Jump to content

User talk:Khirurg

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Cosmos416 (talk | contribs) at 21:45, 13 October 2009 (I had it with you). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Macedonia request for comment

Since you have in the past taken part in related discussions, this comes as a notification that the Centralized discussion page set up to decide on a comprehensive naming convention about Macedonia-related naming practices is now inviting comments on a number of competing proposals from the community. Please register your opinions on the RfC subpages 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5.

Fut.Perf. 07:45, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok

Ok, I am sorry; but you have to stop reverting in bad faith my edits. You may request inlines and I will give you. Reverting my edits in bad faith, is not better than calling you like that. Balkanian`s word (talk) 11:49, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is no quid pro quo here. And why do insist on calling my reverts of you "bad faith"? They are not bad faith. On Origin of the Albanians, for example, I explained to you my reasoning on the talk page. I could also say the same thing about your reverts of me, but you don't see me acting like that. --Athenean (talk) 17:42, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Interestedinfairness

Just to let you know that I have reported Interestedinfairness here. --Cinéma C 18:44, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Additional information needed on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Interestedinfairness

Hello. Thank you for filing Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Interestedinfairness. This is an automated notice to inform you that the case is currently missing a code letter, which indicates to checkusers why a check is valid. Please revisit the page and add this. Sincerely, SPCUClerkbot (talk) 19:06, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think we have another Interestedinfairness: User:Tibetian.. --Cinéma C 17:55, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely. I was about to post on ANI myself, but I'll let you do the honors. He also pretty much admitted to being the IP that was disrupting the Kosovo talkpage. This is starting to become very disruptive. --Athenean (talk) 19:44, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is that where we report Checkuser requests? I've never done that before though :S --Cinéma C 01:27, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My internet was down, otherwise I would have done it already. To report socks, it's best to go to WP:RfCU. If you've never done this before, it's best that I do it, and you can learn how do it by watching me (cause he'll be back again). --Athenean (talk) 06:45, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I've checked it out, and yea.. it was best that you reported it, I wouldn't have known what to do :S You pretty much gave the strongest evidence, but I'll take a look if I can add anything to that. I hope these disruptions will stop, and I'm glad we agree on that. --Cinéma C 14:42, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So this is not the first case you open in vain, right? How long do you want to play this game? Just stop it please, your accusations make no sense at all. --Tibetian (talk) 12:06, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Hey, why have you reverted my edit on the Kosovo Viyalet page? My edit broke no Wikipedia rules. Your explanation in the revert section was in my opinion inadequate and assuming bad faith. Please provide one for me here. Thanks, (Interestedinfairness (talk) 23:35, 10 July 2009 (UTC)).[reply]

High

For your tireless contribution and your efforts in keeping a good faith policy over your noble work, I suggest your nomination as a knight-administrator to the Old Order Of The Good Faith (O.O.O.T.G.F.). Congratulations. --Factuarius (talk) 17:43, 14 July 2009 (UTC) (Some work to the tower may needed before the initiation ceremony)[reply]

Ha ha, thanks! --Athenean (talk) 18:02, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greek Epirotes

I was thinking that in order to avoid confusion, there should be an article about Greek Epirotes, while the EPirotes article should be about all ethnic groups that have lived in epirus. It is the best solution. --Sarandioti (talk) 21:35, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, that sounds like a total content fork. See WP:FORK. And as far as I know, I have never seen any sources mention such a thing as "Albanian Epirotes". --Athenean (talk) 21:40, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You still do not understand that "Epirote" is not a national term. Epirote=Epirote not Albanian or Greek exclusively. --Sarandioti (talk) 21:44, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is your own opinion. On the other hand, I have sources (4 of them) that attest to the exact opposite of what you are saying. I have yet to see a source that uses the term "Epirote" in a non-Greek or Albanian context. --Athenean (talk) 21:46, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You know very well they are not even close to reliable. Greek and totally unreliable sources, is all you brought, friend. Nothing more. Or do you actually think that in 2002 as one of your sources state there were 280,000 greeks in Albania, of whom only ~30,000 voted the greek minority party in 2009. Or is greek author Κασαββετης more reliable? --Sarandioti (talk) 21:55, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't you ever get tired of repeating the same ORguments over and over? --Athenean (talk) 21:57, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As long as you repeat the same unreliable sources of Κασαββετης CO. I have no problem repeating those same arguemnts that show the unreliability of your arguments. And you still haven't answered. --Sarandioti (talk) 22:04, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aigest, Sarandioti, I Pakapshem, a Pristina Kosovar and a Gechingen!? Albanian. This is not contribution, this is an Albanian crusade against you. Is there any way to avoid this demonstration of brutal force in POV-pushing to a wiki article? Just wonder. --Factuarius (talk) 23:08, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources on "Epirus" in a non-Greek or Albanian context. [[1]], [[2]], [[3]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Guildenrich (talkcontribs) 20:35, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pontos

