User talk:KPbIC: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 23:33, 14 May 2006

New name

Hello, even if you are not a sock of a user well-known for his disruption (we shall check this soon), please have a decency to clean up after your controversial moves by fixing multiple double redirects you created. Take care, Ghirla ^-трёп- 05:17, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ghirla, you probably noticed that Kuban kazak initiated the controvertial part of the move (from Chernihiv to Chernigov). I reverted it back. Anyway, I'll take care of the double redirects.

Actually, thanks for your initial welcoming message...

And, you know, don't take Kuban kazak's messages literally. He knows exactly who I am...

134.84.5.xx. Btw you could not have chose a more suitable user name. --Kuban Cossack

10:46, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kiev metro

Подлый ты человек, [1], не стыдно бред нести?--Kuban Cossack

20:26, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think user:134 would have been kind of cool, but KPb|C is fine as well if our colleague wishes to use it. As for the article conflict, I commented on the 3RR board and I hope there won't be any admin actions. That Kazak self-reverted was a wise step IMO. I will comment in the issue itself at the article's talk.

134, it understandably annoyes the editor when he writes articles and others come just purge stuff from there and leave, even if others are right (I am not saying you are right here either, just pls understand the situation). Yes, Kazak doesn't own the article, but it would be nice if you helped add to the article rather than just censor the work of the main valuable editor who writes on the Metro of your native city. Don't step into the shoes of AndriyK who roamed into the whole bunch of articles others, mainly myself, wrote and made a small disastrous POV edits, be it Khreschatyk, Chernihiv, Beregynia stupid edit war or Verkhovna Rada building. There is no wiki-law against such habbits, it's just annoying and almost unethical, if you ask me. Compare it to my "intrusion" to AndriyK's Vasyl Stus. At least, I added and restyled the article, not only replaced the concentration camp by a penal colony. Please think about it, OK? --Irpen 22:03, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hope we agree that wikipedia is just an encyclopedia, it's not a board or a tool to express author's personal opinion to the rest of the world. If somebody forgets it a moment, and let his personal opinion sneak in, and then became angry if it's corrected, then at the end whose mistake that is?

Or, let me put it defferentl. It may be "the main valuable editor" who put his POV in, or it may be a "censor" who is trying to put his POV in. Should the first be given some kind of parole to put his POV just because he wrote the rest of the article?

All I am saying, is that KK would have treated your edits differently if you helped add the content to the articles rather than removed the stuff from there. As long as all you do is purging, he, as an editor who creates content, would treat you with disdain. It may be that you are just "correcting" his POV. It may also be that you just replace his POV or a NPOV with your POV. It is difficult to judge in general and is different from case to case. It is easy, though, to see who writes stuff and who deletes it. Just give it a thought. More at the article's talk later. --Irpen 02:04, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Irpen, I clearly see your points and I understand your logic as if I were in your shoes. In the same time it's also my understanding that even if you wrote 1,000 NPOV articles you are still not permited to write 1 POV article on your lovely topic (but you do get respect for 1,000 articles). And it's my understanding that edits should be judged by context, and not by the name of an editor who made them.

You may say that it's all nice and it's how it should be, but the world is not perfect, and I should live by de-facto rules, accepting their defects, instead of calling for de-jure rules. Well, in the end, each lives in a house that he built. KPbIC 03:27, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Look, I am not speaking in general about articles. I am speaking about one particular aticle. Written by Kazak. Help him write it rather than remove stuff he wrote. I wrote a message at its talk where I supported you both. But my laptop battery died shortly before I would be pressing the "save" button. So, the spark is lost. I may try to recreate it later. A pity, but could be worse. It was much more pity when I at one time wrote a detailed and referenced response to Halibutt and the wiki killed it by a "server problem". See you later, alligator. --Irpen 03:31, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help him... It's easy to say... You are the one who is helping him :) And he will be fine :) There are others which need more help.

Are you sure you want to support both of us? You may take a look on the essence of today's disagreement on Kiev Metro, express your opinion on the subject, not on personalities, and this probably would be the most valuable support.

