User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise

Archives
– July 2006 – October 2006 – November 2006 – January 2007 – 12 March 2007 – 5 May 2007 – 8 Sept 2007 – Dec 2007 – Feb 2008 – March 2008 – 12 May 2008 – 20 July 2008 – 31 August 2008 – – – – – –

Note: If you leave a message here I will most often respond here

Vandalism on the Hunnic language article

Dear Future Perfect Adminstitrator!

I want report to you a vandalism, in this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunnic_language

A guy named, Sborsody always delete a board. In that board, there are the similar words of the Hun language to the Turkish and to Hungarian with English translation. It's there long time ago. But he always delete it. I put again. I also put a new source there. But he is following the vandalism again, and again. I ask your help.

Thank you. Sin sincerely: MagyarTürk (talk)

Pictures of Istvan Kovats

Greetings! I uploaded to xs.to (image sharing site) photos of Istvan Kovats, with my signature, with my identity card. You can see, that's photos are mine.

http://xs.to/xs.php?h=xs132&d=08434&f=pa210107939.jpg MagyarTürk (talk)

John Hunyadi, my answer

Greetings. You missed the sources, references in my editing. All right, now I put two important references, to John Hunyadi article. Is it better? I hope: yes.

MagyarTürk (talk)

I will never get it right...

Is this [[1]] in the public domain? It has been inserted in the Hellenization page along with text that was actually copied verbatim from the sources. I like the photo a lot, but I am a bit confused. Can it be used under the terms described? If yes can I also use pictures of original texts whose copyright (I mean the text's) has expired?--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 11:59, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Do you have better pictures? I'd really like to read the some of the Aromanian. BalkanFever 12:17, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, scanned pages from out-of-copyright books are generally fair game. Just like the many historic maps from old books we use. In what circumstances a scanned image of a text (rather than a simple quotation) makes sense as encyclopedic information is a different issue, but legally it should be no problem. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:54, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I 'll see then if I can find any edition of old musical scores. I plan to insert them in the motet articles!--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 12:58, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

For Dufay there probably won't be much. The oldest reliable full edition (CMM Vol. 1, by Besseler) is from the 60s, I have no idea what older ones exist and how good they are. Might be better to re-set any example excerpts we need, as I did the other day with the Josquin bits. Sorry I still didn't find time to spend an hour or two at the music library. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:13, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Ι was under the impression that the first CMM edition was older and could be therefore used... I still owe you the Leontaritis samples and I am looking forward to working with you on the french-cypriot repertoire. I' ll check if Gallica has any relevant material--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 13:23, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Leontaritis sent. Enjoy--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 15:05, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Nice stuff! Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:48, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Do athletics fall into your interests?

Otherwise can you recommend me an administrator who is familiar with sports (basketball in particular)? --Ioannes Tzimiskes (talk) 16:05, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

No, not really, sports clubs are not really one of the things I deal with. You seem to have a dispute about notability of players? Better to ask for a third opinion at one of the relevant wikiprojects perhaps. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:47, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Bălţi Steppe

Oh, I am really sorry! I never thought about distroying edit history. When I tried to rename it, it prompted me that the page already exists, and that care should be taken not to loose the talk page. But I did not realize about loosing edit history. That means that it was imperative to undo what I did, and I am glad you noticed it. I am sorry I wasn't very thoughtful. (It is not the first time I do simmilar mistakes. But I never do the same exact mistake twice. :))

Sure, I will start a proposal to move the article from Bălţi Steppe to Bălţi steppe. I would like to add also that I accepted some months ago that this, and not Bălţi plane is the correct name (regardless of capitalization of "s"), and I am holding to that oppinion. I will not make any attemptes to change now that, I see, Moldopodo seems to be banned. I changed my mind because I was persuaded by the arguments, and the arguments stand regardless of whether a user is present or no longer. Thank you very much for your kind intervention. Dc76\^talk 00:15, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

Check the history of this talk page to see what this "award" is about. I think it might be that nutcase. BalkanFever 04:33, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Can you have a word with ΚΕΚΡΩΨ about his recent disruptive editing

