User talk:Kransky

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome!

/Archive 1

Contents

Aeroflot destinations[edit]

Hi, Kransky! Don't know if you speak Russian. May I ask you to pay attention to the changes you've done to the Aeroflot destinations article: it contains destinations served by Aeroflot as a flag-carrier of the Russian Federation (not of the USSR), starting from 1992. By that date, Aeroflot already dicontinued its flights to Burma/Rangoon. As well as Gander was used only for a technical stop (refuling, changing crew), not a regular destination. May I ask you to take it into consideration and not to remake it once again. Thank you and good luck! --Dimitree 22:06, 17 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dimitree (talkcontribs)

  • You wrote: The Aeroflot of 1992 is still the same airline of 1982. Definitely not! By the year of 1992, Aeroflot reduced twice its route-net. So what is the same in this case?
    • Moreover, if you insist in citating all the routes of Aeroflot, you should start from the year 1923 - when Aeroflot was found, - and include all its local flights to almost each city and village in USSR.
    • Moreover again: Aeroflot in 1992 is a flag-carrier of the Russian Federation, not of the Soviet Union (1982). It means, if you post a flight to Rangoon, for example, you citate the route of the aircompany belonging to a state that no more exists.
  • If you need more arguments, please, see the "Discussion" section of this very page "Aeroflot destinations". Regards, --Dimitree 19:41, 18 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dimitree (talkcontribs)

Diplomatic missions of Russia[edit]

I'm not quite sure why I am getting this message—I've never edited that list. I remember being asked my opinion about the "old" and the "new" layouts, and my opinion was that the format proposed by Russavia was better—it makes information easier to find and more accessible, more visually appealing, more structured, easier to maintain, and overall more helpful to our readers. I also understood how changing the format in all articles would be an inconvenience to our editors, but I also pointed out that convenience of the editors takes back seat to the convenience of our readers all the time, every time, no exceptions.

If you ask my opinion once again today, you will find that it has not changed since the last time. However, since I am neither a contributor to the articles about diplomatic relations nor exactly am very interested in the subject, voicing my opinion when asked is pretty much the extent of my willingness to get involved. Working out the details and the approach to handling this list in particular or all similar lists in general is up to the members of whatever WikiProject this list is in scope. However, if you ask me, leaving a proposed list up for six months and doing nothing about soliciting the opinions about it is not the way to improve things. Assuming it has not yet been done, I'd recommend actively starting a discussion regarding how these lists are to be handled and what the better layout is. Village pump or CENT should do nicely.

I also disagree this issue has anything to do with the MoS excerpt you cited. The "styles" discussed in that passage refer first and foremost to insubstantial (although important) style issues—such as choice of a variety of English used in the article, use of spaces in headers/list bullets, choice of the style of referencing, etc. Deciding on the layout of a list, especially when the choices are so dissimilar, is of a lot more importance than those minor details, as it affects our readership to a far greater extent and thus should be discussed more thoroughly.

Please let me know if there is anything else I can do. Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 13:56, March 23, 2009 (UTC)

List of diplomatic missions[edit]

Hi Kransky,

There are currently two main types of pages listing diplomatic missions: one listing diplomatic missions by receiving country and the other listing them by sending country. Before I had any part in these pages, the lists by receiving country were called "List of diplomatic missions in x" while those by sending country were called "Diplomatic missions of x". I saw this to be incongruous, as the format of the two types of pages was nearly identical, all of them composed primarily of a list. For this reason, I have been moving the lists of diplomatic missions by sending country to the naming format "List of diplomatic missions of x"; I am approximately half way through this endeavour. It is a common misconception that pages which contain both a list and paragraphical information are for that reason articles rather than lists; it is actually required of featured lists that they contain paragraphical information. Comparing the lists of diplomatic missions by sending country to the various featured lists, I do not see any that go beyond the amount of paragraphical information that is acceptable for lists. If sufficient paragraphical information has accumulated on a particular list, I would suggest that the best course of action would be to split it off from the list onto its own article rather than work it the other way around; the majority of these lists primarily contain list-format information, so it makes most sense to leave the lists with the page history. If you wish to discuss this further, please don't hesitate to respond on my talk page.

Neelix (talk) 13:55, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello[edit]

What is innacurate about some of my edits. May you please give me an example? Thank you. Russian Luxembourger (talk) 03:58, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Former destinations at Nadi International Airport[edit]

It's in the WP:AIRPORTS archives (feel free to look it up), but to my knowledge a general consensus is that former destinations is not encyclopedic, would fail WP:LISTS anyway, unless if its entirely complete and fully referenced. In it's current form, it would fail both. I dont see why this article should be an exception to all other airport articles which do not have former destinations (as it would be incomplete, hard to maintain (for bigger airports) and would likely be poorly sourced anyway). --Arnzy (talk · contribs) 13:31, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

It is a generally accepted consensus per discussion not only at the related Wikiproject, but probably overall that "former destinations" are not really unencylcopedic unless fully referenced and marked. I'm not the only one that tends to agree with this. So, as per discussion at the related pages, I will keep removing it and will be scouting through other articles (when I got the time) that still has this. --Arnzy (talk · contribs) 14:52, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
It's in the archives (feel free to look for it). Its may not be as a general guideline, but it was discussed on the talk pages in regards to former destinations. --Arnzy (talk · contribs) 15:59, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

