User talk:Dbachmann

An invite to join WikiProject Russia

Hi, you are cordially invited to join WikiProject Russia. We are a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to Russia.
We look forward to welcoming you to the project! —Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); May 4, 2011; 15:10 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Dbachmann. You have new messages at Silver seren's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Dbachmann! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Please comment

Hi. Please comment: Scythians: Consensus for the lead section: Iranian people or Iranian-speaking people. Thanks. Zheek (talk) 10:29, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Ethnic groups in Europe

Template:Ethnic groups in Europe has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. NSH001 (talk) 15:33, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Request for comment

Dear Dab, sorry to bother you. Since you know the area well, can you comment here:[1]. Basically, user making ethno-nationalist maps, and also reverting other users who remove his map (despite being told not to do so previously by admins). Here is his map [2] which is a falsification and does not have any sources (none of the sources he cites support his map and they are distortions of sources, and some the sources are not even RS in the first place). You know for example that currently Nagorno-Karabagh is at least Armenian speaking. I had to go into some detail why his ethnic map is not just a POV but grossly exaggerated and contradicts reliable maps on Iran/Iraq made by universities such as Texas or Columbia [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]. I know it is extremely silly, but also annoying to constantly deal with this sort of stuff. Not sure how you can do it but please make a comment (old admirer). --Xodabande14 (talk) 21:34, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the notification, I will try to look into it. Surely this can be addressed purely on a WP:RS basis, without need to go into the nationalistic mud-flinging.

I cringe to see all the self-made "ethnic maps" on commons, which cite as their "sources" yet more self-made maps. That part of the world is really a nasty place in terms of ethnic vitriol, or should I say ethnic vitriol is more often directed there, apparently from the comfort of emigrants into western "multiculturalism" towards their imagined homelands. --dab (𒁳) 07:00, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks dab. It is unfortunate how ethnic conflicts waste so much time of Wikipedia. It is not just WP:RS (these sorts of users don't care about that). There are also some good maps out there in wiki commons that meet WP:RS (one of them reverted by the user to put his own map) and are in several of these related articles. I have also mentioned WP:RS university of Columbia/Texas maps. But that is not the issue. It is pattern that I am concerned about. The user has been warned of AA2, and was asked specifically to discuss any controversial edits and not slow revert war. He failed to do that. Recently Arbcomm enforcement is doing a nice job on clamping down on these sorts of nationalistic editing and that is where I made my complaint: [8]. Note the user has less than 500 edits and his page [9] and block log: [10]. I appreciate your comment here: [11] that can have weight in. Note just the first section where I mention behavior (outside of the scope of RS). The second section is about RS. AA2 was proposed precisely to relieve the community from such behavior, specially users that have been warned and block already. So your sound judgment is appreciated. Note I had to make a long report for admins who are not aware of the area (Part II which is long but illustrates some fact on how the users make dubious maps and then tries to claim sources for them), but my main point was also on the user's previous behavior (Part I of the complaint) --Xodabande14 (talk) 09:23, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I realize this is more than "WP:RS", but what I mean is that we do not have to enter into a debate on who is the evil nationalist and who isn't as long as we can simply reject an edit on technical grounds, in this case, use of an unreferenced map. I am busy in real life just now, but I will comment on this later on. regards, --dab (𒁳) 09:38, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment. When you get a chance to look at AE[12], you may want to read the unfortunate waste of time discussions on the Azerbaijani people talkpage .... --Xodabande14 (talk) 18:59, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

very small request

Dab, since your an admin, do you mind if you move your comment from here: [13] to here:[14] where it says: "Result concerning Ebrahimi-amir This section is to be edited only by uninvolved administrators. Comments by others will be moved to the section above.". Just a side note, the person being discussed actually made the map as well and then reverted/inserted it.--Xodabande14 (talk) 14:07, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Urals blank map.png

Thank you for uploading File:Urals blank map.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:52, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Eponymous categories

I noticed you commented on the Category:Eponymous categories talk page, so i wanted to let you know i created User:Mercurywoodrose/Userboxes/Eponymous Categories (and User:Mercurywoodrose/Userboxes/Eponymous Categories pro). I dont know if i am helping the WP process, but i enjoyed doing it. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 18:16, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. It would be a relief to see WP is capable of actually getting rid of obvious crap like this. Common sense often prevails, but never without the cost of a painful, drawn-out, circular debate. --dab (𒁳) 18:19, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

GFDL

Please see my comment at Talk:The Fall of Arthur. Regards, De728631 (talk) 20:54, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