Overall, the Kiev Metro article is fine, probably a little too much on "Language issues", it probably misses a paragraph on the price, rules, and conditions of a ride, and of course it misses a map with Ukrainian names. :) But I don't recall removing anything valuable that Kuban wrote. He is actually doing a good stuff with station articles. But it's not an excuse for POV :).

"Server errors" should not be a problem I think; I usually use the ordinary IE, click back, save to a file, upload later. But laptop's battery is a problem :( I value the convenience of big screens; I use desktop at home, and elsewhere. I even gave away my only old laptop due to lack of need.

Alligator? Hmm... KPbIC 05:03, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am sure I agree with both of you. Eh, will have to try to rewrite.

I mostly use laptops everywhere. Hitting back doesn't always help when the server problem hits. BTDT.

And while I will be helping the Cossack, please help keeping Ukrained and AlexPU in check. The latter is one of the rudest Wikipedians ever. The former is appreciated to restricting his trolling activity to talk pages, as his edits are mostly good. But the talk page and edit summary trolling is a thing to avoid and we all know that. And the legendary AndriyK... These Don Quixotes of their invented anti-Russian mafia crusade put a shame on the Ukrainian community. And when they read this and tell me that it's me who is a shame, I would be fascinated one more time. See you later at talk:Kiev Metro but no guarantees that today. See You Later Alligator is a catchfrase and not an offense. --Irpen 05:23, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I regard your yesterday's note at my talkpage as general understanding of my point. Thank you for that. Can we cooperate in editing despite your dislike of my lexics? AlexPU 06:34, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hope we can cooperate on issues. Don't go over personalities. KPbIC 07:43, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Special note for User:Kuban kazak:

For article discussion use the respective article talk page. I do read article talks. Hope you too.

Kuban Kazak reverts on Kiev Metro

Kuban Kazak still insists on his version in spite that it is based upon a completely irrelevent source. How could we solve this problem. What do you think about Request for Comment concering his behaviour?--AndriyK 09:05, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So based on a completely relevant source...thus it is correct. Besides it is you who is reverting I am actually suggesting different versions. But do file an RfC, lets see what happens when the truth comes out. (which I know that the word means nothing to you). --Kuban Cossack

10:22, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am glad AndriyK brings his grivances publicly this time, unilike he did earlier. As for Kiev Metro, I still haven't got to posting my proposal killed by the computer mishap. Will do soon. --Irpen 19:16, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes and originally saying that it was a relevant source, and then changing it...Странный чувак...Сам не может определиться, как у Пушкина

Навстречу ему Балда
Идёт, сам не зная куда.

--Kuban Cossack 19:24, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added the "fact" template. Hope Kazak would bring some references. If not it can be one of the points to request a comment... But I would not be around for awhile (exam time)... KPbIC 19:29, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

С Праздником!

--Kuban Cossack 00:57, 9 May 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Imperial propaganda in progress

Hi there. I need neutral users' help to react on intolerable "Russification" of history here and, most important here. Imperial Pride Watch :), presented by our common ... friend, is refusing to edit the POV-table, making me delete it instead. What do you say?AlexPU 21:08, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AlexPU, you edit and discuss a table at its talk and not blank it unilaterally. That's how easy it is. --Irpen 21:15, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let's work on template {{Armies of Ukraine}}. A book by Крип'якевич "Історія українського війська (від княжих часів до 20-х років XX ст.)" could be a perfect source. KPbIC 05:00, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

КРЫС, I object this idea. This is a provokation already successful against you. Neither Druzhina is Russian Army, nor Red Army is Ukrainian one. Please let's find other ways. I stick to my initial idea: we should rework the Russian template somehow. E.g. let's mark Druzhina as pre-history or something. What do you say?AlexPU 12:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No objection. I think I've seen the book online. --Irpen 05:07, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot find it online. Unfortunately. KPbIC 05:22, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is a part two of the book about the Ukrainian period. I could not easily find part I, but judging from content table it is about the princely time and there must be plenty of other sources for that. Besides, since it exists in electronic form, it must be online somewhere. One just has to look more. Or we can buy it from the site. It's not much money.