Smiley.svg Thank you for your wonderful message :) Made me smile. Have a weekend. Ikip (talk) 08:46, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

ITN for 2009 attacks on Indian students in Australia[edit]

Current events globe On 9 June, 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article 2009 attacks on Indian students in Australia, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the In the news candidates page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 18:06, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Regarding User:LatinoAussie[edit]

I have reason to suspect that User:LatinoAussie may be a sockpuppet of indefinitely-blocked User:TeePee-20.7. If you have any thoughts on this, you might want to go to Wikipedia:AN#Block evading sock and make them known. Ed Fitzgerald t / c 05:54, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

You may well be right that the evidence isn't there on the surface, and I have little interest in doing the digging necessary to find the kind of evidence an admin might want - I'm actually here to edit and not to do this stuff. Unfortunately, LA has raised the stakes by going to an admin (User:Henrik) and complaining about me, asking for a preventative block. Ed Fitzgerald t / c 07:26, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Consulate-General of Vanuatu in Shanghai[edit]

According to Chinese source, exchange of notes on the establishment of Vanuatuan Consulate-General in Shanghai were signed in September, 2000. This is a list of consulates-general in Shanghai[1] (refer to No.56). It clearly indicated that the Consulate-General of Vanuatu was opened on April 25, 2007. This is a news about the opening ceremony of Vanuatuan Consulates General in Shanghai (date: July 17, 2007, venue: Renaissance Yangtze Shanghai Hotel).[2]. And this is a report about the“officials from Consulates General of Germany, Pakistan and Vanuatu (Vice-Consul General) in Shanghai Visit Yiwu” [3] [4]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cybercicada (talkcontribs) 11:11, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for this. However I note:
  • There is no reference that Vanuatu diplomatic mission (or even an honorary consulate) exists in Shanghai, according to the website of the Shanghai Municipal Government where all such offices are listed.
  • Likewise there is no reference on the website of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China, although the sites mentions there are honorary consulates in Beijing and Hong Kong.
  • An extensive internet search does not produce any evidence to suggest such a mission exists.
On the other hand, I have read the articles you have shown (except the inaccessible http://61.129.89.229/down/ws/080704f1.doc reference). The Yiwu and Shanghai government websites seem to corroborate your story, which leads us to a quandary with two pieces of contradicting information.
I would maintain that the two websites that I have listed, which are intended to list diplomatic missions rather report on particular events, would be more authorative. I am thus inclined to believe no such consulate exists at this point in time, and the article should reflect this fact.

I have copied this to the talk page of the relevant article. Kransky (talk) 12:33, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi, the website of Foreign Ministry of PRC may not be updated. The Vanuatuan hononary consulate in Beijing was upgraded to embassy on August 19, 2005. This document[5] is downloadable by using any download software but it takes some time. The document will show you the name of Consul-General and the address (728 Xinhua Road, Union Development Building Of China Suite 1207-1208, Shanghai), contact numbers, area of jurisdiction, etc., of the Consulate-General of Vanuatu.Cybercicada (talk) 02:49, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Charles Cheung is on facebook. Maybe we could ask him what the status is? (http://www.facebook.jp/people/Charles-Cheung/556474400) Kransky (talk) 05:25, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Discussion at WW2 Casualties[edit]

Please review my post at Talk:World War II casualties#Civilian Casualties in Asia. What is your opinion?--Woogie10w (talk) 20:59, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Afro Australians in Australia[edit]

Hello Kransky, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Afro Australians in Australia has been removed. It was removed by Youngamerican with the following edit summary '(deprod, redirect to African Australian, unneeded fork)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Youngamerican before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 21:54, 28 July 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

2nd language Chinese[edit]

Apologies on the Miss France thing, I did not notice Mandarin the first time I skimmed through and I had only searched the page for "Chinese". rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 15:52, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Embassy of Russia in Nigeria[edit]

As a note, Russia's embassy in Nigeria is in Lagos, not Abuja; most other countries have their embassies in Abuja, but Russia maintains its embassy on Victoria Island in Lagos. WhisperToMe (talk) 19:48, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Serbian list[edit]

