesWeb?OpenPage

Also, a number of collegues also have entries in Wikipedia including: Leslie Noble, Deb Hutton, Gerald Caplan, Ian Brodie, Rod Love

Why is this individual singled out? Perhaps he is not in the right category on wikipedia?

Thank you for your help and insight.

<unsigned >

Thank you for your interest in wikipedia. Here is my help and insight once again: please address the specific concerns expressed in the vote for deletion: please provide the proof of notability of the person. Once again, please look into Len Domino for an example, as well as into other wikipedia aricles you mentioned. Please also sign your posts. It is very easy to do, by typing four tildas: ~~~~. They will automatically convert into a signature similar to mine: `'mikka (t) 00:47, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. The other individuals have been reviewed, including Demetrioff's collegue Domino. I do not mean to be presistant on this, but I think this is important to ensure this information is made available to the public. It seems as though one individual did not like the article and no one is giving a chance for a fair review, or an attempt to add additional information. After the first deletion a wealth on new background was provided, but then deleted. More details can be added if that is required. The other individuals being googled often appear less than Demetrioff. Please help with the exact criteria for deletion in this case so that the matter can be resolved.

<unsigned>

The policy wikipedia:Verifiability basically requires that information in wikipedia must be based on reputable, preferrably neutral, sources from third parties. Please also see the guideline Wikipedia:Notability (people). Please sign your posts in talk pages for easy tracking of discussions. `'mikka (t) 07:22, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Subhash bose

Hello Mikkalai. I have since tried to ublock the IP of this user but it will not work. It seems he can't edit anywhere. Also, it seems that User:Pusyamitra Sunga is his sockpuppet, used to evade block and 3rr. The sock and Subhash both emailed me from the same address. So I blocked the sock. What is in order for the master now? Regards, Blnguyen | rant-line 05:16, 11 July 2006 (UTC).

Puppetteer removes cat tag from IP

Also please take a look at this. The IP admits he is the puppetteer User:Subhash bose. He insists on removing the suspected sp category links. [8]. Check out his language too. [9] [10] [11]. The IPs have a common subnet. He may have enabled DHCP on his system. Hence the slight variations in the string. Incidentally another user has removed the cat tag [12] from his user page without explanation. Check out this threat too. He is also quite busy campaigning for support for his agenda here. What action ought to be taken? Anwar 14:05, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Kurt Leyman

This guy deletes references to Soviet victory from Winter War. Please investigate. --Ghirla -трёп- 15:05, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Verilog

Why did you revert my addition of Blue Pearl Software amongst a list of Verilog RTL applications? There are many other commercial applications listed, it is on-topic. What was wrong?

Thank you for your interest in wikipedia. I hope The problem is notability of the company. A fresh startup, barely on radar of the industry and google, hardly warrants an encyclopedia article. I've seen hundreds of them in EDA during last 15 years to pop up and flunk. I have a nice collection of T-shirts from DAC. If you have solid references from reputable third-party publications that praise this company, you are very welcome to write an article about Blue Pearl ASAP and link it wherever you want. (BTW don't forget ot kick ass of your sales&marketing or whoever who invented this name, "Bloo Per Software"). Otherwise, I am afraid it will be delisted from wikipedia. Meanwhile I will take a look at other "commercial applications listed". Wikipedia is not a web directory. What is more, adding links to one and the same website into multiple articles is considered spam in wikipedia and frowned upon. Please contribute actual article text. EDA industry is underrepresented in wikipedia. `'mikka (t) 01:42, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
So basically, you are making a value judgement on the basis that you have not heard of Blue Pearl Software and you think the name sucks? What about all the other small EDA companies? Many of these have links in various articles on Wikipedia. I strongly suspect that you work in the EDA industry, so it looks like partisan bias on your part.
I am giving you a friendly advice about the name that may be easily mocked. You are free to disregard a hint that bad name can easily kill a company. But please do not ignore comments about solid references and spam. These are rules of wikipeida, not mine. And what you have to do is to prove that your company is notable by providing reputable references, rather than to prove that I am a partisan.
Summarizing, you have to learn to listen carefully to arguments of your opponents and address them rather than to invent a straw man (and use other logical fallacies) if you want success in business. (You also ignored my remark that I will look at other "commercial applications listed" (and surely make "a vaue judgement")). `'mikka (t) 16:14, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
I suggest that if you want people to read your comments and listen to you, you don't indulge in gratuitous insults that are not pertinent to the topic (under the ridiculous guise of "friendly advice"). I believe that deleting all references to companies is a fair moderation, but it does not reflect well on you that I had to point out your inconsistent moderation before you took this action. Also, I don't think your research is up to scratch -- you refer to Blue Pearl as a "fresh startup". We have had booths at DAC last year and the year before. So I don't think we qualify as "fresh" (unlike at least one of the companies that you left in place in your original moderation, which was formed in 2005, and has not exhibited at a single DAC).
Looking at the Verilog article again, I see that some of the external links have been replaced, including one to "Logicsim". I have added some comments to the "talk" for Verilog, since I don't think that the link to "logicsim" is valid (or that the claims made about it are valid) according to the comments that you have made.

