User talk:Klausness

First Geography Congress, Turkey

Perhaps you can explain to be why that geography congress is notable. Almost every individual congress brought up for deletion at AFD has been deleted, except for a very few very famous ones that are discussed in histories of the subject. The feeling is different about conference series -- if there are more, could you fight out and adjust the article ?DGG (talk) 18:25, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm definitely not an expert, but my understanding (based in part on talking to someone who knows a lot more about this than I do) is that this wasn't a cogress in the sense of a bunch of academics getting together and presenting papers. What it apparently was was a government-backed meeting of Turkish geographers to decide how the relatively new Turkish nation-state was to be perceived from a geographical point of view. So they did things such as (as mentioned in the article) defining the official geographic regions of the nation. As such, the congress has, in fact, been discussed in histories of the making of the modern Turkish nation-state. Klausness (talk) 13:18, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Category:Railway stations managed by Southern

Please can you stop adding this, and discuss it on WT:RAIL? Thanks, --RFBailey (talk) 16:39, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I was creating a category to replace List of railway stations managed by Southern (per a suggestion in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of railway stations managed by Southern). I've added a note about this to WT:RAIL, per your suggestion. Klausness (talk) 17:00, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Theanine

Theanine is known as Suntheanine in vitamnwater b-relaxed. I am undoing 1 revision of your edit. You cannot rely on IPs being WACKY INFLATABLE ARM TUBE MAN salesman. 98.227.189.232 (talk) 23:28, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but Suntheanine® is clearly a trademark, not a generic name, as indicated by the ® symbol. Also, the label of a bottle of vitamnwater b-relaxed (whatever that is) is not a reliable source. In any case, this is all moot, as someone else appears to have already reverted your edit. Klausness (talk) 11:55, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Reversions

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we must insist that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.-- _{Wiki11790  talk}  14:33, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

• I don't believe I failed to assume good faith in any of my edits (including the ones to which I think you're referring, though you don't cite any specific edits). Klausness (talk) 12:23, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Trans-Siberian Pipeline

An article that you have been involved in editing, Trans-Siberian Pipeline, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trans-Siberian Pipeline. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Beagel (talk) 22:26, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

List of nontheists

Restored. --Kukini ^{háblame aquí} 16:42, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I think they are all back. Sorry about that. Thanks for the quick and patient message. --Kukini ^{háblame aquí} 16:45, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Glad I was around to respond when you contacted me. Let me know if/when they are ready to go. --Kukini ^{háblame aquí} 17:05, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Argument from poor design

Hi, Klausness. I notice you removed the prod tag at this article. Could you elaborate a little on your reasoning? You equated "argument from poor design" with "dysteleological argument," but to me there seems to be a relationship, but not an equivalence. For example, it wouldn't seem appropriate to merge AFPD with Dysteleology. Can you say what makes you believe AFPD is notable? I couldn't find any references to the phrase as a serious concept outside of Wikipedia and its mirrors. Thanks, Gnixon (talk) 19:07, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me. I'll look into things further. Gnixon (talk) 20:49, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Brazilian articles

I'd like to know why you removed my deletation request from all these useless articles created by Skanter.

We already explained that these Scottish Brazilian or Belgian Brazilian articles were ridiculous, because these people make up a very small population in Brazil. Opinoso (talk) 16:32, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Center for Policy Studies

Dear Klausness,

I work on the wikipage of the Center for Policy Studies and I would like to write the name of this page in capital letter (the current title is Center for policy studies). Is it possible?

Thank you in advance,

Jadrienj (talk) 13:06, 11 June 2008 (UTC) Jadrienj

Template:Confusing

Hello! The icon was missing because you're running ad-blocking software that mistakes certain images (those stored in "ad" subdirectories) and suppresses them. When I get a chance, I'll replace all of the icon's transclusions. —David Levy 00:50, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Affinium (software)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Affinium (software), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Oo7565 (talk) 08:21, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

"Footnotes"

Yep, there's more. Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 22:20, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Request For Restoration

Hello,

I noticed that you removed a paragraph from the "Brahma Chaitanya" page on wiki. Looking at the other pages on wiki, it was a pretty small one. Could you kindly put it back?