Sorry but we have agreed not to do that what you have just did to the List of diplomatic missions of Serbia. You are trying to do the same thing with the article on Russian diplomatic missions. Don't you see that you are going the wrong way? Instead of bringing the quality of other articles to the level of the ones in question, you are bringing down the quality of the few articles that stand out in order to level them all. Well let's than destroy all featured articles because there are more stubs? I spent a significant amount of time as well as Russavia working on those article for you to just destroy them for the sake of all articles looking like a simple directory. Try bringing up the quality of the bad ones, it's always easier to destroy than build. It reminds me of communism where those who could develop faster were stopped for the sake of everything being the same and balanced, so that the stupid and smart would have the same spot in society, the same wage, the same clothes. What you should concentrate on doing is developing other article and not reverting the developed article to the state in which the majority of articles is in in order for them to look similar. If we were doing that Wikipedia would get nowhere, because we would revert any development on articles on the US president because hey it can't be different to the article on Fijian president. Such retrograde editing is not welcome and on top of that we had an agreement not do it, so why are you now violating the consensus in which you also took part?--Avala (talk) 14:51, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry I thought we were going to do that after all the other lists were ready and set for tidying for the featured list nomination. I don't think it's an appropriate time to do it now in the middle of the work when neither proposal (although my position is that there should be no leveling therefore no voting for which design should be used in all articles). It doesn't make sense to discuss the design now when the quality of the articles, both technical and content wise, is at different levels, (I would say that the list on Serbia is more advanced at this point) that the last problem we should be dealing with here is it's design. We should concentrate on bringing up the quality of other articles or all articles if you want, don't you think? As for the listing of ambassadors I think I chewed it over so many times "The article on missions is just listing heads of missions while the main article on ambassadors concentrates on them in detail explaining their status as well as their photos etc." I thought that you accepted my plea to let me work on the article on missions of Serbia to try to promote it to the level of a featured list and if it gets that status it will be a great thing for Wikipedia and perhaps or perhaps not the guideline for others as it is up to them, if it fails miserably it should be discussed on how to implement some other model. I think it's better to do it this way then experiment with all the articles at the same time in the same direction anyway.--Avala (talk) 21:25, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
No such agreement was made. I thought it was clear that we could not agree, and so the next step would be to get the view of other contributors. You are welcome to write whatever argument you want defending your new proposal on the talk page. Otherwise, please tell me why you don't think the matter should be settled this way. Kransky (talk) 09:27, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Why you removed the wikitable from the Turkish DM list, but not from the Serbian list? I waited for a month, but there is still no consensus for removing wikitables from these lists. The Serbian and Turkish lists are featured lists when compared with others. --Turkish Flame 15:43, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
There is no consensus for Wikitables either.
I don't think Wikitables are suitable (especially when we have pictures). But my major concern is that the people advocating for wikitables are only interested in particular countries. I am sure they bring good ideas and energy to articles they are interested in, but who is going to make the updates to all the other articles? There should only be one style used.
Why not adopt your preferred style in an article on Turkish ambassadors? Kransky (talk) 12:38, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Yes there is no consensus for both styles. So we can use both of them. It isn't against any consensus or policy.
There is no obligation to use same style in every DMBC list, like there are several different sections in country articles. Some have sports, tourism, cuisine, etc. sections, but others list these topics under a single section. And Wikipedia community choses one of these styles featured.
I also wonder why you don't remove the wikitable from the Serbian DM list? I'll readd the wikitable to the Turkish DM list. Please don't revert it. Because your allegation can't be justified. --Turkish Flame 15:44, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Image Sizes[edit]

Please see my input on the JNB talk pages, as well as Wikipedia guidance on image sizes. As explained, there really is no justification for the images to be so large. Regards the PRG airport page, the images were not removed, they were simply moved to ensure a good layout, and the extremely large destination images were reverted to thumb-size. And a spelling error was fixed (which you reverted without noticing). Thanks. Jasepl (talk) 11:28, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

thank you[edit]

if you are reading me carefuly you see i now understanding noone likes fixing me in mistaking my edits. i am understanding and am acepting this. if you look you are see i am no more almost not editing this article because of this one. but stil i am interesting in this article because it is about everything. so if i am thinking i can help by asking some questions.

i am very much thinking that you are maybe the best editer i am seing because i can seeing that you are THINKING. many of them are just like childs and put in what they are remember because it was for them interesting. I see this here: [6] and [7] and most lately here: [8]. you understand this aritcle has problem and understanding it needs big thinking to fix. i am suporting you very much.

what you need you must find somehowe to pruve what should be and not be in aritcle. but it must be rules not things that hapened. so with rules everbody is knowing if it is okay to be ading this one things or not. i dont care if romania is in aritcle or is not if someone can say look this is rule why vedio games are in there but first woman president is not. what is most important? i am not saying i know i am saying noone is knowing this right now.

i maybe am too going to add more to the aritcle but i am promiseing to work morer on my grammar. i can do beter when i take much time to be writeing my sentences and will try not to add anything needs to be fixed by other editers. i am happy always to lisen to what you are writeing me. thank you. 70.153.208.164 (talk) 17:40, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

You are welcome to contribute, but I stress you should understand how this Wikipedia system works. We need more diverse content, and I think you can help this way. Kransky (talk) 08:23, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs[edit]

Information.svg Hello Kransky! 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 insure 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 1,517 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

  1. Erika Yamasaki - Find sources: "Erika Yamasaki" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 20:49, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

References?[edit]

Hello Kransky - I assume you are the creator of this file? [9] If so, could you give your references and explain when this was the case? I am especially surprised to see a direct connection to London. Never heard of it. Ingolfson (talk) 02:16, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

space exploration disucussion[edit]

please return to talk page discussion on 2000s and be helping to decided what is important to put in there. it is not good now at all. 70.153.230.93 (talk) 01:12, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

German-Japanese relations[edit]