Joke

Maybe some Talk before reverting again? You are the only admin who has supported the list, of whihc I'm aware. I posted to WikiEN-l as well, not many responses (some to me not the list), all in favour of removing the jokes. Just zis Guy you know? 22:12, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

RfC on Lazar Kaganovich

You edited the Lazar Kaganovich article. Would you consider participation in the RfC Lazar_Kaganovich abakharev 01:16, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Water stagnation

I do like your attitude toward the Wikipedia. I did the disambiguation page on Rath, for many of the same reasons that you have expressed. Were you planning an article on Water stagnation? Is that why you placed the link on the Anoxic sea water article? If so, you might also link from the Manfredonia article about the stagnation of the water in the lagoons after the 1223 earthquake, and the Theodore Roosevelt Island article where in 1831 a causeway stagnated the water. Maybe you might also include a see also reference from Backwater, Billabong and Swamp. Bejnar 00:00, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Viaduct + Template:unreferenced

You recently added Template:unreferenced to the Viaduct article, without leaving any mention of it on the talk page. I will leave it where it is for now but would like clarification as to what in particular you feel needs citations. Most articles of a similar length lack citations, which I feel is entirely appropriate given the generic and rather common knowledge nature of the subject matter. --IntrigueBlue 01:04, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Your reply on my talk page
I don't take the addition of the template as an attack, I'm merely seeking clarification as to what in particular you feel needs citation so that I can fix it. --IntrigueBlue 01:20, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
Re: Your reply on my talk page
Okay, thank you for the clarification. --IntrigueBlue 01:58, 14 July 2006 (UTC)


Zhukov?

I saw that you re added that clearly wrong and incorrect line on zhukov. Everyone knows that Stalin was in full command of the Soviet Union and that he was the one who ordered all the counter attacks it wasent an idea of zhukovs it was stalins idea. (BobShoe 12:55, 14 July 2006 (UTC))

I know that Stalin ordered the attacks it can be proven it is extremly obvoius Stalin had killed of a part of the military and he did rule the soviet union supreme, andno it is not someone blameing him. Only when stalin stoped trying to control the war and started listening to the military did things get better for the red army and look on the talk page and you will see this
-Richard Overy "The Dictators" from 2005- http://img208.imageshack.us/my.php?image=bild2421nm.jpg
Everyone know that Stalin was in charge it is so obvoius. (BobShoe 20:39, 14 July 2006 (UTC))
Obviously this situation is not so obvious as it seems to you. `'mikka (t) 21:22, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Hiwi (volunteer)

It's something wrong with this article, it doesn't explain, rather misinforms. No Discussion. Xx236 13:30, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

No offence intended, but I reverted your deletions from the article. Both of the paragraphs are sourced from Antony Beevor's book "Stalingrad", Chapter 11 (near the end of the chapter). I doubt Beevor would have indulged in "erratic speculation". Folks at 137 19:47, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Added response to your comments on the Hiwi talk page. Please consider them. Out of town for a week or so; slow response not meant as rudeness. Folks at 137 22:49, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Lev Shubnikov

No, the {{citeneeded}} is not a joke.

The Joseph Stalin mentions that Lev Shubnikov, the physicist, was shot. I'd like to see a cite for that, to get more info for the Lev Shubnikov article. Google has several hundred hits indicating that he was shot, but they're all derived from the Stalin article in Wikipedia. This issue came up because someone created an article for him, and the question then arose over whether he actually was shot, and if so, for what. --John Nagle 06:12, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Transnistria

You misunderstood my actions. I am not planning to delete that category, so don't worry. An article when it belongs to a subcategory of transnistria, it means it belongs also to transnistria. I took them off from transnistria category because they belong to sub-categories of transnistria. It is a rule; when there is sub category, or a stub the article belongs to its stub. I didn't took them off those which don't belong to transnistria stub. --User:KRBN 16:45, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Józef Piłsudski

Could you help adress the concerns you raised during FAC process? Unfortuanately I cannot find sources to satisfy your points.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 15:14, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Cult of personality

Hello, I was just about to come looking for you. Do you have any scholarly works that discuss Ceasescu's personality cult (in the sense described by Krushchev) that you could work into that article?

I removed the Niyazov example because the sources don't conclude that he has made himself "larger than life," just very visible. Gazpacho 21:34, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Zleitzen has said on the talk page that "well-known" and "documented in his article" aren't sufficient, and policy is on his side. If you can come up with academic-quality sources that state Niyazov has created a cult and describe the ways he has done so, we can have him in the article. Gazpacho 05:36, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Eurotophobia

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eurotophobia.

Lists of phobias is not a source for encyclopedic articles. One can derive a phobia word from every noun and verb. If you find a medical source which discussed this phobia, welcome. `'mikka (t) 00:10, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Can you please move it to Wikitonary? --GoOdCoNtEnT 01:10, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
I have done research and determined that is a real word. It was just misspelled on the source where I first found it. There already exists a page on it on Wikipedia. See erotophobia. The word is also on dictionary.com, and Wiktionary. --GoOdCoNtEnT 02:27, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

ru:Участник:Mikkalai

Is this you, or is it an impostor of yours? 02:30, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

This is me. `'mikka (t)

Invitation to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy

Hi there! I've noticed that you've edited articles pertaining to the Eastern Orthodox Church. I wanted to extend an invitation to you to join the WikiProject dedicated to organizing and improving articles on the subject, which can be found at: WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy. This WikiProject was begun because a need was perceived to raise the level of quality of articles on Wikipedia which deal with the Eastern Orthodox Church.

You can find information on the project page about the WikiProject, as well as how to join and how to indicate that you are a member of the project. Additionally, you may be interested in helping out with our collaboration of the month. I hope you'll consider joining and thank you for your contributions thus far! —A.S. Damick talk contribs 01:19, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Demkina - again!

