Dolphin, you made a complete mis-statement of my conversation there with you. Too obvious to be accidental. It's starting to look like you want to wage arguments more than you want to get cites added. <font color ="#0000cc">''North8000''</font> ([[User talk:North8000#top|talk]]) 12:59, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Dolphin, you made a complete mis-statement of my conversation there with you. Too obvious to be accidental. It's starting to look like you want to wage arguments more than you want to get cites added. <font color ="#0000cc">''North8000''</font> ([[User talk:North8000#top|talk]]) 12:59, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
:My apologies for not responding sooner. We live in different time zones.
:We appear to have failed in our mission to persuade Benjamin of the value of adding his own in-line citations. He has just erased the banner saying ''This article lacks in-line citations etc.'' and posted the following statement on the Talk page:
::''Since there is now no evidence that citations are needed I removed all the citation requests. If someone finds something in the article that is not in the references or contradicts another source, please leave a note here.'' See the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AAsp_House&diff=531884402&oldid=487610725 diff].
:Again, Benjamin is saying that if someone can see a statement, paragraph etc that needs an in-line citation, someone should leave a specific note on the Talk page or a “Citation needed” tag. In my experience Benjamin has never acknowledged the legitimacy of a banner that says “This article lacks in-line citations”. He has never acknowledged the legitimacy of the information at [[WP:Verifiability]], nor has he acknowledged that he has even read it.
:Benjamin is a prolific and competent creator of new articles. I have tried to persuade him of the value of adding his own in-line citations but I have met with little support and quite a bit of opposition. If Ymblanter or North8000 are willing to assist by trying to persuade Benjamin, that would be greatly appreciated by me. [[User:Dolphin51|<font color="green">''Dolphin''</font>]] ''([[User talk:Dolphin51|<font color="blue">t</font>]])'' 04:24, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Revision as of 04:24, 8 January 2013
If you leave a message here, I will answer it here. So check back later. If I left a message on your talk page, please reply there. I will watch your page and reply as soon as I can.
Hi. I noticed you uploaded some pics of historical buildings in Casper, Wyoming. It's nice to know that someone else realizes what few photos there are of Casper on Wikimedia! I'm wondering, though, how come you didn't get a shot of the Townsend Hotel, as it's right next to the Masonic Temple downtown? Chevsapher (talk) 23:12, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to disappoint, but the pictures are not mine. They were just uploaded by someone during the Wiki Lives Monuments contest, and I merely added them to the articles. It might very well be that the shot of the Townsend Hotel also was uploaded, but did not make it to the article yet. We have a straight production line, and it the picture is there, it normally gets to the article next day.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:25, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. Sorry that I could not find time for the full-scale review, I am involved with WLM in September and also busy with my work till Christmas.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:45, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Question about a Cultural heritage number
Hi, I'm new to wikipedia so sorry if my question appears to be stupid. Thanks for helping to categorify my recently uploaded file http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lamp_post_MSU_1.jpg However, you removed the Cultural heritage number that I assigned to it, with comment "different building". Did you mean that this entry: http://kulturnoe-nasledie.ru/monuments.php?id=7710451001 does not refer to the Main Building of the Moscow State Uni, but to smth different? That seems unlikely to me, because two adjacent buildings, the Faculties of Chemistry and Physics, are also enlisted in Cultural Heritage. Thanks for your help, Dima Heuschrecke12:38, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. What they mean by the "new" building is the building complex on Mokhovaya Street (formerly Prospekt Marksa). This is obvious from both the address and the construction year. I still need to check whether the new building (Vorovyovy Gory) is a recognized heritage monument. If this is the case, I will insert the correct number to the pictures. Thanks for the files, they are really pretty. The new building is still protected by the author rights and can not be uploaded to Commons, but for your files we can argue it is de minimis, since the posts are the main focus.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:46, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, it does not seem to be in the database. It could still be protected though since the database is incomplete and contains a lot of errors.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:52, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ярослав, вы только редактировали статью, я вспомнил одну вещь. Когда-то я все страны СНГ кроме Белоруссии в раздел 90 дней отправил, потом, правда, пришёл аноним и всё обратно. Понятно, вы не юрист, но у меня чисто мнение спросить. По закону все граждане СНГ кроме Белоруссии безвизово могут находиться только 90 дней, потом они должны покинуть Россию. В этом отношении они вряд ли отличаются от, например, граждан Турции. Так что они вряд ли подходят под раздел "Unlimited period". Им единственное послабление, что для граждан СНГ нет системы «90 из 180», и они могут проще получить разрешение на работы (другим вроде нужна специальная виза). Так что мне наверно всё-таки вернуть всё? Или я не прав?