Hi there. I noticed that you've put a bit of effort in the article on German-Japanese relations. Over the past weeks I majorly expanded it and really need people to go scan my contributions. I want to set a high quality standard since I'd love to have it featured some day ;) Thanks in advance! --Gliese876 (talk) 10:21, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I'd really appreciate your participation on its nomination for a Good Article - Talk:German–Japanese_relations :) --Gliese876 (talk) 14:25, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Just look at Talk:German–Japanese relations, the nomination template is right at the top ;) --Gliese876 (talk) 13:41, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Re: Latin American Australian[edit]

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

Re: Proposed new map style for List of Diplomatic missions by Country articles[edit]

I like your idea as it shows which city the mission is in and because some countries have more than one mission in one country. However I think we could merge the two maps. Have a light blue colour to show which countries country X has a mission in. Then have a red dot to show where the mission(s) is based within the country. We would need to make sure that the colours are easy to see though. Regards IJA (talk) 12:58, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

New map at list of List of diplomatic missions of the United States[edit]

I like the new map that you posted, but why is Japan listed as not having dip relations with the states (along with North Korea, Iran, Taiwan and Cuba). Also, the article does mention the USINT section in Havana, so I am not sure what color that country should be and I note that there is no listing for the diplomatic post there (maybe just like Taiwan - showing not officially recognized, but with a mission?). Bevinbell 17:14, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the notification. Japan (and Sakhalin) were accidentally excluded and I have coloured them in. I don't think we should colour countries where diplomatic missions are in reality just interests sections in protecting power missions. On this point, I may remove the references from the list to US interest sections, but place it in the prose. Kransky (talk) 22:53, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

New map for List of diplomatic missions of Mexico[edit]

Hello, on the new map you show Mexico have an embassy in Sudan rather than in Ethiopia. I was wondering if you can please correct this, thanks. Aquintero (talk) 19:15, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Diplomatic missions of Serbia - map[edit]

There seems to be a handful of errors in the Image:Map of diplomatic missions of Serbiav2.PNG map - it seems that you haven't painted Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, Switzerland (even though dots were added so now it's difficult to correct it without an original file). Cuba is missing eniterely. Peru is painted while the embassy is temporarily closed as well as Jordan which is not painted, and they should be orange. New York is painted in yellow only while there should be a blue dot as well for the Consulate General. There should be a blue dot for the Consulate General in Salzburg too. Thanks in advance --Avala (talk) 19:55, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out those omissions. I have updated a revised version. Note that for display purposes I only use one dot per city. Kransky (talk) 07:59, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. There is one more thing, please add Salzburg Consulate-General. And I also think that Bratislava and Budapest are mixed up on meridians but that is not that important. Btw great job in general. Maps are really interesting to look at. For an example Paraguay map is really interesting.--Avala (talk) 00:22, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
Sure and if I find anything I will let you know.--Avala (talk) 15:46, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
For an example Russia no longer has a consulate in Santiago de Cuba.--Avala (talk) 15:57, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

RE:Diplomatic missions of Saharawi[edit]

Hello!. I have no idea of that Sahrawi delegation in Hanoi you mention, I will search about it. In the case of India & Madagascar, both countries suspended relations with the SADR in 2000 & 2005, so the Sahrawi embassy in New Delhi was closed. I dunno if there's still a General delegation there. In the case of Timor Leste, I think there's a non-resident embassador (Timorese foreign affairs page ain't updated since 2004). Perhaps he lives in Australia, because he's also the representative for Australia & New Zealand (see the link[1]). Perhaps the General Delegation is in Melbourne,Perth or other major Australian city. The problem is that Australia dont have official diplomatic relations with the SADR. Regards.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 16:29, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

I understand there is a consistent format to be used at the DMBC pages, but that cannot be an obstacle to bring as more info as we can (This is suppossed to be a encyclopedia, ain't it?). Also, the case of the SADR (as for example, the case of Palestine) is special, as it's a limited-recognition state, so it's not equal as, for example, Morocco or Algeria. P.D. I finally find that the Australia & New Zealand general delegation is based in Sidney.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 15:29, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
I can agree with the format of the page, but what's that about the citation of Australia's SADR office? If citation is needed, I will have to start putting [citation needed] on a lot of diplomatic missions pages (I think in all of them) without references. Because norms are for all isn't it?--HCPUNXKID (talk) 16:02, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Also, If you ask me to not change or delete info, I ask you for being more careful & not deleting references (for example the reference of the SADR embassy in South Africa).--HCPUNXKID (talk) 16:05, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Here you have a link that proof the SADR delegation is based in Sydney[2], so Im gonna add it. Regards.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 13:50, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm starting to doubt about your good intentions about the article. I repeat, I'm thinking seariously to ask for citations in ALL the the Diplomatic missions pages, as you are asking me in this one. Rules are for ALL. Let's see:

+Australian delegation. The links I send to you show clearly that: 1.There is a Sahrawi representative to Australia, who is also ambassador to Timor Leste (Almost sure by the info I search non-resident). 2.The other link of Kamal Fadel talk about the SYDNEY REPRESENTATIVE! what more u want?.

