User talk:Garik 11

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User:Garik 11)
Jump to: navigation, search
Hello Garik 11! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking Button sig2.png or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Khoikhoi 03:59, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines

The Community
Things to do


Thanks, Garik. I have reverted this copy-paste move and notified the user. If you spot another move like this, please let me know or just go ahead and fix it on your own (I didn't find any other moves after a quick look at the user's most recent contributions). Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:52, December 22, 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs[edit]

Information.svg Hello Garik 11! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 2,866 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

  1. David Bascombe - Find sources: "David Bascombe" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · highbeam · JSTOR · free images · wikipedia library

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 04:45, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. Garik 11 (talk) 09:36, 17 January 2010 (UTC)


Thanks for this edit. It was getting a bit silly, but I didn't get this good idea.... — Mariah-Yulia • Talk to me! 15:30, 18 January 2010 (UTC)


Ukraine Barnstar.png Ukraine Barnstar
I give you this Ukraine Barnstar making usefull edits in Ukrainian related articles the past months and for correcting some of my lack of insights....
Mariah-Yulia • Talk to me! 19:05, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
I appreciate this one. Thank you for all your efforts, too, while mine are so little. Garik 11 (talk) 20:36, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

No Prime Minister in Ukraine at the moment?[edit]

According to your last edits to Yulia Tymoshenko there is no Prime Minister in/of Ukraine at the moment. I thuogh that until a new coalition is formed the current government remains in place.... — Mariah-Yulia • Talk to me! 12:22, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it is unclear at the moment who will be the acting Prime Minister in the days to come before a new coalition is formed. Garik 11 (talk) 13:23, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Wait untill about 4 o'clock Smiley.svg I hope Ivan Vasiunyk will not be acting PM cause I havn't time or will to write an article about him. Smiley.svg. — Mariah-Yulia • Talk to me! 13:51, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Garik 11. You have new messages at Connormah's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Victoria Taranova and Kharkov[edit]

in your edit to the article on Kharkov on 06:46, 15 April 2010 you deleted Victoria Taranova from the list of famous people from Kharkov, with the words not really.

I know nothing about Victoria Taranova. However the article on her (which quotes no sources) says that she was born in Kharkov. If you have sources that show that she was born somewhere else, please could you edit the article on her, and add citations for the revised information.--Toddy1 (talk) 22:21, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't make myself quite clear. By saying "not really" I meant "not really one of the famous people from Kharkov". She is not even included in the quite lengthy lists of famous people from Kharkov in Russian Wikipedia and Ukrainian one. She is just not notable enough to be featured alongside some really great names. In my opinion, we shouldn't overload this list with just everyone who can write or sing or whatever and hails from Kharkov. But if you think she's worth inclusion you might as well re-add her. Garik 11 (talk) 07:06, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Things That Make You Go Hmmm...[edit]

This May 2010 poll by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology puzzles me it claims that most voters of Party of Regions (PoR) are over 45 years old and it also claims PoR has the greatest support in Ukraine's eastern (65%) and southern (51%) regions. This leaves me wondering where young people in these eastern and southern regions vote for Confused.svg. Can you make an educated guess about that? Thanks in advance Smiley kabelsalat.gif! — Mariah-Yulia • Talk to me! 17:43, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I can only make an uneducated guess based on my perception that young Ukrainians, irrespective of regions, still don't have a candidate / party they prefer to vote for. The results of that poll also show that all the major parties draw their support mainly from not so very young people. I think young people normally don't vote at all. Garik 11 (talk) 20:44, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Personal question[edit]