User:Ngunalik editing Acholi people

Hi, sorry to bother you, but I'm not sure whom else to contact in this kind of situations (I don't think WP:ANI would do, since the issue is not vandalism). I remember you as an editor who has experience in dealing with the various nationalist POV-pushers from around the world that plague linguistics- and history-related articles (the last time when I contacted you, it concerned the precise age of Armenia). In this case, it's a Ugandan nationalist who is determined to right a great wrong and prove to the world that his "Nilo-Shemitic" (sic) ethnic group were Hebrews or even Christians long before any missionaries came; his only source is a crackpot article by a non-expert on a non-peer-reviewed website. I've tried to explain to him all the policies that he is violating, but it seems like a pointless endeavour; he doesn't seem interested in listening and just reverts. Here is a taste of his arguments: he thinks the Acholi people's history is "their copyright" and that editors who are not Acholi have no business questioning his edits. By the way, looking at his activities elsewhere on Wikipedia, his main interest seems to be to prove that Joseph Kony isn't such a bad guy after all and he is even having some success at edit warring there, too. I'm not a regular Wikipedian, I stumbled upon this Acholi article accidentally and I can't afford to have a two-month edit conflict with this poor soul, who probably should have been banned a long time ago to begin with. So unless someone with better abilities addresses the problem, I'll just have to let him insert his nonsense and be one additional harm to Wikipedia. Greetings, --Anonymous44 (talk) 22:09, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Sumerian language

Dear Dbachmann, In your Revision as of 13:46, 10 February 2005 of the page “Sumerian Language”, you wrote: “Examples of suggested related languages include the Hurro-Urartian languages (see Subarian, Alarodian),……” Can you, please, provide the citations to sources of this statement. I also think that this relation exists, but I have not appropriate information. By the way, do you speak Russian? Best regards, Alex — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexander Berchansky|talk (talk)

I had to dig for this, 2005 is quite a while ago now.

diff. I did not suggest that this relation exists, I merely stated that some people have claimed it does. Actually I was making fun of everyone claiming whatever they like about a complete unknown.

I know a little bit of Russian, but I cannot claim I actually speak it. --dab (𒁳) 08:46, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Witch trials in the early modern period

Thanks for the thoughts, my problem is threefold. Yes the categorization is messed up, and yes it can be fixed by editing the category structure, it cannot be fixed by removing categories that help the reader place the article in context. Secondly I am not sure of the value of the reader opening the show bar for {{witch hunt}} and then open the category you have replaced the others with to discover it is one and the same. Thirdly though not as specific as say Bury St. Edmunds witch trials the category (for example) legal history does have relevance and should stay. I will reinstate at the moment but await your thoughts on this. Thanks, Edmund Patrick – confer 20:38, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

ok, it may be we have a communication problem. We should first lay out the category system as it exists, then agree on what its problems are, and then find a solution. I am not sure I understand this,

I am not sure of the value of the reader opening the show bar for {{witch hunt}} and then open the category you have replaced the others with to discover it is one and the same.

I think the basic problem is an overloading of the term witch hunt. It is often use to mean the Early Modern witch-hunts, but in other contexts it may of course refer to any witch-hunt, e.g. in modern Africa, (not to mention figurative use). There may also be a similar overloading of witch trial, it may mean the actual proceedings of a specific court of law, or it may be used more widely, I suppose, "the witch trials" generically meaning "the entire complex of the witch craze in the Early Modern period".

We just need to become aware of these problems explicitly and then decide how we want to handle them for the purposes of categorization.

Also, regarding

the category (for example) legal history does have relevance and should stay

I think this is a misunderstanding on your part. Our categorization system is hierarchical. As long as Category:Witch trials is in the category Category:Legal history (which it should be, assuming that we restrict "witch trials" to actual, regular trials), every article in Category:Witch trials is automatically in the category Category:Legal history, and the category Category:Legal history should not be added to the page directly. But perhaps I misunderstood what you were saying? --dab (𒁳) 05:28, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

thanks, I will think,check out and explore, then get back to you. Edmund Patrick – confer 20:31, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Category:Culture heroes

Category:Culture heroes, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 04:59, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Om Shivaya Namah

There's new info and references on the talk page you should see. I put the documentary proof in the form of the original book, a known translation of that book, and an anthology containing said translation. 70.194.66.99 (talk) 23:56, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Om Namah Shivaya for a direct link to the page. 70.194.66.99 (talk) 23:57, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Syncatabasis

A tag has been placed on Syncatabasis, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Jargon not interesting for the vast majority of Wikipedia's readers, and I could not find a source for the rhetorics part on neither Google Books nor Google Scholar

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here.