+African Union permanent representation. Please, take a lil' bit of your time consulting the references I give: 1.The pdf is the AU's official list of Permanent representations to the AU & embassadors to Ethiopia, based in Addis Ababa. One of them is "Mr. Lehbib Breika", ambassador of the SADR to Ethiopia & "permanent representative to the African Union". 2.One of the references of Ethiopia, states in it's own title "Lehbib Breika presents his letters of accreditation to African Union".If that's not a proof... 3.You have to update your knowledge about some issues, Morocco is THE ONLY AFRICAN COUNTRY who IS NOT member of the African Union. They withdrew from the organization in 1984, after the 1982 presence of the SADR @ the AU meetings and the full recognition of the SADR by the AU in 1984 (you can read about it in wikipedia).

+The Lesotho reference talks clearly about "the Ambassador of the Saharawi to Lesotho, Mohamed Yahia". The mission is sure non-resident (Lesotho is a tiny country), and it's sure that is based on Pretoria (South Africa), as Mohamed Yahia is ALSO the Sahrawi ambassador to South Africa (based in Pretoria). I included it as a external link because is an information that could be interesting for someone, and it's part of the diplomatic relations of the SADR.

For all that reasons, I revert your changes. I hope there is no problem on it, and all this have been a misundertanding. Regards.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 16:09, 14 May 2010 (UTC)


Nuvola apps important.svg Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to List of diplomatic missions of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, you may be blocked from editing.

Please stop vandalizing the page, you are erasing information with references. Also, you claim that no general delegations are on the DMBC pages, but the Palestine page is full, most of them unreferenced, and curiously you havent reverted them. I thought that DMBC page rules are for all. So please be fair and stop deleting info.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 18:01, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Initiation of dispute resolution procedures[edit]

Evidently we cannot agree to what goes into this article, and I note a previous editor also had issues with your edits. This is no great drama - good faith disputes are a common occurance in Wikipedia, and there are processes in place to resolve them.

My argument is that you have not yet provided what I consider is reliable evidence that the SADC government has an official presence in a number of countries, particuarly countries which do not recognise the SADC's sovereignty in Western Sahara. Indeed I have actively searched for anything that could corraborate your claims, but I have found nothing, although I stand corrected on the SADC having a presence in Addis Ababa (I am still uncertain about the authority of the website that claims SADC missions in New York and Geneva, but I will let that slide).

You have repeatedly told me to refer to sources (like this website) which you claim proves your point, but I cannot see any evidence that the persons mentioned run are "general delegations", or even if they have any form of legitimacy within the SADC.

If you consider other DMBC articles are insufficiently referenced, your efforts to improve those articles by finding references or adding "citation required" annotations would be appreciated. Just because one article is not to-the-letter consistent with a policy doesn't justify the elimination of that policy.

I understand your keen interest in the rights of the Sawahari people, as you specify on your user page, but I do not believe their cause is advanced by misrepresenting particular persons as "general delegations", no matter how well meaning the intent. In recognising your good faith, might I also politely ask you review what exactly Vandalism is before making such accusations.

Consequently I will revert the article back, but I am happy to direct this dispute to a third party to have it resolved if you still want to press the issue. Since the crux of our disagreement is over your reference material, might I suggest the matter be directed to the Reliable Sources noticeboard? Alternatively Wikipedia:Third opinion could be another option. Any thoughts?

I will post this message on both our talk pages, and the article talk page. As indicated earlier please lets debate this on just one board. Kransky (talk) 05:47, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

I agree with the dispute resolution mediation, It's the better way to resolve it. But for equanimity reasons, there are only 2 solutions until the resolution of the conflict:

A - Deletion of the unreferenced delegations on other pages, as the Palestine one. B - Reversion of the deletion you made in the SADR page.