Hi Mikka. I didn't realize that you were the one who made Skeptical Investigations into a Wiki link -- thought it was Rohirok. I don't understand: why create a link to a Wiki article that doesn't exist? Not all references/external links are turned into empty Wiki article links, right? I'm still learning the ropes here. Thanks. Askolnick 18:16, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Zeusophobia

Why did you remove it? Any reasonable reasons? Monkey Brain(talk) 05:35, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Hm.. Since when are phobias considered diseases? All it is is a psychological condition. definitions around the web. They are not diseases, and I don't think Zeusophobia is a hoax for that matter either, is simply a psychological cause. Answers, wiktionary, weblog(list of phobias), and a quick google search shows some result. Maybe I'm wrong, and maybe you're right, but can you show me an article that states Zeusophobia is a hoax? Monkey Brain(talk) 06:06, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
You got it all wrong: it is you who have to prove that it is real, using reputable references. The fact that it is cut-and-pasted into hundreds of phobia lists does not make it real. There is lots of bullshit circulating all over 'net. As for disease or not: in my reply the keywords were "joke" and "bogus", not "disease". I also suggest you to read thru the archive of talk:-phob- `'mikka (t) 06:20, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Now that you have said that, I'll decide to ignore the rules for now. And I also think that these selective cases of keeping the list of phobias seems to be a bit too biased (pick which I think is true/like, and the rest in the pile of junk). If you want to keep one, then do it for the all, otherwise just delete them all equally and without bias. However, ignoring the rules (from my part), I would like to see some articles on statements from a notable source where it states zeusophobia is a joke/bogus. I personally don't see the joke/bogusness of such a psychological condition. If you want, I can also say many religions say that by defying god, you will be punished for eternity in hell. And I would think that logically, such statement gives rise to zeusophobia(fear of god/s). So therefore it is a real thing. Not a "joke"/"bogus" as you have said. I have read the talk pages, but I did not see anything useful other than the split of articles. Monkey Brain(talk) 07:06, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
There is fear of god(s), but there is no zeusophobia or godophobia, just as there is fear of ghosts, but there is no ghostophobia. People can fear of or dislike anything, but not all fears are notable to warrant an article and not all words that end in "-phobia" or "-ology" are real ones. And there is no democracy or egalitarism in wikipedia.If we have Bill Clinton article and don't have Joe Rumpelberger, this alone doesn't mean that we either have to delete Bill or add Joe. Every topic is judged by its own merits. And it is your job to prove that Zeusophobia is a real term, not mine to prove that it was a joke. For one last time, reputable reference, please.
And, by the way, you are absolutely welcome to write the missing article, Fear of god. I completely agree that this topic deserves atention. (An whio would have known that Fear of God exists :-)) `'mikka (t) 15:40, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
I'm not much of an article creator, but more of an editor. I'll leave that up for grabs. Monkey Brain(talk) 23:36, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Jogaila

Hi there. Despite a whopping victory for the name Jogaila on the previous vote, the Polish users have got upset and called yet another vote. They want to get it moved back to the old unpopular name Władysław II Jagiełło. If you are interested in stopping this, you'll need to cast your vote again. Sorry for all this tediousness. Regards, Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 03:49, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Quick comment on letter Ł. One has to remember that the written Polish language only started to be used in any extensive way in the 16th century. Once it came into use, the letter Ł was created immediately, since apparently there was a need to express that special sound, which must have been present in the Polish language long before. Therefore, to me it is not unreasonable to say that Jogaila took the name Władysław, with that precise spelling, since that is how the name most likely sounded at the end of the 14th century (even if it was not written in that precise form then). Balcer 18:15, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Please use english

It would greatly help me understand your take on the User_talk:Ghirlandajo#Personal_remarks issue if you'd use English. I regret that I have only one language. Friday (talk) 23:40, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

(comment) Mikka, I saw what you said at Ghirla's talk page, and I just wanted to point out a miscommunication, as it would seem that you may have mis-read my statement at WP:ANI. I never said that Ghirla said "Poles are Holes". I said that he was making comments about Poles and Holes [13]. In any case, I did find the comments offensive, but I am willing to put the situation behind us at this point, and move forward with a fresh slate. --Elonka 18:19, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Please re-read what you wrote at User talk:Ghirlandajo. A person on an edge like Ghirla have most surely read it as a deliberate falsification with the purpose of defamation. `'mikka (t) 18:29, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
In actuality, it appears that he took immediate action, and commented out the statement in question. [14]. He never apologized for it or told me that he had done that though, so I did not learn this until later (after the block, as a matter of fact). --Elonka 18:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I just want you to know that I agree with your unblocking of Ghirla, 24h for a second offence is enough. Let's hope he has learned his lesson. Still, you may want to explain your reasons on ANI just for the bookkeeping records (I already wrote there that I don't oppose your unblocking). Nonetheless you may want to be careful when unblocking familiar editors: consider how long my unblocking of Molobo and Halibutt is haunting me... Take care, -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  19:18, 28 July 2006 (UTC)


Regarding Persecution of Hindus

Moved to Talk:Persecution of Hindus. `'mikka (t) 02:13, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Nixer

These articles are now being vandalized by Nixer:

Russian Empire - Reverts without provides. Rejects official sources and does not specify the sources. Refuses to cooperate.