17:10, 21 June 2008 (UTC)AMD08

I thought it was unencyclopedic (and, by the way, it wasn't very small), so I removed it. Anyone (including you) can restore it if they disagree. I've left a longer note on your talk page about this. Klausness (talk) 19:59, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Userboxes of Turkey

Hi there just created some userboxes, if you want to use them then please do. Thankyou. Assalamu Alaykum. Moshin (talk) 19:35, 23 June 2008 (UTC) [1]

The Turkey Map

Hi! You said "if a user doesn't know where Turkey is located, he/she have to see the map i chose " but if a user doesn't know where Greece is located (or other European states) what can he/she do? In the article of Greece and in other European states' articles, maps are the same with my Turkey location map

Note: Cyprus is located in Southwest Asia Izmir lee (talk) 11:19, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

• Ok, if you want to change the maps, please begin with others but the maps are showing enough continents.. --Izmir lee (talk) 11:56, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

MSNBC liberal bias.

I just quickly added some cites. But (and I'm not trying to be insulting here) when you're trying to do an overview, you tend not to add them. If you look down in the MSNBC article there are citations about how it has a liberal bias.

I don't think any citation is neccesary. But do you think it might be better to copy paste the same cites? Or add new ones? (what I did). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.176.44.252 (talk) 00:31, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I see someone else has already reverted your changes, and rightly so. Newsmax and some random blog are harely reliable sources. Klausness (talk) 09:15, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

My question remains; why should I cite sources in an overview?

Should I just repeat the cites below?

Please answer!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.157.68.114 (talk) 13:24, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

All such claims need to be cited, whether they're in an overview or elsewhere. If they're properly cited elsewhere in the article, then a summary in the overview doesn't necessarily need to repeat the citations, but it needs to accurately reflect what's said (with proper citation) in the rest of the article. The bias section of the article claims that MSNBC has been accused of both liberal and conservative bias, but what you added only claims conservative bias, so it does not accurately summarize what's said in the rest of the article. If you're going to mention claims of bias in the overview, you need to either mention that there have been claims of both liberal and conservative bias or provide some very good references that indicate that the claims of liberal bias are significantly more notable than the claims of conservative bias. Other editors may still disagree about whether the claims of bias should be mentioned in the overview at all (I have no strong opinion on the matter), but mentioning only the claims of liberal bias (at least without some strong support from reliable sources) appears to be a clear violation of neutral point of view.
(Also, please remember to sign your comments on talk pages using ~~~~ rather than relying on a bot to add the signature.) Klausness (talk) 13:40, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Issues with TinucherianBot in Project Banner Tagging for WP:FOOD

Thank you for expressing your concerns on the recent issues with TinucherianBot in Project Banner Tagging for WP:FOOD . I have made some comments and explainations at Wikipedia_talk:Bots/Requests_for_approval#TinucherianBot and I am leaving this note just for your information -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 09:53, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Allegations of apartheid deletion notification

Some time ago, you participated in a deletion discussion concerning Allegations of Israeli apartheid. I thought you might like to know that the parent article, Allegations of apartheid, was recently nominated for deletion. Given that many of the issues that have been raised are essentially the same as those on the article on which you commented earlier, you may have a view on whether Allegations of apartheid should be kept or deleted. If you wish to contribute to the discussion, please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allegations of apartheid (fifth nomination). -- ChrisO (talk) 18:17, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Redirecting CRM to Primary Topic

Would like your opinion on Talk:CRM#Redirect_to_Primary_Topic.3F redirecting CRM to it's primary topic, Customer relationship management. The current experience seems cumbersome. Kingsley Joseph (talk) 00:09, 27 August 2008 (UTC)