--Luboslov Yezykin (talk) 00:44, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[1] Do you mean Yaroslav Blanter, apparently your former persona? Sorry mate, but here, in English Wikipedia, the late Yaroslav Blanter with his track of administering and interaction unlikely could be elected to the Arbitration Committee. You make a mistake dismissing all that you said then as a "trash". Certainly, Yaroslav Blanter was excellent in driving away trolls and deterring nationalistic PoV pushers, but not in anything about conflicts between established, non-PoV-pushing users. I see that you come to help, in your best faith, but I do not need it. Not because I am upset about you – past conflicts in ru.wikipedia are far away now. Just because I do not need defenders. I never hid myself behind loyal followers, and never rallied the people to defend my person, like you did in 2009–2010. I am glad that you eventually abandoned all this and started a new life. See you later and good luck! Incnis Mrsi (talk) 06:49, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you may happen to remember that at those election I still got more than 80% votes. Anyway, since I am not going to return there it is irrelevant. I am afraid you DO need defenders in the current situation, since the ANI discussion is well on track to at least a topic ban which I believe is not an optimum decision.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:54, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
To a topic ban? Don't be paranoid. Look at WP: Editing restrictions: most of residents are PoV pushers or, al least, persons which are really uncollaborative. I do not believe that a couple of angry waste-makers and policy trolls together with few (legitimate) users which were upset about my remarks and are not willing to present grievances to me directly, all have a sufficient power to invoke a topic restriction. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 08:14, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we will see. Not that I care so much, frankly speaking. After I have unwatched WikiProject:Physics, I do not think we have any overlap in the articles.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:19, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I still think the creation of a disambig in place of Discrete spectrum was a wrong decision, which may be good from the perspective of a mathematician, but clearly contradicts to the textbook material from the point of view of a physicist. On the other hand, I have so many discussions on physics in my real life, that I did not want to fight also for my hobby, and just decided to quit the topic.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I contributed to the cockup in Discrete spectrum initiating that ill-fated discussion; now I understand that your position was the right one and there was no need to touch anything given consequences which Wikipedia has now in Discrete spectrum (physics). But it was not me who started actual manipulations; I only attempted to mitigate the awful dab page when it already was created. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 08:46, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I know. After the discussion resulted in the splitting of the article, I unwatched WikiProject:Physics, and I do not know what happened next. I also never contributed to the article, it is not of my direct interest.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:02, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, and I've been getting a weird "too many users are trying to view this page" error for the past few hours. Anyway, thanks for checking.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); September 24, 2012; 16:53 (UTC)
You twice added the same image to National Register of Historic Places listings in Worcester County, Massachusetts, once after I reverted you. The image was clearly incorrect, since it was labeled (by the photographer, whose descriptions are generally quite accurate) as being in Woods Hole, Massachusetts, and also did not depict a church (which was the subject of the listing). The NRHP listing for the church had the wrong reference number. Please take care that when you make these contributions using images that aren't yours that they actually make sense. Thanks. Magic♪piano13:35, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. This is strange, since I added hundreds of images which are not mine (and dozens which are mine), and I always check them. Anyway, I will see what can be done with the image.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:38, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Photo Changes in National_Register_of_Historic_Places_listings_in_Colorado
Ymblanter, I uploaded photos of Sim Hudson Motor Company, one of which (I think) you used in National_Register_of_Historic_Places_listings_in_Colorado. But I had the wrong NRHP reference number on the photo so it went to the wrong entry. I have corrected the reference numbers in the photographs, moved the photo you had used from Flagler Hospital to Sim Hudson Motor Company, and linked to a just uploaded photograph of Flagler Hospital for that entry. I'm new to editing and hope I've done all this correctly.Eric (talk) 15:28, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Yaroslav! Just wanted to clarify about this district, after seeing your most recent edit. Leningrad Oblast's law on the administrative-territorial divisions is somewhat similar to Pskov Oblast's, in that it defines the administrative divisions via the municipal divisions. The law was adopted in June 2010, but the OKATO section dealing with the cities of oblast significance of Leningrad Oblast has remained unchanged since 1999 (so it's quite outdated—it's actually based on the old 1994 law). As per the current law, the only town which is not a part of any district is Sosnovy Bor (since it's the only urban okrug in the oblast). Same goes for the volosts—they were established in the 1994 law, but the 2010 law no longer recognizes them. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); October 24, 2012; 13:25 (UTC)
I'll take a look. As for the law, there's only one that deals with the administrative-territorial divisions, but the municipal laws are entity-specific (there's one for every district, except for Vsevolozhsky and Vyborgsky Districts, which for whatever reason are covered in the same law).—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); October 24, 2012; 14:27 (UTC)
Does not grant you any special status above other editors.