Naval ranks and insignia of the Russian Federation and Ranks of the People's Liberation Army - multi 3RR violation

Please, help to stop his attack and reverts.--Oliversi 11:15, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Oliversi is a sockpuppet of Roitr (see User:Roitr/sockpuppetry)--Nixer 11:40, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
I am not a sockpuppet of a long-term vandal Roitr. Provide your accusations and suspicions. Still even if I am a sockpuppet of Roitr - is do not give you the right to break a rule of wikipedia.--Oliversi 11:41, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
I think the contribs of the users posting look suspicious as well:
Wikibofh(talk) 15:32, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

State Seal

moved to Talk:Russian_Empire#Gerb. `'mikka (t) 19:41, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Roitr

Can you please block the active accounts of Roitr from User:Roitr/sockpuppetry--Nixer 19:49, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

The problem with Russian/Soviet military ranks is bogus rank system invented by our friend Roitr, and he seems resolved to push it no matter what actual findings are. Here are some previous discussions:
User talk:Nixer#Comparative military ranks of World War II
Talk:History of Russian military ranks#Russian military ranks
Wikipedia talk:Long term abuse/Roitr

--Dmitry 20:52, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

So Shri Krishna is an 'evil demon'?

Calling Shri Krishna an "evil demon" is a misinformation campaign. I was being polite. It's actually blatant defamation. This is in the Persecution of Hindus article.See talk pageNetaji 19:52, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Plz see my response in talk page. Thank you.Netaji 22:47, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Cooperative

Hello Mikkalai. I am not sure if the Cooperative subject on Wikipedia was originally started by you, but today I saw you removed the external link on GKBI, The Federation of Indonesian Batik Cooperatives, which is one of the largest Cooperative for Batik in Indonesia (batik is the national ethnic-pattern on cloth-design), established since 1948 (57 years ago)and has 8,000 members. As that topic is about cooperatives and their existences worldwide.. it has Agricultural cooperative etc. so I think it is good to enrich that topic with batik cooperative as well. Please clarify the removal and if that was just a misunderstanding, kindly put that external link on GKBI back as it was. Regards, AA.

State emblems

The state symbols of the Russian Empire were defined in the Corpus of Laws of the Russian Empire: [15] (chapter 61). There were one gerb and three state seals (Big, Medium, and Small)--Nixer 13:49, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Bonaparte

Hi mikka,

Could you please help me out with Bonaparte? He's trolling again... Thanks. —Khoikhoi 18:08, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

alternative names of administrative divisions of ROmania

hi, please take a look to Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-07-17 names of administrative divisions of Romania. My opinion is Britannica naming convention regarding the administrative divisions of ROmania is an expert guide for wikiarticles, since Wikipedia lack explicit Naming convention for administrative divisions of Sovereign States. Criztu 18:45, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

oh, and i see u are able to revert more wikiarticles at once can u please tell me how can i do the same; thx Criztu 18:45, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

ASP

Hi, recently you removed a copyright violation from Application service provider. Could you add a link to the copied text, either here or as an external link on the article. Cheers, Jayvdb 06:45, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, my fault. It seems that there are several common buzzphrases. `'mikka (t) 15:14, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Digital Pen / Digital Paper merge

Hi, why did you drop the "academic" section during your merge of [16] and [17]? Peter S. 13:43, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

World War II controvercy

Do you have time please to have a look on the World War II. There is some movement leading to Nazi apology end even saying Germany started the war some users call "bias against German people". Probably we need some meditation.--Nixer 09:07, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Satu Mare

Hi, I would like to ask you to restore again the lead and protect the Satu Mare County article. Criztu is deleting from the lead everything he don't like (alternative names, historical regions, the note about local Hungarians). I think he already broke the 3RR but the real problem is the he launched an anti-Hungarian campaign all over the Transylvania county articles. See other users opinion about the case here: Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-07-17 names of administrative divisions of Romania. Thank you for your help! Zello 19:51, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Hungarian names for administrative divisions of Romania

hi, i will ask you to read the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names) about the use of names in the articles: Dispute resolution: Avoid revert wars: If there is a dispute regarding the naming convention in the contents of the article, to prevent revert wars the name from the title of the relevant article should be used in all occurrences until a consensus is reached on the relevant talk page(s). Criztu 21:26, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Irrelevant. the dispute is not about naming convention. `'mikka (t) 21:31, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
i think the naming convention in the contents of the article refers to using a hungarian name in the lead section also Criztu 17:48, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

can you please explain it to me why Britannica does not provide a hungarian name for an administrative division of ROmania in the lead section of its article Criztu 21:26, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

This is wikipedia, with its content and rules. `'mikka (t) 21:31, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

can you please explain what is the difference between not providing a hungarian name for London in the lead section of the article, and providing a hungarian name for an administrative division of Romania in the lead section of the article Criztu 21:26, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Respect to local population in a particular county, also mentioned in the lead section, because it is a distinctive feature of the county. `'mikka (t) 21:31, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

May I jump in? I think non-local naims should be used for entities with common history, such as historic regions and city names, but not for modern administrative units. This is what we agreed to regarding Ukrainian articles with our Romanian and Polish colleagues. There is a Polish name in Lviv article and in Galicia article. There is a Romanian name in Bukovyna article and Chernivtsi article, but there are neither to modern administrative subdivisions such as Chernivtsi Oblast and Lviv Oblast. Just my 2c. --Irpen 21:46, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