Garik, are you personally accept me as a some sort of vandal? Have you even looked at the references that I provided for Yanukovych edits? Do you know what was the goal of the Medvedev's visit to Kiev on May 17, 2010? It is widely discussed issue not only in Ukraine, but abroad as well. One of the goals was to yield Ukrainian territories in Kerch sound to allow the Russian ships move without paying any taxation. The incident also has a history behind it when the Russian government allowed the construction of a dam as part of a bridge. The accident with the pine wreath will (I guarantee it) become the historical event one way or another. One of the Kiev public societies Brotherhood filed a criminal case on the presidential escort for their duty negligence. Did you know anything about that? I personally do not understand why people are trying to hide it. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 14:15, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Excuse me, but I just reverted the information about the so-called "attack by a pine wreath" which not only I find unencyclopaedic and having hardly any connection with what you have written above. Please discuss it first on the article's talk page, if you insist on including. Garik 11 (talk) 14:28, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, thank you on responding back. I do not want to make an edit war out of it. I agree that article is not in the best shape and I think it should be split into several of them. Mr.Yanukovych is not an ordinary person and his strife for power is worth to be mentioned in separate article. Beside that in recent developments several important events took already place that made out of Yanukovych a person with dictatorship-like way of governing. Several of them took place in the two day visit of Mr.Medvedev to Kiev.

Even though from English world perspective they are meaningless, it promise to develop into much bigger later in history as in example of the Black Sea Fleet and the developments in Crimea. The EU continues not only to ignore the Russian imperialistic wants, but in some cases even encourage their farther development as in case with Georgia. To this day no one really enforces the Russian Federation to pull their Armed Forces from several regions of the former Soviet Union (Transnistria, Osetia, Abkhasia, Ukraine, and others). Russia promised to withdraw heir troops from Moldova in 1997(!). How long ago was that? Are we going into the second decade of idleness? The last paragraph is kind of way off topic, but I tried to turn your attention.

No one in Ukraine still really understands how Yanukovych managed to pull a win at the past presidential elections when his tricks are widely known. Plus his personal charisma is not that great to develop such a strong free-will support. Those incidents as with the wreath as well as the egg-throwing attack only reflect public opinion for the President of Ukraine. Which was my intention for the inclusion of that fact in the article. Yanukovych promised consolidation of the public opinion, unification of the country, but instead he completely ignores his promises. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 20:12, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi Garik, I'm part of the management team representing Jonas Myrin. And I was wondering if I could enlist your help? Can we talk via email if possible? my email is —Preceding unsigned comment added by Highlights88 (talkcontribs) 12:24, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Garik 11. You have new messages at Sk4170's talk page.
Message added 22:40, 21 October 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ridiculous interpretation of Ukrainians[edit]

Hi there! Do you understand the difference between the two words "Ukrainians" and "Ukrainain citizens"? I hope you recognize hidden fascism on the one hand, and the input of objective data from well known sources. I believe in your honest side, because this way a couple of contributors presents Ukrainians is shameful. If anything, you can write something that looks like a page about the Russians. In the end, readers are not idiots and they laugh a ridiculous interpretation of several contributors. I hope that you understand that fact. Best regards! --SeikoEn (talk) 12:00, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

I just don't understand your point of view on what the word "Ukrainians" means then. On the one hand, you insist that it means an ethinc group only. On the other hand, you have furnished the article's infobox with a collage of "Ukrainians" featuring people like Tymoshenko who is anything but Ukrainian by ethnicity while undoubtedly being a "Ukrainian citizen". As for my point of view, I do agree with Galassi who quotes the Constitution of Ukraine as the reliable source outweighing all the other sources. --Garik 11 (talk) 22:39, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
You are absolutely right about some people who take ethnic identity upon their citizhenship like Tymoshenko, but those people do not mark Ukrainians as they are not a nation - several Wikipedia users are doing just that what is not correct. This sentence is also not correct (without source): "... is significantly less homogenous than neighboring ethnic groups." In the same way you can write about any nation, especially Russians. In short, article about Ukrainians is written on the political way and not professionaly like for example about Russians, Poles or Germans. Few uneducated users are traying to present Ukrainians as if they are not a nation and they don't allow anyone to join the work. This article about Ukrainians is not so important to me but it is shemful part of Wikipedia. Information about Ukrainians sholud have facts and sources, and not some malicious interpretations of several users. I hope you will understand my words, they are not written withou reasons. BR! --SeikoEn (talk) 17:20, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Second, you write: "As for my point of view, I do agree with Galassi who quotes the Constitution of Ukraine as the reliable source outweighing all the other sources." WHERE IS THE SOURCE FOR THIS SENTENCE? I am speaking several languages and I would like to read this quotaishon or interprtation of Mr. Galassi. Thanks! --SeikoEn (talk) 17:29, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Other intentional errors[edit]