He has been adding the Greek Language among the languages spoken in Macedonia in a total of 7 times up till now. [2] We have some pretty strong evidence that the language is not spoken in Macedonia, at least not in a significant number: European Council [3][4][5], United Nations [6], Britannica encyclopedia [7] , BBC Educational [8], Eupedia [9]. This has been backed up by many editors also. The only lame arguments this user uses to support this fantomatic language minority is this web page [10][11] and even here the Greek it is not clearly stated among the languages of Macedonia. "The number of languages listed for Macedonia is 9." Non of them is Greek. Can you have a word with him about his recent disruptive editing and vandalism on the Republic of Macedonia page. Thank you Alex Makedon (talk) 19:08, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

dear fellow Admin plz do something about the nationalist troll ΚΕΚΡΩΨ and his attempts to edit Republic of Macedonia page at will, instead of editing the page just as he prefers to.[12]Alex Makedon (talk) 13:23, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Huh? Fellow admin? When did that happen? So not only can you unban yourself, but elect yourself to an adminship now too? That's hot. By the way, in case you hadn't realized, FP's edit effectively contradicted yours, so I don't know why you're bothering to try to invoke his wrath against me. ·ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· 16:37, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Deleting an article

Hi , I think the White Serbia article needs to be deleted. It is a stub, poor quality, and the White Serbs article more than adequately covers the issue. The article can be done without Hxseek (talk) 08:03, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Question about sources

Dear FP. Is there any guideline prohibiting or discouraging the use of references from internet resources when the latter require (payed) login? I have a disagreement with a fellow editor in Talk:Armenia but I can't find any specific guideline elaborating on the issue--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 08:49, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt reply.--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 09:19, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

WP:DUCK

Hello, Fut.Perf. Could you take a look at a newbie Occidentalist (talk · contribs) and have a WP:DUCK test? Since Ex-oneatf (talk · contribs) was blocked by you for his plagiarism and disruptive editing to Comfort women and others in July, about 4 months are past (that means RFCU report would not be effective) and the newbie inserted the same plagiarized materials to Prostitution in South Korea using same "Katherine Moon's citations". Also, Priorend (talk · contribs) and Logitech95 (talk · contribs) who took over the edit used the same source. The newbie was temperarily blocked for that after WP:AIV report, but I believe Occidentalist is either Ex-oneatf or Priorend per their same writing/method/violation/sources. I would appreciate if you spare a time for that. Regards.--Caspian blue 05:08, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Update: Tanthalas39 blocked and unblocked the newbie and takes it to WP:ANI. Thanks.--Caspian blue 05:56, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

User:VivaNorthCyprus

Can you do something about this user? He/she continues to make POV edits on Cyprus related articles like Morphou, Lefkoniko, and so on. I've taken it to WP:AVI, and they did nothing. The user has been warned. Any help would be appreciated. _{El Greco}^(talk) 17:08, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Looks like we may have a new sock on our hands, but "POW removed"? Hilarious. ·ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· 15:21, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Future Perfect at Sunrise

Hello, the RfC on you has been closed. You are invited to read the conclusion at Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Future_Perfect_at_Sunrise#Conclusion. To answer your question that was on the RfC talk page, RfC/U's are left up pretty much indefinitely until someone gets around to closing them. Since I'm pretty much the only admin who touches them, they can be up for months until they're dealt with. Wizardman 20:52, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

I just now saw your note. I have no outside view to give, I only closed it as a completely uninvolved user. Pretty much it's either I close it or it disappears into oblivion, your actions neither right nor wrong. I can't answer which is better. Wizardman 20:56, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Fut. Perf, you have an unambiguously clear sense of involvement in this RFC - it was not appropriate for you to refactor an uninvolved editor's comments. If you were not satisfied with the outcome of your discussions with Wizardman, you should've come directly to the RFC talk page where myself or another editor would've made the necessary adjustment, depending on who noticed it first. So don't get me wrong; I can appreciate your concerns in part that may have some merit. But without further input, what you did was not appropriate. There are specific reasons why the involved subject of an RFC should not make such edits, particularly to avoid escalating disputes. Please bear this criticism in mind for the future. Ncmvocalist (talk) 11:33, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Your advice is duly noted and archived in the place reserved for opinions of comparable value. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:51, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Kosovo

Could you please take a look at the little trollfest on Talk:Kosovo? Both sides seem to have forgotten that the article is under probation. Colchicum (talk) 21:53, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi

Sorry for your time, but I really, really do not understand why should this be without an image? Any real point? Vlatko (talk) 00:49, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

what happens next?

care to give me a little advice?

I am a little apprehensive to dive straight back into the article resulted in my 48 hour block - I have suspicions that it might result in another edit-war.

I have made a proposal on the talk page, which only one person has commented on and there comment were agreeing with my proposals.

I did however think it would be fair/sensible to try and get Caspian Blue involved in the process, I left him a talk page message with a link to the discussion, but he does not seem to want to get involved.

At what point do I edit the article again? I am trying to use tact/diplomacy rather than cause more problems for myself.

