Jump to content

User talk:NuclearWarfare

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by NuclearWarfare (talk | contribs) at 19:15, 9 August 2009 (archive). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Home Talk Email Contributions monobook.js Content Awards Userspace

WikiVoices publication of Board candidates interview

What is taking so long to get the audio published? I suspect that the content is being suppressed by some WMF Board and/or Staff member(s) who want to make sure that my counterpoint views are not heard by voters. The election polling window is nearly closed. This session's delay in publication renders it almost worthless to voters. Utterly disappointing. I feel like my time was wasted on an audience of a handful of Board candidates and a few WikiVoices regulars. -- Thekohser 13:56, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quite honestly, I have no idea, and I too wish it had been able to come out the Friday before last, before the election actually started. User:Promethean was supposed to do the publishing, as he has the recording, but he has simply vanished. Perhaps you could try getting in touch with him? NW (Talk) 14:36, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Greg's got a good point. This is an embarrassment. NuclearWarfare and I don't edit audio; we've done all we can. Durova293 15:01, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This rings true with many things in life, when things don't go to plan, blame someone who isn't around. FYI Shoemaker's Holiday was supposed to be doing the audio editing to fix up the mishaps that occur with audio etc. He renewed this vow several days ago. Shoemakers Holiday has the copy of the audio (unless he deleted it) for all parts required so I'm not sure what is taking so long.   «l| Promethean ™|l»  (talk) 22:15, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, sorry for blaming you; I honestly thought you were doing the editing. My apologies, NW (Talk) 00:10, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Admin

When do you think I can become an admin? AlienX2009 (talk) 05:07, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the eBay auction is scheduled to close in 46 hours. Dollars and euros accepted via PayPal. Durova294 05:11, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Durova, Durova. Tsk, tsk.
In all honestly, AlienX2009, it really depends on you. First off, why do you wish to become an administrator? NW (Talk) 05:12, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, first of all I don't want users who are writing nonsense on Wikipedia. And a user is harassing me for everything I do because of my user sub space. AlienX2009 (talk) 02:48, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For the first case, I suggest that you try working with Recent Changes Patrol. Antivandalism is always quite helpful. As for the second, more specific reason, if it is an ongoing problem, I would suggest speaking to an administrator about it. NW (Talk) 02:50, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
His complaint is about me and the MFD I have for a page he has in the user subspace.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:58, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:FAC Nikita Zotov

Thanks for talking on that. My mind is not clear yet, but I'll throw some comments so that you understand my harsh reaction at FAC.

  • It is a shame Zotov didn't have a proper page, and your efforts in this direction are more than appreciated.
  • It is very difficult for a non-Russian to write a proper (FA) page on Russian history. Not only one has to get access to proper sources (most of which are still not available on internet or/and never translated), but one has to understand the (complex) Russian history as a whole.
  • I myself disliked history as a subject for most of my life. I'll try to help as I can, but a russian-speaking humanitarian would be 10 times better here.
  • In Russia, Peter I is probably the most popular and important figure of the entire Russian history. Whereas there views on Lenin, etc, differ vastly, Peter is treated apolitically and favorably by most sides. I may not judge whether he was a cruel tyrant or best human of the time, most likely neither, but the issue is sensitive and painting him villain might induce strong opposition, sooner or later. Evidence suggests, whatever cruel he's done (no angel is capable to rule Russia) he had a great sense of humor, so as Zotov.
  • As a close friend of Peter, Zotov is well described in Russian literature (not only him, but even his sons). The literature I used in my 1st FAC comments was found in no time on the web (not blogs, but proper articles, copies of Solovyov, etc.). I don't know whether this FAC can be rescued, I guess it depends on others. Finding sources is a technical issue. I feel it is important to quickly brush the style to avoid any potentially conflicting statements (keeping in mind that almost every "fact" there might be corrected later). Regards. Materialscientist (talk) 23:40, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding whether this is salvageable for this current FAC; no need to worry about that. If it is, great, if not, no big deal.
Now, moving onto the sources. As I mentioned in my FAC introduction, I tried to exhaust as best I could both internet sources and my local library network. It is clear that you feel that at least a few points of view from Russian historians, as well as several facts from Russian-only sources, are missing. Could you explain a bit further on that note, and link to where I can find references for these? If they are offline sources, is there any chance that you could scan me those pages? Thanks, NW (Talk) 01:22, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So, I looked through the Brockhaus and Efron link, and saw the list of sources down at the bottom. Do you have access to any of those sources by any chance? NW (Talk) 03:07, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My internet time is fragmented during the day .. Your source coverage would be good in other circumstances, but not for this particular topic .. Brockhaus and Efron is much too brief (even on references) .. I have no access to any russian library (live abroad), but I'll look on the web, very soon. I'm still mulling whether or not google translation will be illegible. Try Brockhaus and Efron page and see for yourself (seems better than I thought). I am afraid this is the most realistic option (I can give russian pages, and check questionable points, but its too much work to translate them manually - e.g., that Solovyov's page was rather long). BTW, you'll need to decide when the teaching of Peter started (i.e. choosing the sources). So far, it seems 1677. I'll try to give my opinion (on the sources). Materialscientist (talk) 03:50, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To me, 1677 seems like it makes far more sense with the timeline of Peter's life (After 1683, he was away from the Krelim and his sister I believe, hanging out at Preobrazhenskoye), but seemingly reputable sources do say 1683. Would it be acceptable to just cut mentions of 1683 from the article?
I incorporated Brockhaus and Efron as best I could with Google Translate, and I think I squeezed all useful information from that particular source. As for Russian sources, I do know someone who is a native Russian speaker who might be willing to help, so I will do the best that I can with any links/scans that you can send me. NW (Talk) 04:00, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the day was gone to find copyright-compatible pictures of Zotov. I've put them into the article, please double check copyright issues (assuming I'm right on all dates, those come from russian sources). Regarding start of teaching, most sources suggest 1677. Some refs (full ref can be extracted later):

