User:Zzyzx11/Archive22

User:Zzyzx11/Archive22/TalkNav Zzyzx11/Archive22 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)

Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/April 13

Thanks for making the changes. However, "Jallianwallah Bagh garden" is redundant. Coz Bagh means garden. Regards --59.182.84.185 (talk) 18:33, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. Zzyzx11 (talk) 18:37, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

I know I am fretting too much, I would to point your attention to the discrepancy of the 13 April's On this Day here:

• 1919 – British Indian Army troops opened fire on a peaceful gathering at the Jallianwala Bagh in Amritsar, Punjab, India, killing hundreds of unarmed men, women and children.

• 1943 – World War II: Germany announced the discovery of a mass grave of Polish prisoners-of-war executed by Soviet forces in the Katyn Forest Massacre, driving a wedge among the Allies, particularly the Polish government-in-exile in London and the Soviet Union.

As you can in these successive anniversary hooks... Katyn Forest Massacre is clearly stated as Katyn Forest Massacre but the word massacre or Jalianwallah Bagh Massacre is missing. I am sure we can reword the shooting hook to make it clear and let the fact of "massacre" show.

Ex.

• 1919 – Firing by British Indian Army troops on a peaceful gathering at the northern Indian city of Amritsar, resulted in the Jallianwallah Bagh massacre, killing hundreds of unarmed men, women and children.

59.182.84.185 (talk) 18:51, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Super Bowl XL.png)

[Obligatory Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice] Kalel2007 (talk) 20:32, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Kalel2007 replaced the PNG File:Super Bowl XL.png with the SVG version File:Super Bowl XL.svg. Zzyzx11 (talk) 02:37, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

File:Begin, Carter and Sadat cropped.jpg

Just to let you know that I recently copied the above image that you uploaded to Wikipedia over to WikiMedia Commons, the Wikimedia central media repository for all free media. The image was either individually tagged or was in a category tagged with the {{Copy to Wikimedia Commons}} template. Your image is now available to all Wikimedia projects at the following location: Commons:File:Begin, Carter and Sadat cropped.jpg. The original version of the image uploaded to Wikipedia has been tagged with WP:CSD#F8. Cheers! --Captain-tucker (talk) 18:41, 25 March 2009 (UTC) --Captain-tucker (talk) 01:23, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Susan Boyle

"this is currently a highly visble page on a {{Current person}})" - It certainly is. Yet what reason is that to fully lock an article? SunCreator (talk) 10:45, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Because the protecting admin, User:Viridae, did not tag the page himself with {{pp-dispute}}, I took the liberty of doing it because, as I said, this is currently a highly visble page that is attraching a bunch of readers. I am only going by what Viridae entered in the deletion log, "thats what the talk page iis for, sort it out there"[1], and what appears in the page history to be an edit war between an anon ip and established users over whether to include the fact that she suffered from oxygen deprivation during birth.[2][3][4].

Since you have already posted your feelings on WP:RFPP and User talk:Viridae, I cannot help you any further. Viridae has posted comments on both that he is currently opposed to unprotection, and I prefer not to be involved and be in a wheel war with him. I also noticed that User:Rootology, another admin, made a legitimate comment on WP:RFPP that "If an IP is dueling a logged in user, then full is required. Semi is not intended to give logged-in users an edge."[5]

We have already had a Wheel War problem last August involving the Sarah Palin article where one admin thought there were too many edit disputes and BLP violations, and the other admin thought, as you probably do, that high-profile articles are watched too much that they can be reverted more expeditiously and thus do not need to be protected. Well that dispute eventually became an ARBCOM case where the Arbitration Committee acknowledged, among others, that the protection of BLPs and other articles of unusual prominence can be controversial, but that any admin such as Viridae, Rootology and myself should avoid wheel warring. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 16:28, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

UPDATE: Looks like somebody else unprotected the page at 17:14, 18 April 2009 (UTC). Keep in mind, under Wikipedia:Wheel war/Examples, the wheel war does not technically occur until the page is protected again. Zzyzx11 (talk) 17:55, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Inclusion of uninhabited sites under "Unincorporated communities" section

Greetings. I have stumbled across the San Bernardino County template many times over the years and have always wondered about the "Unincorporated communities" section. Over the past years, this section has expanded to include former communities that are currently uninhabited and now only exist in name. As a researcher of historic San Bernardino County desert communities, I am very familiar with the history of many of these settlements and can confirm that a good number of the locations listed in this section are completely abandoned. Here are some examples:

• Bagdad : A former mining community that existed into the 1950's, all that remains here as of 2009 is a cemetery.

• Cadiz : A former railroad water stop, all that remains here as of 2009 are building foundations.

• Siberia : A former railroad water stop, all that remains here as of 2009 are building ruins of a former service station.

The question may come down to what qualifies a location as "unincorporated" -- from my understanding, it signifies that there is in fact, residents present at the location although their form of local government lacks formal incorporated or census-designated place (CDP) status. I encourage contributors to view County templates of other municipalities to see what the rule of thumb is for including uninhabited settlements/ghost towns in the "Unincorporated communities" section. One contributor has suggested to follow the Yuba County template example by creating a new section called "Ghost Towns". Please share your views and comments on the San Bernardino template talk page. Thanks! --Djrun (talk) 16:29, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

List of 81st Academy Awards In Memoriam tribute honorees

As someone with at least ten edits of 81st Academy Awards, you might want to comment at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of 81st Academy Awards In Memoriam tribute honorees.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 14:26, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Baltics

Any other sources has been removed from the article by the Estonian lobby in Wikipedia. The article has been under meditation: [6] but they even do not follow the meditation ruling and attacked the mediator instead. This is the legal definition of occupation from the Hague Conventions of 1907: Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised. No country can occupy its own territory.--Dojarca (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

The link to Occupation of the Baltic states has been removed. Sorry for the delay, but as I have posted on the top of this talk page, I am busy in real life – and unfortunately, it seems that no other admin monitoring the main page wanted to touch this "with a ten foot pole". Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 17:54, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Could you please consider undoing your edit to the April 26 page. Dojarca's complaint comes strictly from the Soviet POV and the argument "cannot occupy its own territory" is simply erroneus here. Dojarca's latest actions have spawned an extensive discussion on Occupation of the Baltic states talk page. Oth (talk) 00:25, 29 April 2009 (UTC)