As I said before, rules are for all articles, so for time reasons I choose the second option. No problem if you revert it but you also delete the other pages unreferenced info, as I said for equanimity reasons. Regards.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 14:36, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
A response given in good faith would have been "A - the insertion of references for unreferenced delegations on other pages". In most articles references are provided, either as citations or links to the relevant pages of the sending country's ministry for foreign affairs. You cannot assume that if something missing for one country means policies are being applied differently. Anyhow, this matter will be referred to DR. Kransky (talk) 22:38, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Ok, so let's recap. I understand that both accept the existence of representations on countries that haven't recognized the SADR, ain't it?. The dispute is the name given to that representation. You don't agree with the term "general delegation", wich I include. Ok, I assume that, so let's choose the most apropiate. I think about two terms, "permanent mission" or "SADR office". Wich one you think is more appropiate?. Regards.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 16:24, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Neither. I see no evidence that the SADR has a "permanent mission" in those countries you selected, nor any other form of representation that uses such a formal title normally accorded to recognised entities. Nor do I see any evidence that the Polisaro offices you keep referring to are called "SADR offices". They are Polisario representative. Furthermore I am opposed to listing as "diplomatic missions" organisations which are essentially representing a political movement rather than an actual state.
I am also considering whether the article "diplomatic missions in the SADR" should exist. You only seem to have listed missions accredited to, but not actually in, the SADR. Kransky (talk) 10:57, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
For that same reason, for example, the Palestinian representations in countries that haven't recognized Palestine should be deleted, as they are PLO representations, representing a party rather than a state (Yeah, you told me that Australia recognizes the PNA -need a proof of that-, but that's the "government", not the "country". It's not the same, but too different.). I pledge one more time for fairness in this issue.
I explain very clearly that the actual situation (social, political, demographical & humanitarian) made imposible to base embassies in the SADR controlled part of Western Sahara. Also for legal reasons, as it's a non-autonomous territory (for that same reason there ain't any foreign diplomatic representation in the Moroccan controlled part).--HCPUNXKID (talk) 14:47, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
I am travelling at the moment so I cannot spend too much time considering your ideas, which I consider are being given in good faith.
If we are going to remove' all representative offices of sending states that do not recognise the host states, it will involve considerable edits to a range of sensitive articles (Taiwan, Israel, TRNC etc). It would also weaken the utility of those articles. I could agree to this approach, but I expect there would also be strong opposition from others. I am not the owner of these articles and do not have the power to make such influential decisions.
So, if you want to propose this idea, I suggest you think very carefully about what the rules are going to be, and how you will explain it to the people who have been editting these articles over the last four years. The fact that you have not contributed much to the DMBC articles - except on your favourite SADR issue - might cause some editors to question if you have any long term commitment to the broader aims of this category. While some editors may question your judgement (your edit warring and repeated claims that you eventually said you were not sure about may be a handicap), if you can develop a compelling argument, draft a clear, practical and robust set of rules, and demonstrate your commitment to implementing all your suggestions - then maybe your revolutionary proposals could be adopted.
I cannot see the connection between the PLO Office in Washington and the Australian representative office in Ramallah. It represents the Australian government, and not a political party. Australia's legitimacy is not under question.
You may believe the PLO Office (now Mission) in Washington only represents a political movement, and therefore its treatment should be equivalent to a Polisaro Front representative. This argument would be reasonable, except that a visit to the [www.plomission.us Palestinian mission in Washington] website shows that it status and capabilities is considerably more significant than that of a Polisaro Front representative. The PLO Mission" in Washington is run by a career ambassador, who is authorised to represent the PNA. The mission has its status accorded by the Oslo Accords. It can issue Palestinian passports and certify Palestinian documents. I believe that if asked most editors would believe the PLO Mission is a de facto mission. I do not believe a Polisaro Front representative in a Western European capital has a similar level of recognition, or authorisation to carry out quasi-diplomatic duties.
Kransky (talk) 09:57, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
I see, your point of view is "removing all representative offices would be polemic & difficult, so let's remove only the ones of the SADR". Very fair & balanced, yes. You are not the owner of the articles except the SADR one?. Because you seem to think that you "have the power" to do that. Also, I repeat, focusing on personal (talking about I only edit on the SADR page or my personal believings) it's low, childish & non-sense (I don't want to talk for example on your threats on other users.). I'm not an expert on international relations or diplomacy (are you?) as you always remember the "General Delegation" part of the issue against me (I'm not going know to remind you the SADR/African Union/Morocco relations part of the issue, for example).
Please, don't try to twist the words & phrases, I'm not talking about Australia's legitimacy, but of the recognition (I still wait for a proof) was on the government (PNA) not the state (Palestine). It's not the same. I don't know exactly the level of recognition of Sahrawi representatives, but I believe they have authoritation to carry quasi-diplomatic issues, because of the meetings & accords of that representatives with presidents of national congresses or senates, presidents of autonomies & provinces or city mayors.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 16:50, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
The tone and assumption of bad faith you are adopting makes it very difficult for me to continue this dialogue. I have just outlined what anybody would consider would be a reasonable way how your views could be considered and possibly adopted in all the articles.
At the very least, your problem is that you just focus of Sahrawi. Nothing wrong with this, but you want all the articles to dance to whatever standard you want for the SADR. I am sorry but a Polisario Front representative in some European capital does not have the same degree of cachet as the PLO Mission in Washington, at least not on the many many articles you have shown me.
If we are to accept Polisario representatives as diplomatic missions, then why not Tibetan, Hutt River or Puntland representatives? At what point can a partially-recognised state be included in these articles? Taiwan is a viable state, Palestine enjoys a strong degree of recognitio and the TRNC and South Ossetia, while their inclusion is deeply controversial, nevertheless is backed by a sovereign state and their governments rule their own territory. Unfortunately the SADR cannot be considered in the same category - I did not wake up this morning intending to oppress the Sahrawi people, but I want to main a degree of consistency in these articles.
Why not create an article like "List of Polisario Front representatives"? This could serve to demonstrate the linkages and ties, both official and unofficial, of the PF?Kransky (talk) 06:45, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
No, no, no. The problem is that you are aking a difference between an unrecognized state (SADR) and the rest (TRNC, Palestine, Kosovo...). If you take a look at List of states with limited recognition SADR is in the same category (UN non-members recognized by at least one UN member) as TRNC, Palestine, Taiwan, Kosovo, Abkhazia & South Ossetia. It's the second most recognized country on that category (83, only below Palestine). So it's not comparable with Tibet, Puntland or Somaliland for example. The SADR is strongly backed by middle power sovereign states as Mexico, Algeria, Nigeria or South Africa, for example. As I said before controls about 20-25% (depending on sources) of the territory of Western Sahara. The rule of the SADR government in that territories is a fact, as demonstrate the celebration of Polisario general congresses (2002, for example), visits of foreign journalists, professors, politics or NGO's personnel, or the building works on that land (A hospital, a school, some blocks of houses and a dam in Tifariti, also, the Sahrawi parlament is being builded there). Official documents or comunniques are made & stamped in Bir Lehlou. In February 2009, at a conference held in Tifariti, the SADR started a program of reconstruction of infrastructures in some places like Meharrize, Agounit (has a hospital & a school too), Mijek, Dougaj... Western Sahara is a viable state. It has one of the biggest phosphates mines in the world (Bou Craa) & one of the bests fishing coasts in the world. There had been many prospections searching for oil & gas, but due to the legal status the results haven't been published. There is also presence of other minerals like iron or uranium.
I can accept the "List of PF representatives" if the same size is applied to the rest of non-embassadorial offices of "unrecognized countries", because, as I argue in the first paragraph, I can't understand your reasons to make that distinction between SADR & the rest on the same category. Regards.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 19:33, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
I am not sure what you are saying exactly, but I would have no problems if you were to start an article on "List of PF representatives". It can be as long or as short as you like, and you can include or exclude SADR missions. You could link it to the existing "List of Diplomatic missions of the SADR" article.
Regarding the "List of diplomatic missions in the SADR" article, perhaps you may wish to rename it to "List of diplomatic missions TO the SADR" - this is what we use to missions to the Holy See, since for practical purposes there are no diplomatic missions IN the Vatican City, likewise there are no missions in Sahawri.