No you may not :-) (without seeing the whole discussion). The whole point is that the name is local, used by a significant minority. `'mikka (t) 21:56, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
no, the point is the hungarian language is not used in official documents of Romania, an administrative division of Romania does not have alternative names in hungarian language.. The hungarian names of cities are not provided in the lead because they are used by hungarian minority, but because they are used in english sources Criztu 17:48, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, feel then free to delete my post as it is useless and irrelevant. BTW, I sent you a quick email. I hope you don't mind :). Cheers, --Irpen 22:13, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I know what you are talking about quite well; I've seen them all. My position is that names in local languages as well as historical names are encyclopedic information, and useful, too (please show me a dictionary that will translate "Satu Mare judet" in a single piece for me). My only objection in some cases was cluttering of the intro sentence. If there is more than two languages/names, I stand for creation a separate section, "Names". Otherwise I don't buy any other arguments, since they are motivated by politicizing under pretences of "NPOV", "standard format", whatever. `'mikka (t) 00:28, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Mikka, I am totally with you on that. Just one thing, note that there is a difference between the name of the historic territorry (or a city) which has historical names or the names in other languages are historical, and the names of the modern administrative subdivisions, which are mostly the creations of the 20th century. I see your clutter argument too. My overall approach was:

  • Article is titled by a local name which, if not in Latin script, is transliterated by the Wiki-wide accepted translit rule (Lviv, Chernivtsi), unless the most common English name exists (Kiev, Odessa, Warsaw) which always takes precedence even if it came into being due to the transliteration from the "wrong" (from the nationalist POV) language
  • Other names, historic, other languages that were significant in local history should be listed in the first line unless there is a special "Names" or "Etymology" section in the article, or we get rid of it all by the link to the "list of names in languages" article like you done in Lviv
  • In text usage is complicated and dealt with separately.

But this all applies to etnities that have historic names. Modern administrative subdivisions, are modern and, hence, have no "historic" names. There is no Polish (or Romanian) historic name for Chernivtsi Oblast or Lviv Oblast (respectively) while there certainly are for the towns themselves (Lviv, Chernivtsi) and historic areas (Bukovina, Galicia). Russian names could be "historic" for the oblasts though. That's how (and in agreement with our neighbors) we purged the Romanian and Polish names from the Oblast articles, but I would not even think of purging them from the city or territory articles where they are historic and, thus, governed by the common sense rules above. Maybe the HU/RO issue above is different from the case of Ukraine I described. Maybe there are different nuances. I don't know and I leave this to you guys. I just thought for a second that this is somewhat similar to the Ukrainian oblasts (vs towns) articles and thought I say a word here for the record. Cheers, --Irpen 01:02, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, Irpen, I would agree with mikka that the alternative names should rather be described in a separate section, instead in putting them all in brackets in the first line. It would lower the tension, as it eliminates the fight for the first line. This should apply to both, historical and modern entities. --KPbIC 01:28, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Irpen, the situation is different in Transylvania because the county names are not historical. They are the present-day Hungarian names used by the local Hungarian population. The historical names are sometimes the same, sometimes different as the former Hungarian administration were not totally the same as the present-day ones. For example Harghita County - present Hung. name: Hargita megye, historical Hun. names: Csíkszék and Udvarhelyszék. Zello 13:24, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

The issue here is more narrow. Do modern admin subdivisions have "historic names" to speak about at all (unlike towns and historic provinces/territories)? How to deal with the etnities that have historic names is a separate issue. (I favor a separate section (within the article) or in its absence a first line or a link to the "list of names in languages" article.) My point is that unlike towns themselves, the modern subdivisions don't have historic foreign names, except perhaps the Russian names for the Ukrainian and Belarusian oblasts since the modern ones are direct successors from the Soviet ones (even their borders did not change). There is no Polish history of Lviv Oblast while there is quite a bit of Lviv and Galicia and many oblast towns and villages. --Irpen 01:39, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Irpen, I would agree with your modern usage argument. But, too bad, you use this as an argument in one situation, and use opposite arguments in the other. As an example, regardless of "Kyiv Oblast" being much better established than "Kiev Oblast", you argued that because "Kyiv" is "Kiev", the same should apply to the oblast name. --KPbIC 02:02, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I will answer that at Dnipro laucnh vehicle talk. You don't need to ask the same q twice. If I haven't answered, I haven't got to it and your one more accusation against me has nothing at all to do to Mikka's talk. --Irpen 02:10, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I don't want to be too peaky, but have to point out that your actions show the true value you put on your arguments. --KPbIC 02:31, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
WP:STALK and WP:DFTT apply. --Irpen 03:35, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Further personal discussion at User talk:Irpen --KPbIC 06:04, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


mikkalai, can you please explain to me though, why is there no hungarian name in the lead section of London, altho there are hungarians living in London (we may choose other ethnicities). Criztu 17:53, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