There are lots of errors about russian and ukrainian history. The historical maps of Kievan Rus' are the best example. Here's a small sample of that fact: russian town Nizhny Novgorod is founded in 1221, and you cant have it on the maps from 10th or 11th century - or The boundaries of these historical maps are purely fictitious. Why do I say they are intentional errors?! Because they do not have a source and several users puts them in front of those historical maps that have a source. Is this a vandalism? Certainly it is! Disputed sentences and maps without source are useless and finally Wikipedia becomes empty space, without real information. I am telling you this because I want you to understand that Wikipedia is becomeing a children's encyclopedia. --SeikoEn (talk) 17:59, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Anne Sinclair[edit]

Hi, just to let you know that I have restored your comments to Talk:Anne Sinclair as I feel that they do add something, you give good cites from WP:POLICY and the fact that you quote one bit that I have already mentioned above is a good thing as it shows two completely independent editors have read the debate, read the policies and come to the same conclusion. Thank you.

I prefer to restore your comments as the user who insists on including the phrase seems to be a bit reluctant to let go and if they see that they are the only one to have this opinion then maybe they'll reconsider their position. CaptainScreebo Parley! 13:47, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I left a message on the russian literature talk page -- (talk) 23:14, 17 November 2011 (UTC)


Hello there

Please stop deleting my legitimate request for a reliable source proving your point. Doing so is nothing but vandalism. You'd better find a reliable source instead proving Chernigov is the native name of the city and Chernihiv is just the official one. Your reference to the infoboxes of similar cities can't be accepted as an actual argument for two simple reasons: 1) it isn't accompanied by a reliable definition of a "similar city", 2) it must be proven the infoboxes you're referring to have been filled in correctly. (talk) 12:30, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello again

You've removed my reliable source request mark again without having responded to my previous message on your talk page. I've suggested previously you should cite a reliable source proving Chernigov is the native name of the city and Chernihiv is just the official one. Your vague reference to the content of Chernihiv page can't be taken as an adequate reaction to my request. Unfortunately you seem to prefer edit warring over a constructive dialogue. I'd like to point out again your behaviour can't but be considered vandalism. (talk) 13:18, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

It is a pity you did not post warnings on this disruptive user's talk page, when you reverted his/her edits. If you had, then it would have been an easy matter to ask for him/her to be blocked. I have placed a final warning on his/her talk page.--Toddy1 (talk) 14:26, 26 December 2011 (UTC)


Hi there, here you say that the arguments on the talk page are good, yet they make no mention of actual policy (they complain about 'yellow press', a subjective term not mentioned in policy). WP:BLP says that allegations are fine if sourced to multiple RS. The allegations about Putin are sourced thusly. What is the problem? Malick78 (talk) 22:11, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

The problem is that there is still no consensus. You've been bold, but your textual additions are being reverted by several other editors. In discussions of textual additions or editorial alterations, a lack of consensus results in no change in the article. --Garik 11 (talk) 10:52, 19 May 2012 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Garik 11. You have new messages at Ukexpat's talk page.
Message added 19:24, 8 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

ukexpat (talk) 19:24, 8 October 2012 (UTC)


If you help me find a reference saying his grandfather moved to Mogilev from Russia we could return the Russian part to the article. I'm neutral and don't promote any side, if you get that reference I will support returning that information to the article! (talk) 17:42, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Due to the fact his grandfather was a soldier it's possible that he was stationed in Belarus but was originaly from Russia. Anything on that? (talk) 17:46, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Warning regarding vandalism[edit]

Please be advised that any further attempt by you to remove reliable references eg. the Australian Dictionary of Biography in the article Nicholas Miklouho-Maclay, like you have done [1] will be interpreted as deliberate vandalism and will be placed on the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents or the page for Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Additionally, I ask you to desist from using emotional language in your edit titles imputing me with deliberate breaches of Wiki policy eg. "rm POV-pushing" "unnecessary POV-pushing ethnicity details". --Very trivial (talk) 11:44, 13 February 2013 (UTC)