Also, 134, maybe you could add a word or two to this fellow here about manners, you know. The messages from Ukrained, myself and several other people doesn't seem to be getting through. Judging from his recent talk page entries and edit summaries, there is no reform in manners whatsoever. Not that I care when he badmouthes me personally (I even made an amusing gallery at my talk out of his entries) but his harassing others, referring to people by nationality and other similar uncivil stuff may get our friend in trouble again. Since he is now known for his bad mouth, I don't expect any more tolerance and/or time delays between another outburst and another block. So, please try since I am giving up. TIA, --Irpen 06:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And here is another interesting book. Ukrainian Armies 1914-55 by Peter Abbott. There is plenty of online sources, but this one is particularly useful for being in English and written by an established historian[2]. This TOC can be used directly.

Should we list armies that represented the Ukrainian states only (UkrSSR, WUPR, UPR, Carpatho-Ukraine) or should we also list the Ukrainian units in other armies, like Sich Rifles with Austro-Hungary, SS Galicia with Nazi Germany, separate Ukrainian units in Red Army (until '30s), etc.

UPA should certainly be listed but should we list an anti-Polish resistance force of OUN that preceeded the UPA?

Also, there was a Western Ukrainian Republic's separate Ukrainian Galician Army, which joined reds in Jan 1920 following what they perceived as Petlyura's selling them out to Poles, but retained a separate identity within reds for a while.

Pro-Soviet "alternative" Kharkiv government organized the Ukrainian Workers' and Peasants' Red Army which by mid-1919 had some 100,000 men (it was later integrated with the Red Army). There was also a "Red Cossacks of Ukraine" formations, etc. Perhaps, this is too many for a template and this would all be interesting for the History of the Ukrainian Military article to be.

Also, his other book would be interesting for the partisan article which I still haven't got time to clean up following AlexPU's POV "revision". --Irpen 20:30, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gomel

Please when reverting moves use WP:Requested Moves in the WP:FAITH pattern. --Kuban Cossack 12:20, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have explained my original move on talk page. Any subsequent moves should be done with WP:Requested Moves. Which is something that you clearely forgot to do. Finally it would be Homel in Belarusian not Homyel, which plain wrong. Also please don't tattle, it does look rediculously silly. --Kuban Cossack

23:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maladzechna

Also you are just being plain silly here in your vandetta against me. Reverting a literary Belarusian translit to a latin alphabet that has no official use anywhere really shows how rediculous you really are. If I was a Russian POV-pusher wouldn't I have moved it to Molodechno and blocked the the redirect page? No, even though Googling that would be most sensible, however unlike you I am aware of WP:Naming Conventions. Reagardless PLEASE STOP STALKING ON MY EDITS! --Kuban Cossack 23:19, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you have anything to say in support in your provocative page moves, do so at article's talk page. KPbIC 23:26, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That is not a provocative page move, that is the move that will get a massive support on any WP:Requested moves. --Kuban Cossack

23:30, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

134, Kazak's moves where in accordance with WP:Naming conventions. Lacinka is not a basis for any names in any encyclopedia. I can't see why you reverted his moves rather than to provoke him. I am glad he learned how to hold his temper and didn't reply to you with insults. And I hope this wasn't your intention to provoke him and get him banned to "compensate" for the likely block of a filthy-mouthed user:AlexPU who you are viewing as a useful pusher of the right POV, perhaps in the wrong way. --Irpen 23:33, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 89: / Line 89: @@
 :If you have anything to say in support in your provocative page moves, do so at article's talk page. [[User:KPbIC|KPbIC]] 23:26, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
 ::That is not a provocative page move, that is the move that will get a massive support on any WP:Requested moves. --[[User:Kuban kazak|Kuban Cossack]] [[Image:Romanov Flag.svg|25px|]] 23:30, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
+, Kazak's moves where in accordance with WP:Naming conventions. [[Lacinka]] is not a basis for any names in any encyclopedia. I can't see why you reverted his moves rather than to provoke him. I am glad he learned how to hold his temper and didn't reply to you with insults. And I hope this wasn't your intention to provoke him and get him banned to "compensate" for the likely block of a filthy-mouthed [[user:AlexPU]] who you are viewing as a useful pusher of the right POV, perhaps in the wrong way. --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 23:33, 14 May 2006 (UTC)