For the same reason by which there is no Hungarian name in Suceava County. If you fail to see the difference in status of Hungarians in Satu Mare and in London, you have a really big problem, which I am not going to discuss. Good luck in your nationalistic struggle.
Actualy there are a Hungarian minority in Suceava, a Ukrainian minority and a Rroma minority. As there is a Hungarian minority in London, and other minorities. The status of the Hungarians in Satu Mare county is similar to the status of other minorities of Romania, like Germans, Ukrainians, Russians, Turks, Bulgarians, Serbians, etc. Their language is not an official language of Romania. Criztu 19:11, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
(for occasional readers: Criztu pretends that he does not know that, quoting, "local public administration authorities will provide inscriptions for the names of localities and public institutions under their authority, and display public interests announcements in the native language of the citizens of the respective ethnic minority". This means that, say, an American tourist in Satu Mare may have a real chance to see a Hungarian name written somewhere. (It is a totally different issue that people like Criztu will make everything possible to prevent this from happening)). `'mikka (t) 18:40, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
The law in Romania says : "At local level (meaning localities) the administration will provide inscriptions for the names of localities and public institutions(meaning Hospital, Police, School) under their authority, and display public interests announcements in the native language of the citizens of the respective ethnic minority. The official documents are written only in Romanian"(meaning the Hungarian name of Satu Mare appears nowhere in the documents of ROmania Criztu 19:11, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not an official document of Romania, neithe rit is limited to description of only official documents, of Romania or of anything else. `'mikka (t) 19:14, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
as i understand it, the Hungarian name of London is not used in English sources. this is why it is not provided in the London article as an alternative name. the Hungarian name of Satu Mare county is not used in English sources, this is why it is not provided in the Satu Mare county article of Britannica. It is not about how many Hungarians live in London or in Satu Mare county, but if the Hungarian name of London or Satu Mare county is used in English sources(maps, letters, newsreports, old encyclopedias) Criztu 19:22, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia does not forbid usage of sources written in languages other than English. `'mikka (t) 19:37, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Mikka, please take a look at Talk:Pinsk. We are discussion a similar issue there. Cheers, --Irpen 23:21, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Besides, could you please take a look here? --Irpen 20:19, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

"Other uses" discussion

You were previously involved in discussions relating to whether the wording of templates such as {{otheruses}} should simply say "For other uses" as it currently does or should read differently. I've started a discussion on the issue at Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation#"Other uses" of what? and thought you might be interested. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 03:01, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Category pages...

What do you mean sub categories? Sry but I am kind of new to this. I am working on Naturalized citizens of the united states by nationality and will add a template that can be found on the right of this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Swedish_Americans

You wouldn't happen to know how to do that template by any chance would you?

Thanks!

Here2fixCategorizations 20:12, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Criztu

In the meantime all the county articles of Transylvania were changed by Criztu deleting the Hungarian names. The same happened with the Târnava River and Lake Sfânta Ana articles. The later two are about geographical features not administrative units - proving that Criztu only uses one kind of arguments until they are good for his goals, in other cases he contrive new ones. Only the result the same: erasing minority language names. Zello 23:28, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Question at Talk:Participation dance

Quite a while back, you made an edit at Participation dance which I don't understand exactly. I put up a request for clarification at the talk page Talk:Participation dance but received no response after several months. Could you take a look at that and either rewrite the paragraph to clarify what is going on for those unfamiliar with this dance style, or otherwise explain it? Thanks. --Metropolitan90 06:54, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Third opinion

Could you please review these edits? --Ghirla -трёп- 07:22, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Reply

Although Luis is my friend, I reverted him but added {{fact}} tags to your paragraphs. Now it's your job to add sources. If they're not neutral, attribute them properly. As for the last part, what ever happened to assuming good faith? Jeez mikka, do you forget about Wikipedia policy as soon as you go anon? :p —Khoikhoi 05:15, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I cannot assume good faith from a user who started reverting me on sight and accusing me in pushing Russian POV. Please notice that unlike him I didn't start wholesale reverts of his contributions. While he was acting with enormous hostility against me from the very beginning. `'mikka (t) 16:02, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Since you are claiming that he is your friend, next time you have some beer please explain him that revert wars will not nelp him in proving his point. `'mikka (t) 17:11, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Keep being brutal. It's fits you well.

Misha, who is this? 140.203.12.4? I was not brutal, I tried to be friendly. whats wrong with beer and vodka? anyway, who is also 193.136.242.251 ? Ldingley 23:58, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Personal attacks

I got the following message on my talk page and do not know what to answer. I have consider you the best contributors to Wikipedia I ever encounted and I do not know User:Ldingley but it appear to me that he is right here. Labelling user Russophobic for one single article critical to Russia is against WP:AGF and accusations of sockpuppeting are better to keep private unless they are certain. The article itself is obviously written from one side of the military conflict and so is biased. It would be good to find an informed editor from the other side.

I have removed what looks like a personal attack from the P:RUS/NEW, please take more care the next time abakharev 15:21, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Whatever. If you see his behavior OK, have fun. It is not about a single aricle critical to Russia. It is his personal Russophobic attitude expressed in his edit comments. Please notice that he blindly reverted even anti-Russian pieces I added, implying that he is a yet another stubborn revert-warrior who decided that I am Russian and went amok, and I have no respect to him until I become convinced otherwise. Please notice that unlike him I did not revert his contribution in wholesale despite his evident purpose in villifying all Abkhazians and making all Georgians innocent victims. `'mikka (t) 16:08, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Koumpounophobia

was there an AfD or a PROD on this? might have missed it. thanks ++Lar: t/c 00:39, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Nope. `'mikka (t) 22:17, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
So it was an out of process deletion, then? It doesn't qualify as a CSD and wasn't tagged. Would you rather I restored it and took it to AfD, or left it deleted and took it to DrV... Let me know your preference. Note, you can answer here, I prefer to keep talk threaded, as it says on the top of my user page... ++Lar: t/c 00:22, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
If you think that people have nothing better to do in wikipedia, by all means, do whatever you want. However may I suggest you to do a minimal search in google to find out any serious reference besides blogs and indiscriminate/irresponsible lists of phobias. And while you are at it, please read the section "-phob-#Phobia lists", just for fun. Would you like to write a missing article for "Prostitute Phobia" mentioned there :-) ? `'mikka (t) 00:32, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Added: Wikipedia:Deletion_review#16_August_2006. I must say I don't think your responses to my questions have been particularly collegial. ++Lar: t/c 01:14, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
<Shrug>. I can only repeat: if you want to have fun fiddling with this nonsence, by all means. `'mikka (t) 01:04, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Bristol Stool Scale