Sennen goroshi (talk) 03:39, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Zwei things

• Since you guys don't rewrite articles, how about a history merge? I know it's not caturday but it r been a wyle :).
• Is there anything you can do about this? BalkanFever 06:35, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

You mean Exodus of Ethnic Macedonians from Greece and Political refugees of the Greek Civil War? I don't think that would be very useful, there's too much interlacing edit activity; a merged history would be utterly unreadable. And since my recommendation is to rewrite the merged article from scratch anyway, there isn't much of a formal problem either. If you want to be very very correct about attribution, you could say "merging material from ..." in the edit summary whenever you copy literal stuff over.

As for the monkeying, I'd simply keep it around as a document. Revealing the varying degrees of cleverness among their team – they're doin it rather well, akshully. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:58, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

OK. By the way, why did you add an "a" here? Apparently now the book is called "marijuana" (see WP:PNT). BalkanFever 11:55, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I found that version on Google, in a search entry of a page that seemed to have been one of the very rare instances where her name together with that of some other book titles of hers were mentioned on some Macedonian news site [13]. Unfortunately, the page itself was no longer accessible at the time, only its Google shadow. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:41, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

FYI

An anonymous editor has begun a deletion review for one of your image deletions but cannot inform you as your talk page is semi-protected. See: Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 November 10.

CIreland (talk) 14:18, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review

IP 86.166.86.153 is calling for a deletion review on Image:Barack-obama-mother.jpg, which you closed; the IP did not inform you because your talk page is semiprotected. Nyttend (talk) 14:27, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Please refrain from calling my arguments preposterous: whatever you may think of them, such an appelation surely paints me in a bad light. I don't look ill on you for disagreeing, but it's only right for you likewise not to look ill on me. Nyttend (talk) 01:29, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Aradic

Hi Fut. can you have a look at this and tell me if having two accounts like that is allowed?--Avg (talk) 17:47, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

What's the problem with the accounts? As far as I see he switched cleanly from one to the other, with no attempt at deception. It all looks more like some confusion over account names that were originally meant to be specific to each language wiki. Of course, one might recommend he should link the accounts through a userpage redirect. The discussion comments are unhelpful, but don't cross the line into the overtly disruptive, as far as I'm concerned. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:52, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Same stuff explained here--Añtó| Àntó (talk) 06:23, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't think this allows you to repost this kind if stuff even when you've been reverted and told they are offensive [14]. Unless you compare yourself to "anonymous trolls", which speaks for itself.--Avg (talk) 08:28, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Threads with rants from both sides removed. Aradic, yes, please don't participate in these kinds of pointless shouting matches. Avg, if you are going to remove crap, remove all of it, or your actions look biased. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:39, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I won't participate but it would be nice that Greek users (anonymous and especially registered!!!) stop taking the rule of prosecution,jury and executors at the same time . Including Mr. "Absolute Truth" -Avg --Añtó| Àntó (talk) 10:50, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Balkan nationalist POV-pusher and edit-warrior (incl. move-warring)

Bože pravde (talk · contribs). Take care of him, please. Colchicum (talk) 02:09, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

He's abusing Twinkle as well. I've warned him to desist or be blocked. -- ChrisO (talk) 02:27, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

You are way too kind. As far as I see, he has been doing that for years and is perfectly aware of the ARBMAC: [15]. Colchicum (talk) 03:05, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Please also note the POV push at Šar Mountains and Kopaonik. Aramgar (talk) 03:09, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

This is rather pointless. The list is almost as long as the entire list of his contributions. Take any random diffs, and you will see something like Montenegrin => Serbian, Kosovo => Kosovo, Serbia. Colchicum (talk) 03:19, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Point. One's presumptions of good faith are certainly abused. Aramgar (talk) 03:51, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Mactruth

Hey Future, please send me your email address to discuss the matter. Mactruth (talk) 02:22, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

You can contact me through the wiki "E-mail this user" function, see link in toolbox on the left. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:24, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Aromanians

Hi fur perf. If you had any time to spare with your inkscape skills would you be able to make a linguistic/ethnic map of the Aromanians in Albania based on this [16] source with the major areas labelled, (Muzachia, Moscopole.....). If you would do this it would be greatly appreciated. I would do it myself but your skills are better. PMK1 (talk) 09:42, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Use of the minor edit tag

Hi Future Perfect. I noticed you've made several revisions ([17], [18], [19]) using the minor edit tag, which aren't really minor revisions. Please see WP: Minor_edit:

"A check to the minor edit box signifies that only superficial differences exist between the current and previous version: typo corrections, formatting and presentational changes, rearranging of text without modifying content, et cetera. A minor edit is a version that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. An edit marked as minor appears on the right of a lower case, bolded "m" character (m) in the history."