You should probably also read WP:PROTECT, since this user privilege deals largely with page protection. As the requirements for this privilege are still in a state of flux, I would encourage you to keep up to date on the WP:REVIEWER page. Feel free to ask me if you have any questions! Happy editing! Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:36, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with your restoring the conversions, can you do it for the rest of the article? (Am not familiar with the formatting myself.) Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 17:43, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Уважаемый коллега! По истории упомянутой статьи я вижу, что Вы следите за этой статьей и активно противодействуете внесению в нее недостоверной информации и превращению ее в пиарный материал. В связи с этим хочу обратить Ваше внимание на некоторые материалы по аналогичной статье в русскоязычной Википедии:
Thanks for the edit. However, I have one question, how can the name Amar Mitra refer to Amar Mitra Perriredy? The link for Amar Mitra was created from the Sahitya Akademi List of Award Winners where some one has created an article for Amar Mitra Perrireddy. Now, I being an Indian have never heard of Amar Mitra Perrireddy. While, Amar Mitra (writer) is an acclaimed writer in my mother tongue Bengali. However, there are not many sources on him in the net, may be due to lack of information on Bengali Literature. Please help, this disambiguation page is only required if there were two Amar Mitras. However, we find only one, the other one carries a different name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shamikbangla (talk • contribs) 18:43, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There are indeed two Amar Mitras, and one of them is Amar Mitra Peddireddy (of whom we have an article). The fact that you or I never heard of him is irrelevant. What is relevant is the fact that if there is an article, he is presumably notable, and then somebody can be looking for him. The situation when somebody is looking for him but gets to the other article instead, is not really acceptable. I see two further ways to deal with the situation. First, if you think Amar Mitra Perriredy is not notable, please nominate this article for deletion. If it gets deleted, the disambig should be transformed into a redirect to the other article. If you think he is still notable, but a vast majority of searches would lead to the writer (i.e. the writed is "much more notable" than the politician), nominate the disambig for deletion. It then could be transformed into a redirect, and in the article about the writer we could att a hatnote directing to Amar Mitra Peddireddy.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:53, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Reply
You can stop bringing that block up, because it is irrevlant to the situation.
In the next few weeks we're going to have dozens new stations to take photos of, when line 6 opens and all the new stations on lines 10, 8 and 9 open. Let's divide the work or something! Which line(s) are easier for you? 6, 8, 9 or 10? Azylber (talk) 14:16, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am only here till Dec 30, and my understanding is that 6, 9, and 10 are still not open. I have the complete set of 8 (north of outh Gate of Forest Park), need to post-process, probably will upload tomorrow. I planned to take 15, Changping, Daxing, 9 and Fangshan before I leave (the rest of what is open now I took two years ago). If I have no time, 9 and Dangshan have lower priority. I did not yet check what is available (may be those line all have photos). If 6, 10, connection of 9, and the southern branch of 8 get open before Dec 30 these become for me high priority.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:33, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
All the new stations are supposed to open on the 28th, but you hear a lot of people saying they're going to open on the 31st. Either way, I think it's a bit too late for you.Azylber (talk) 14:36, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
28th is still fine, I have my flight on 30th afternoon. Then I will try to take what I wanted to before 28, and see whether the new station open. I live close to Zhichunli, so that the west part of 10 and the south part of 8 will be my first priority. I will post here what I managed to take. (I can also do it elsewhere, if you point me a good place).--Ymblanter (talk) 14:39, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I saw all the recent photos, they're looking great! I'll go on my photo rampage of line 6 and the new stations of line 9 as soon as they open! By the way, I got back to Beijing last night. Oh, and congratulations on the survival of Genrikh Graftio Azylber (talk) 08:31, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I have got now three days more or less free, but the weather is not really inviting, so I will try to do Changping tomorrow, and then I am going to wait for the opening. If they open on 28, I do what I can, if not - may be I walk to Beijing West and then take 9 + Fangshan on Saturday.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:35, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. Please check your email, I'm going to Haidian Huangzhuang now.
Hello, Ymblanter. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
I have made photos of Changping line, and, if I got it right, there was in the news that 10 and 6 are open. I will go in the city now anyway, if everything is fine, will take pictures as well (10 is the top priority, 6 only if I have more time).--Ymblanter (talk) 01:55, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I saw some people today, who tried to cross to Line 6, Line 9 on the National Library (the trains are arriving there, but they do not let anybody to board the train) or to take 10 beyond Bagou. Anyway, I personally do not have so many options. If some of the stations will open tomorrow, I will try to take as many pictures as possible. If they do not, I will do 9 and Fangshan, the only open stations I have no photographs of. In this case, on Sunday I will check Line 8 and may be northern part of Line 10 on my way to the airport. In any case, Sunday night I will post what results I have by then.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:54, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Today, I made photos of the existing part of Line 9 plus the first two stations of Fangshan Line (up to Daotian). I will check tomorrow Line 8 on my way to the airport, just in case, but most likely it will still be closed. If it is open, I will post the results here on Monday.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:22, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Genrikh Graftio for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.