Thanks for expanding the name of the journal cited in the article, I could not find what J Scand Gastroenterol expanded to, while I could have guessed correctly I didn't want to. kylet 11:34, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

"Romanianis"

Here's the stuff that he added to the Georgia (country) article. I reverted the intro, but feel free to remove the other sections and paragraphs that he added, as his edits generally tend to be pretty POV. —Khoikhoi 00:38, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Everyone logged into an account is allowed to vote in RfAs.

Please note that I have removed your strikeout of a 'permabanned troll' in Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Consumed_Crustacean because, according to policy, everyone logged into an account is allowed to vote for RfAs, unless there is reason to suspect. Quill E. Coyote 07:22, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Template:Turkic States

What is in common between Taymyria, Xinjiang, Dagestan and Cyprus? Please check the template to learn the answer. --Ghirla -трёп- 15:04, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Justin Bonomo

Mikka - You closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Justin Bonomo saying that the conclusion was delete. This confuses me for two reasons: (1) you voted in the AfD, I thought closing admins were supposed to not be voters and (2) it's not been deleted. Thanks for looking into this. --best, kevin [kzollman][talk] 20:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for looking into it. --best, kevin [kzollman][talk] 20:24, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Turkic States

First of all, it's not like you know. We are very close people to each other, for example an Altai people and a Turkish peope could understand each other easly but a German and a British can't! though they're Germanic peoples.

You can see same of this template in Deutsch Wikipedia, Russian Wikipedia, Turkish Wikipedia, Azerbaijani Wikipedia and Kazakh Wikipedia.

Zaparojdik

Image:180px-Nehrung.jpg listed for deletion

Hello, I listed this image because it is obsolete. Better one is available on commons at Image:Curonian Spit and Lagoon.png. Visit WP:IFD, if you disagree. Renata 00:11, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

No problemo. Viso gero. `'mikka (t) 01:05, 19 August 2006 (UTC)


Kengir uprising

I just saw the warning saying you're on break but I'm going to post this question nonetheless: I see from the history of the page on Kengir that one of your sources was a Ukrainian-language book on the uprising that took place there and I was wondering if you'd please help me out and go over the new page for the uprising, Kengir uprising. This is mainly because I'm a) don't speak Russian or Ukrainian; b) am on my quest to get the article up to FA status and it needs to come from more than just one source (the vast majority of the stuff in the article right now comes from Solzhenitsyn's efforts); and c) am a bit rusty on my Soviet history and I think the article could really benefit from a once-over of someone more expert than I. Thanks a lot in advance, whenever you read this! --Clngre 12:10, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Grigori Perelman

Thanks, but the links are misleading. The translation is a literal one, but adding the links doesn't help english language readers of WP to figure out what his diss concerns, so I removed them. ---CH 22:55, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

And I restored them. If you know more, please explain, if not, back off. `'mikka (t) 23:01, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Mikkalai, please see the talk page. I don't know what your mathematical background is, but I earned a Ph.D. in mathematics (see my user page), I have heard Hamilton speak on this more than once, and I have recently played with computations related to the Ricci flow, so I probably do know more than you. There is agreement among at least two other users that these links are seriously misleading. I don't know what your intention is, but you are not helping to improve the article here. Please discuss on the talk page your reasoning if you disagree.---CH 23:07, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Ignored. Please use proper talk page for discussion. Sorry, I cannot believe you have math PhD. You talk like a politician. It seems also that you have trouble in reading what is actually written in the article talk page. `'mikka (t) 23:10, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, Mikka, I am disappointed to see that you haven't replied to my query in the section below, or made any response that I can see to my attempts to spread oil on troubled waters after our unfortunate misunderstanding, but let me add a suggestion: if you put a bit more information about your mathematical background in a prominent location on your user page, it might prevent any future misunderstandings about how much you know about mathematics. Since there is currently nothing there (that I can see) indicating any likelihood that you have any particular knowledge of advanced mathematics, I think my assumption that I probably know more than you about mathematics (see above), simply because I have earned a Ph.D. in that subject, was understandable. I do however regret my choice of words in Talk:Grigori Perelman (based upon my misconception that you wanted to add a link from GP's dissertation to paraboloid), and I urge you to also try harder to conform to the spirit of WP:CIV in future. Hope you will take this advice in the spirit intended.---CH 04:54, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Justin Bonomo on deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Justin Bonomo. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, your reasons on how or why you did so will be greatly appreciated in the above review. Love, Coyote (t) 22:19, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Comparison theorem

Good for you! OK, you obviously do know more than I about this subject :-) Hope you're not still mad at me. ---CH 06:54, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Why the insistence on subst-ing?