Kransky (talk) 12:02, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Ok, so I'm gonna make lists of "representative offices" for SADR, Palestine, TRNC, Taiwan and the rest of unrecognized countries. I hope I would not have problems with other users. I'll link them to the diplomatic missions pages.
On the diplomatic missions TO the SADR, I think I had to redirect the page for changing the name, isn`t it?. Or is it any other solution?. I changed the rest (content of the article & politics of the SADR infobox).
If we finally reach consensus, I hope the diplomatic missions of the SADR would be unprotected, as I had to add new info (Sahrawi embassy on Uganda). Regards.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 11:54, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
I think the end is in sight. Sure, link the "Representaive OFfices of SADR" article (or should it be the Polisario Front?) to the "Diplomatic Missions of the SADR" article. But do not categorise the Representative Offices article as a DMBC article. A simple rename should do the job of "in" to "to"; let me know if you have any problems and I will try to fix it. Kransky (talk) 12:07, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the redirection, I'm a bit busy now, but need to talk this next week to resolve the issue.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 19:03, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Just to clarify - you would still need to seek consent from others if you want to downgrade the Diplomatic Missions of Taiwan, South Ossetia, Palestine, TRNC etc articles. Editors on Taiwan forums might find it strange that you are equating the international presence of a major exporting power with a population of 23 million, with a network of PF representatives. You would need to develop a credible argument. Kransky (talk) 03:05, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Ok, this is just incredible. You told me that I have to reach consensus to remove representatives from other articles, but in this one you haven't wait to reach consensus to delete them. Why don't you had used the same measure with the rest of the unrecognized countries, then?. I'm still waiting for a credible argument for making that difference between articles on the same category. The fact look like is the unique article of that category (DMBC of unrecognized countries) where the representative offices were deleted. Talking about economic facts in this issue is non-sense, want to talk about the dubious economical viability of the Palestinian state, for example?. We're talking about political & legal issues, not economic ones.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 14:20, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
No, I don't think it is incredible. I think that any neutral observer can see that the diplomatic missions of Taiwan and Palestine are far more well established than that of the SADR. You cannot equate a handful of Polisario Front representatives in various capitals, who do not appear in any official websites, as a viable diplomatic network. In terms of legal issues, the Palestinian Authority runs a functioning state (albeit with shakey foundations). A letter that you send to Hebron would be collected by a PA postman. I would not consider the PF occupied positions as being remotely comparible.
I have already suggested that you list those PF representatives in another article. You can still have the SADR diplomatic missions article, but not with PF representatives. Kransky (talk) 14:44, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Timor-Leste[edit]

Timor-Leste is on the main page today. I saw your comments about naming. You are correct.