Your Babel boxes (userpage) look fine. Materialscientist (talk) 07:51, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I got here via FAC. Regarding the onset of Peter's education, I just would like to refer both of you to WP:NPOV#Impartial tone and WP:NPOV#Balance. So I think to mention both dates without deciding for one is o.k. (as it is now). In history articles this should be the case (history is not an exact science). As regards Soloviev and old sources generally, they may be the best, of course, but FA criteria insist on including newer/newest research. I have the feeling that Massie took his stuff about the All-Joking Company largely from works like Soloviev, so it is o.k. to regard him, and Hughes, as "reliable" in this kind of context. Peter's general education or lack of it, is, as I pointed out in my GA review, more problematic: Perhaps you could concentrate on saying what Zotov taught him, instead of including what has been said he supposedly never learnt properly; this belongs rather to Peter's own article (which is quite dreadful) than to Zotov's.
This is the English WP, so WP:NONENG does apply; for the same reason I don't think that there will be much edit-warring for a quiet topic like Zotov. In Western biographies of Peter he hardly figures largely, the more academic the less, so many people will never have heard of him. Peter the Great generally, he used to be rather hated by some historic Russian groups (Slavophiles, people of the "old faith", some intellectuals etc.). It is a recent phenomenon that he is no longer discussed politically. NuclearWarfare, take comfort in this: WP is not about truth, but about verifiability!-- You (we) did not do so badly. Buchraeumer (talk) 10:54, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for the links as well as the work you did to find those images, Materialscientist. I appreciate all of that very much, and shall do my best to improve the article.
And Buchraeumer, interestingly, Solovev is cited little by Massie, at least in regards to Zotov. However, Vasily Kluchevsky, Eugene Schuyler, and M.M. Bogolovsky are all cited quite frequently around the areas that Zotov appears. And I shall take your advice into consideration as I go through the article; thank you.
Well, off to work I go! NW (Talk) 16:54, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kevinoleary12/Archive

Can you please explain this one to me please and I am not clear on what happen. I suspect the Goodridence is a sock of one or the other of KevinLeary or LeagueofIreland - but I would say that whichever one isnt the "sockmaster" of Goodridence therefore isnt a sock.--Vintagekits (talk) 14:55, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is almost 100% certain that LeagueofIreland, Goodridence, and KevinLeary - all three of them - are the same people. It doesn't really matter which one is tagged as the sockpuppet and who is tagged as the master; for convenience sake, I tagged the first one as the master account. I think I am slightly confused as to your statement; could you please clarify it for me? NW (Talk) 16:42, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My point is that I dont think all three are sockpuppets. I think Goodridence is a sockpuppet for one of the other two - not sure which one but I dont think the other is a sockpuppet, Was an IP check ran?--Vintagekits (talk) 17:38, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A checkuser (IP check) was indeed run; that confirmed that the three of them were almost 100% likely to be the same person. NW (Talk) 18:01, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough - that ends my enquiries then.--Vintagekits (talk) 19:08, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

deleted photo

I have it in the photo (File:Downtown Mill Demo 8 July crop signed.jpg.)that I'm the author inbedded in the photo and I post it (and thefore essentailly "signed" by me on wikipedia) therefore I'm not sure how it can't be determined that I own the copyright and can post it. I also noted it in the description as required. Please explain/clairfy for me. Thanks.--Ernest Everett Blevins (talk) 15:31, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, my apologies. Since I cannot actually see the image in question (I am not an administrator), let me refer you to two administrators who I trust. Matthew Bisanz or Juliancolton should be able to help you out with this matter. Thanks, NW (Talk) 16:36, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikivoices Board Candidates Skypecast

Back from holiday Nuke, all I wanted was listen to a recording of the Skypecast of the Wikivoices Board Candidates just before the end of the election. I missed the Skypecast live, I'm missing it now. Ping me when it is up, please (I only know one magic word). Dedalus (talk) 17:45, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For some reason, the Skypecast still isn't up, but I will be sure to let you know when it is. NW (Talk) 18:02, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:NuclearWarfare&oldid=307021721"