Sue Rangell✍ ✉ is wishing you a MerryChristmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
This seems to be an obscure creek. I found a map and added some details to the article, but I am afraid at this point this is the only thing I can do.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:54, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please note that none of my editions broke any civility guidlines of wikipedia, while your message to my page was clearly unecessary and close to threatening.
First, what i reverted was INDEED vandalism, as it was a previoulsy consented attempt of establishing a consent version based on the discussion on talk page, while you abruplty and with no warning reverted it. The edit-warring in that resides in you, that first bursted into removing content to enforce your POV, and only afterwards posting at the talk page and trying to threaten me with that warning.
The issue is indeed being discussed at the talk page, and has not yet reached consensus. However, editing in the way you did and acting in a badgery way towards other users is extremely uncivil posture.
If you continue, i will be the one notifying the community about this issue.
The vandalism accusation was a mistake of mine, who confused you with X ziomal X, and on that i fully withdrawn my claim. However, the lack of civility accusation is one i endorse and will stand for it, considering your message on my talk page was clearly intended to threaten me with an unjustified accusation of vandalism, while what i was doing at that page was exactly the opposite. -R.Arden (talk) 17:31, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I am well, thank you. The rest of your phrase I do not understand. I requested you to remain civil and stop saying others that they are talking bullshit. Would you please indeed behave in a civil manner. Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:43, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ymblanter. Benjamin Trovato is a prolific creator of new articles but he does not add in-line citations to most of his new articles. Since August 2011 (17 months ago) I have been trying to educate Benjamin about the value in adding his own in-line citations, rather than assuming they are unnecessary or that someone else will do it for him. Please read the thread User talk:Benjamin Trovato#Citation of reliable sources 2, starting at the top. You will see that User:North8000 has opposed my efforts quite successfully. I hope you aren’t going to oppose my efforts too.
In the following edit, Benjamin asked that if anyone could see any statement of his that needed an in-line citation would they mark it with a “Citation needed” tag: diff
In the following edit, I highlighted the fact that a significant number of Users have added banners at the top of Benjamin’s articles. These banners ask for in-line citations to be added to the article: diff
In Benjamin’s reply to me, he argues that the banners placed at the top of his articles mean little because the Users who put them there didn’t insert “Citation needed” tags in the articles to show him where they want in-line citations added: diff
Benjamin is a competent User but he appears to be playing a game in which he says his articles don’t need in-line citations, and he also implies he will only add an in-line citation where someone else adds a “Citation needed” tag to identify where a citation is needed. I have responded to his requests by adding “Citation needed” tags in places where an in-line citation could be placed.
You and I both know that adding "Citation needed" templates is not disruptive, and there is no Wikipedia policy against adding them, singly or otherwise. Multiple templates might make an article look ugly to you, but not as ugly as an article whose content can't be verified due to the absence of in-line citations. Wikipedia has no policy about ugliness. Dolphin(t)12:54, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You just want to educate somebody and therefore try t make a point. This is not acceptable. You should only require on-line citations to the statements which you really find doubtful and only after you tried to find the sources and failed. Everything else is disruptive.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:15, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dolphin, you made a complete mis-statement of my conversation there with you. Too obvious to be accidental. It's starting to look like you want to wage arguments more than you want to get cites added. North8000 (talk) 12:59, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies for not responding sooner. We live in different time zones.
We appear to have failed in our mission to persuade Benjamin of the value of adding his own in-line citations. He has just erased the banner saying This article lacks in-line citations etc. and posted the following statement on the Talk page:
Since there is now no evidence that citations are needed I removed all the citation requests. If someone finds something in the article that is not in the references or contradicts another source, please leave a note here. See the diff.
Again, Benjamin is saying that if someone can see a statement, paragraph etc that needs an in-line citation, someone should leave a specific note on the Talk page or a “Citation needed” tag. In my experience Benjamin has never acknowledged the legitimacy of a banner that says “This article lacks in-line citations”. He has never acknowledged the legitimacy of the information at WP:Verifiability, nor has he acknowledged that he has even read it.
Benjamin is a prolific and competent creator of new articles. I have tried to persuade him of the value of adding his own in-line citations but I have met with little support and quite a bit of opposition. If Ymblanter or North8000 are willing to assist by trying to persuade Benjamin, that would be greatly appreciated by me. Dolphin(t)04:24, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