Why the insistence on subst-ing {{mergefrom}} and {{mergeto}}, both of which involve complex Wiki code and appear at the very start of articles? Doing so deters other potential editors from contributing, because they click the "edit" link and see an overwhelming (and, unbeknownst to them, unnecessary) mess of markup.

And it's fairly rude to write "bug off" in an edit summary, as you did here. Seeing as the edit served to revert mine, I can only assume the summary was directed at me. Why? Did I do something to offend you? If so, please let me know, so I can apologize properly.

Ruakh 02:36, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Assume good faith basically tells you that your colleague is most probably not a complete idiot. You undid my action without much thought. I considered this kind of edit similar to some color/colour warriors. Now I see you are not one of them and apologize. I was in the middle of a complex multi-edit and was annoyed by the distraction, sorry.

In fact, it was not a simple substitution: I edited the text so that it would point directly to the section of the talk page with the discussion of merge proposal. "Complex wiki code" is a weak argument. Some templates, such as {{afd}} are specifically instructed to substitute. `'mikka (t) 03:02, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I appreciate and accept your apology. But I find it a bit strange that you're citing "assume good faith" to me — who reverted whom with rude words in place of explanation? Thanks for explaining your reasons. I'm not sure I agree with them — I think that's the kind of feature that should be incorporated into the template (using an optional parameter), rather than the kind of feature that should be hacked in by subst-ing and making manual alterations — but you have your reasons, and I see no reason to enter a revert war over such a minor matter. So, thanks again for explaining, and have a good day. Ruakh 13:18, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Please review your deletetion

Hi, you recently deleted Omphalophobia. I don't think that was justified under the deletion policy. I'll be much obliged if you restore it, thanks! Mixel 09:15, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Transliteration in Russian reduplication

I'd like to convert the transliteration into IPA but I don't speak Russian and I don't know the stress of non-dictionary forms. Do you think you could help me out? AEuSoes1 02:41, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Regulamentul Organic

Hi, Mikkalai. I am trying to find someone who can provide the Russian version for the name Regulamentul Organic (Organic Satute, Organic Regulations, Reglement Organique, or any of these forms in plural), the constitution given to the Danubian Principalities by the Russian overseers (see Pavel Kiselyov) in the 1830s. I guess this may be rather obscure, but perhaps you can help me; if you can, please provide both Cyrillic and transliteration for the name (I am clumsy at Russian-to-English transliteration). I need this for am article I plan to start. Many thanks. Dahn 14:25, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

органический регламент. In any case, the orgin of the term is French. As you may have already noticed, the French term 'Règlement Organique' is used in many `'mikka (t) 16:02, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Thank you. Dahn 15:59, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

be.wikipedia.org

Я гляджу, Вы напісалі даволі шмат артыкулаў у ангельскай Вікіпэдыі... Можа, пачніце паступова перакладаць іх на беларускую мову ды й дапаўняць імі беларускую Вікіпэдыю? ;-) -- Bełamp 01:13, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Na zhal, maja mova zanadta psutaja, kepska budze. `'mikka (t) 00:33, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Nu moža, vy hoć pasprabujcie? My budziem vypraŭlać, bo hałoŭnaje, kab źmiest byŭ :) -- Bełamp 23:11, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Justin Bonomo

Please reconsider your vote in the AFD for this article. If you look at the article, it is now referenced, and there are more possible sources in both the first AFD and the deletion review. Grindingteeth 22:12, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Albula river

I just wanted to congratulate you - you have saved an important article that, left as it was, would have been deleted. - Blood red sandman 01:24, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Bless you

I've just searched through an online version of the Golden Ass right now, and you're right that it doesn't seem to be there. Apparently the quote was taken from this page, along with a couple other historic quotes, but if you'll look back in the history you'll see that someone has deleted all of the others. Not sure what's up with that source but I guess it could be possible that there are different interpretations of the original latin text?

  • If it is an "interpretation", then it cannot be a "proof" about the origination date. `'mikka (t) 19:07, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
I didn't disagree with your removal of this quote.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ 

About the other couple of removals you made, though: Another urban legend states that you cannot open your eyes while you sneeze, or if you manage to your eyes will pop out. This is, as stated, nothing more than an urban legend. I believe this last statement should be preserved in some form, merely to inform the reader that urban legends are not considered to be factual, for some people may assume attaching an urban legend tag merely implies that the truth is unknown.

I'm glad you know that, but I don't believe most other readers think so logically/black and white about such popular concepts, and would have a tendancy to read over the statement as it is right now without considering the implications.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ 

Also: There are many theories regarding the origin of this custom. As an introductory sentence, I believe there is no "redundancy" here. Removing this sentence merely strips the prose of any literary flow, and I don't believe articles should be arranged as mere lists and arrangements of factual statements.

  • There is only one "theory" in the section, so the phrase is unjustified. In any case there is no "many theories" (superstitions are not theories). As for literary flow, it seems not much worsened. `'mikka (t) 19:07, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
There are many theories, I could easily list three. Only one of them is widely accepted so I chose to include only that one.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  05:07, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Anyways, thanks for your diligence!  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  17:29, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  08:53, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Russian revolution

Mikhail, Do you need these photos for Russian revolution related articles? I think they are useful. Cheers. Ldingley 21:20, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Mikkail. You don’t like that Soviet tag? There should be one for Russian Federation rule on copyright. Mikhail, I have tons of Russian revolution and Russian historical photos. Most of them are not copyrighted or protected. They belong for the public view. What is the best way to upload them? Upload them in Wiki commons? Thanks