Since your edits were actually substantial, it would be great if you could avoid labelling them as minor. Thanks! -- Gaius Octavius | Talk 16:20, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Number one was a routine rollback of an obvious ban-evading troll sock; number two was a rollback of an image that had been restituted against policy after being deleted at IfD; number three was a purely technical dummy edit after a history merge (technically a self-revert, in fact). All three were correct. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:06, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

They were all justified edits; no argument there. But a minor edit is only for "superficial differences". These changes were not superficial, regardless of how justified they were. -- Gaius Octavius | Talk 09:47, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Last time I looked, rollbacks were always automatically marked as minor. Banned users get rollbacked, that's policy. The history merge one was as superficial as it gets (look at it this way; if you don't understand why these kinds of edits happen, look up "history merge".) The image one is the only that's even remotely debatable. It was indisputably enforcing policy, it had been explained in the previous edit summary, and not doing it would have left the page with a redlink, so yes, I maintain it was legitimate rollback too. Now please let's all do something more useful, shall we? Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:04, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Confused

Fut - I'm a little shocked about what you're doing. You're the only person that holds the view that Wizardmans closures of RfC's are wrong. Everyone's trying to tell you that he's doing the right thing, yet you disregard that and start reverting him complately against the consensus on WT:RFC. I'm not going to revert you again, but I will seriously consider taking this back to RfC or ArbCom if you continue this nonsense. I haven't really looked at your RfC, but some of the concerns were edit warring over things where you clearly in the minority - please take this to heart. Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 22:35, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

No, you evidently haven't looked at my RfC then. And I will continue to protest against the perversion of policy that is in those "closures", with all the means I have. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:37, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Look, you need to take a step away from this issue - you've got a seriously clouded judgement with regards to this. Why don't you just leave it for a few days and we can discuss it when everyone's calm and thinking rationally? We can even have an RfC on the matter if you want! Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 22:41, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm perfectly calm and rational, thank you very much. And all I'm asking is a minor clarification of the wording in the format he uses. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:42, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, we can discuss that with him can't we? I don't see any other people raising these concerns, rather I see people supporting what he does. Perhaps you could ask him to change how he "concludes" user conduct RfC's in the future - using terms like recommendations (based on the consensus) rather than more formal words like conclusion. Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 22:46, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, I did just that, I made one such suggestion to him and carried it out for him, and he didn't object, did he? (If it's used as an argument that Elonka "didn't object", you know...) Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:48, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Just go to his talk page, and ask him if in the future he could change things. He's quite responsisve - I personally see no reason for him to change his ways, but if such a minor thing will make you feel happier about things then I see no reason why he won't use different wording in the future. Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 22:50, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

He didn't seem too much interested in continuing the discussion this morning, in fact he said he was "dropping" it. I'm sure he can follow up on our discussion on WT:RFC, and I'll take it up with him again should there be another occasion for it. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:53, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

But the thing is, he's under no obligation to do as you say - it would simply be a kind gesture of him to accept that your not happy with the way he does it and change to a way you're happier about. He has consensus firmly behind him with his current way of doing things. Please - just ask him kindly on his talk page to change the words he uses and I'm sure he'll respond positively. Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 22:56, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Wizardman doesn't own the RfC format, just because he's the one who does it most often doesn't mean it's for him to decide how to do it. Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:01, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Just to let you know, I'm off to bed in a second so please don't think I'm being ignorant if I don't reply. Enjoy the rest of you day. Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 22:57, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

No prob, I should be off to bed too, actually. Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:01, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Your move of Germans

Maybe I'm missing something, but shouldn't it be moved to be consistent with French people, Spanish people, Japanese people, Taiwanese people, Gagauz people, Basque people, etc.? –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 14:16, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, ok, that's fair enough. The Transhumanist seemed to indicated that these moves are primarily uncontroversial, but I apologize for the inconvenience/hasty move. Would it be best for me to move German people back to Germans for now? –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 14:42, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Opinion

Would you like to give me your opinion for [[20]]. Thanks.Vlatko ^T 22:00, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm, let me see - editing logging in and off is considered sockpuppeteering. + comments like this one -> I can see where this is going. Fut.Perf, I have troubles filling a case at WP:SSP - is it necessary for such a clear case? --Laveol ^T 22:16, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Its OK, whats up to me Fut.Perf, as long as the infobox stays that way. Laveol just leave it, I'm not at the point of mind condition to play with you. Stop bothering me. Vlatko ^T 22:35, 12 November 2008 (UTC)