Hi Garik 11, I was bold, you reverted, now we're at the discuss step. I saw that you'd reverted my edits to Air with the comment "unnecessary" I'd like to talk a bit about why you felt the changes were “unnecessary” I think that the image illustrates the article in a way that text alone cannont do. The lead image in the infobox has very little prominence compared to the text content, the table of contents alignment causes the article text to be unnecessarily be pushed further down the page, and breaks up the article text in a distracting way. Looking forward to hearing back from you Jared Zimmerman (talk) 17:40, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your note. Frankly, I do not remember ever seeing a wiki page on a musical artist or whatsoever with this kind of formatting. I cannot see how a gigantic image at the very top can "illustrate the article in a way that text alone cannot do" either, since the article is not about, say, a painter, and the image is not a painting of his, but it's about music. More importantly, the current layout of the article is just the standard one as per MOS:LAYOUT. All the best, --Garik 11 (talk) 18:56, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
I see in Elements of the Lead] from MOS:LAYOUT that the rational for using images in the lead should be after the intro text due to screen readers, so for the Air article an image would appear after "Air is a music duo from Versailles, France, consisting of Nicolas Godin and Jean-Benoît Dunckel.[1]" would that be a workable solution for you?Jared Zimmerman (talk) 19:41, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
So you still want to put the image that large? However, "lead images should usually be no wider than "upright=1.35" ("300px")" as per WP:IMGSIZE. Also, I do believe there is no valid rationale for displaying two similar images that close to each other. The infobox image is quite in its place. I would suggest replacing it with your image if you find it somewhat better but still this does not seem appropriate as the current infobox image is more recent and we tend to use newer images in infoboxes. --Garik 11 (talk) 20:47, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
I'm practicing writing a new template by creating a variation of wide image template that will have better control over vertical height, perhaps once i'm done we can try it out on the Air article to have an into images that takes up less vertical height. To your point surely you've seen other articles that use the wide image template and the effect that has positively of changing the mood of a page by having a different balace of text to images. As far as why you'd have multiple Images on a page, I don't follow your point… are you saying an article doesn't benefit from having more imagery? Jared Zimmerman (talk) 21:33, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
Well, my point is again, I've never seen an article with images that wide in the lead, neither have I read a rule that allows them there. And yes, I believe one should be careful with the amount and size of images so the articles (on musical artists in particular) don't look like fan pages. --Garik 11 (talk) 08:03, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Point taken, I hope that things like article layout and style would evolve over time, and that just because we've not seen it before isn't a reason to not try something new.Jared Zimmerman (talk) 20:04, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Ukrainian pronunciation / transliteration[edit]

Hi. Regarding the dispute between you and Lvivske over the correct transliteration and pronunciation of Ukrainian в, I just posted a lengthy comment on Lvivske's talk page on this subject, and I'd like to know if you believe my observations might help at all to form a basis for resolving the disagreement. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 17:16, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Reino Häyhänen translation...[edit]

What would Reino Häyhänen be in Russian? Adamdaley (talk) 06:40, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Рейно Хейханен 1, 2, 3 --Garik 11 (talk) 13:00, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher[edit]

May I respectfully advise you to stop trying to teach an experienced editor to suck eggs, and actually read below WP:OPENPARA to WP:BIRTHNAME, which you seem to be conveniently ignoring! You will note that none of the individuals in the examples are commonly known by their birth names, which are still listed in the opening paragraph. Note in particular the second paragraph: "In some cases, subjects have legally changed their names at some point after birth. In these cases the birth name should be given as well." In this instance it does not appear that Fisher even did legally change his name, so his birth name was actually his real name all his life. In what way, therefore, am I going against guidelines by including an individual's birth name in the opening paragraph? Any reversion of this in future would clearly therefore be for your own personal preferences, and not in any way following Wikipedia guidelines. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:47, 12 September 2014 (UTC)