Wikipedia does not use an editorial board to decide on questions. It would be better if there were a ruling of some sorts for the naming of the Timor-Leste. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 15:01, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Diplomacy, re[edit]

Yes, I figure out that after I made the edits. Sorry about it, regards, --MacedonianBoy (talk) 09:52, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Your contributed article, List of ten largest countries by GDP[edit]

Imbox notice.png

Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, List of ten largest countries by GDP. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as yourself. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - Lists of countries by GDP. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will to continue helping improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Lists of countries by GDP - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. — Timneu22 · talk 13:03, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

sovereign states sorting criteria[edit]

Sorry to bother here, but as you are a contributor to certain discussions at the List of sovereign states I would like to show you the recently compiled list of all proposals for sorting criteria so that you can express your opinion here. Thanks! Alinor (talk) 13:04, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Vietnamese diplomatic missions map.PNG[edit]

Copyright-problem.svg

Thank you for uploading File:Vietnamese diplomatic missions 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 website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 10:43, 7 September 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. 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) 10:43, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Air Routes from DPS2.PNG[edit]

Hi Kransky. The Bali/DPS map needs an update to include Townsville Australia as Strategic Airlines is commencing services there from 3 dec 2010. Aeroflot are threatening to start services as well but are yet to release a start date so it will probably need another version soon to include MOV/SVO. I will do it if you like but I thought as it is 'your' map you might like to do it. If not then let me know what typeface you have used, ie helvitica or is it arial?? (repeats message at your WC talk page. Regards Felix505 (talk) 12:02, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the notification. Please feel free to make the update (I think Helvetica was used). I would perhaps wait until flights have been confirmed for both Strategic and Aeroflot - without regulatory approval at this late stage it does not seem to be likely a scheduled service would take place. Kransky (talk) 10:12, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Autopatrolled[edit]

Wikipedia Autopatrolled.svg

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:

  • This permission does not give you any special status or authority
  • Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
  • You may wish to display the {{Autopatrolled}} top icon and/or the {{User wikipedia/autopatrolled}} userbox on your user page
  • If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it
If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! Acalamari 18:55, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Trade map[edit]

Hi, in the first map where you have the legend "European Union" is in darker blue font while on the map it's in light blue. US is reversed. In other words, the legend colors do not match the map colors. Hope that clarifies. Renata (talk) 17:54, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

No it is correct. The legend colour does not indicate what the particular country is. It indicates what that particular country's leading export destination is. The EU is light blue because its leading export market is the United States (and in the other map it is pink because its leading source of imports is from China). Kransky (talk) 02:19, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Ok, never mind. I think I got confused because EU countries are treated as EU and not as separate countries. Renata (talk) 23:11, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

List of People's Century interviewees[edit]

DYK[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of List of bordering countries with greatest differences in GDP (PPP) per person at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Qrsdogg (talk) 18:05, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for List of bordering countries with greatest relative differences in GDP (PPP) per capita[edit]

Another article contributed, thanks Victuallers (talk) 18:03, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

JFK destinations[edit]

Hello, please uddate no-stop destinations of JFK. The map date from 2009 and there have been many changes since then. Luisfege (talk) 16:47, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

feel free to update it. Kransky (talk) 01:02, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Iran Embassy Berlin - Mutter Erde fec.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Iran Embassy Berlin - Mutter Erde fec.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Marcus Qwertyus 18:02, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

XLR8TION and Turkey[edit]

I see now that XLR8TION is conducting a campaign of listing Turkey under Europe. You will know better than I do whether to oppose or acquiesce. Esoglou (talk) 16:09, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Posted something on this here. Nightw 06:28, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Tukey, Armenia, and Azerbaijan are members of teh COuncil of Europe. Furthermore Turkey is a candidate member for European Union membersip. Another editor brought up the same fact that the countries as part of the continent as Europe includes anything north of the Urals like Armenia and Azerbiajan and Turkey is considered part of Europe due to the presence of Istanbul in Europe. I will not revert no article until a LENGTHY discussion is conducted. The UNited Nations is not the only multinational organization in the world as a member of NATO, the COuncil of Europe and possibly the European Union, Turkey does not fall under Western Asia. Armenia and Azerbaijan also are georgraphically part of Europe. Please read the criteria for Member states of the Council of Europe. Article 4 of the Council of Europe Statute specifies that membership is open to any "European" State. That says enough and therefore the category will remain unchanged. Religion has nothing to do with where a nation belongs. Cultural, historic ties, and most importantly geography does.--XLR8TION (talk) 18:48, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Middle East[edit]

Hello. Another user has taken upon themselves to include the Middle East within the Asia category but not combining them. I have not had the time to dispute it nor correct any changes to each article for I did not see it as too big of a deal. Glad to see you back. Aquintero (talk) 15:19, 30 October 2011 (UTC) (P.S. I was in India earlier this year. Had I known you were there, I would have contacted you.)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Years[edit]

Hi, since your name's down on this project, I'm just writing to let you know that there's a discussion going on at the moment on how to format events – and in particular, events that go on for multiple days – on year pages. Your input would be appreciated. — Smjg (talk) 18:24, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Italian Embassy in Canberra.JPG[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Italian Embassy in Canberra.JPG. 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. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 22:12, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Image:Air routes from PEK.PNG[edit]

Air routes from PEK.PNG

I'm afraid Hong Kong and Macau are missing. 14.0.208.107 (talk) 00:39, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Map Creation Method[edit]

Hello Kransky,

I've noticed on a few Wikipedia pages that you have created and uploaded maps. I wanted to find out how you create these maps. Is there some kind of special software or template you are using? Please let me know when you get the chance. Thanks for all the help! Subbupedia95 (talk) 22:09, 29 August 2013 (UTC)Subbupedia95

  1. ^ [10]
  2. ^ [11]