Btw how is Pontos?--Sarandioti (talk) 19:04, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just want to thank you for your help in Autonomous Republic of Northern Epirus (reached 'ga'). Let's see what's next on the 'ga' list.Alexikoua (talk) 06:44, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of possible ARBMAC sanctions

In a 2007 arbitration case, administrators were given the power to impose discretionary sanctions on any user editing Balkans-related articles in a disruptive way. If you engage in further inappropriate behaviour in this area, you may be placed under sanctions including blocks, a revert limitation or an article ban. Thank you. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 00:34, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kyrenia/Girne

Just to let you know that there is now a proper request to move the article back to Kyrenia --> Talk:Girne#Requested move. Green Giant (talk) 03:13, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

...

Athenean, I believe if we can resolve our differences here, there will be less disruption in the articles. What do you think? -- Mttll (talk) 20:07, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What do you propose? I'm listening. --Athenean (talk) 20:10, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let's start with the position of peripheral countries with respect to Europe. Also, let's keep it simple. -- Mttll (talk) 20:27, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds very general to me, but ok. Do you have a specific proposal for a specific article? --Athenean (talk) 20:46, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm talking about something very general. In articles concerning Europe in any way, I have basically two definitions; one of them is this [4], and the other this [5]

Sometimes an article uses them both like here [6] and I find that inconsistent and hypocritical. Do you see what my point is? -- Mttll (talk) 21:22, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the "hypocrisy" you're talking about. The definition of the European continent in physical geography is clear. It is that map you have posted above. In articles that have a strictly geographical context, we should stick to the strictly geographical definition. So if Turkey's wine growing regions are in Anatolia, then they should be listed in Asia. Same with Cyprus. The definition of Europe in political geography is more complex and fuzzy. --Athenean (talk) 21:31, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

About hypocrisy, do you not see that Cyprus and Georgia are listed under Europe? -- Mttll (talk) 21:59, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, move them under "Asia". I will not object to that. But what I would object to is using that as an excuse to move Turkey's wine growing regions to Europe. That is simply geographically incorrect, plain and simple. Next. --Athenean (talk) 22:05, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It would be a valid excuse though, one could assume this definition was used [7]. Btw, can you help me out in that article now that you understand and agree with what I'm saying? -- Mttll (talk) 08:33, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What on earth are you talking about? There is no valid excuse (and i use that word in its most negative connotation), it is geographically incorrect, period. The wine-growing regions of Turkey are in the Asian side, so they stay there. If you feel so strongly about Cyprus and Georgia, feel free to move them, I won't stop you. But it ends there. --Athenean (talk) 07:33, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, but if this is a clear cut geographical matter, how then Cyprus can ever be listed under Europe? No need to be aggressive, btw. -- Mttll (talk) 19:31, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not being aggressive, sorry if I cam across that way. Like I said, within the wine-growing regions context, I have no problem listing Cyprus under Asia. It seems to me you are having trouble with two different users on that article, so you might want to discuss it with them. --Athenean (talk) 20:55, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

Copy of my comments from WP:PERM Pedro :  Chat  20:52, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Done But with caution. This right really is not a big deal but does have some potential to damage. I note your historical blocks and your talk. I also note that you have reverted edits in the past with clear edit summary and have engaged in much discussion around your areas of interest. I'd advise extreme caution with the tool; clearly not productive edits are fine but continue to manually revert anything otherwise with the explnatory edit summaries your are used to. Please also note any admin can remove this tool at anytime if used poorly. See the main rollback page for more.
Understood, thank you. I only plan to use it in cases of obvious vandalism across multiple articles. If there is even the slightest doubt, I will refrain from using it. Thank you once again. --Athenean (talk) 20:55, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure you will. Happy editing! Pedro :  Chat  20:59, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Reporting repeated disruptions

You might like to know that I have reported 3 users (Lontech, Sulmues, Spanishboy2006) who are violating Wikipedia consensus on Kosovo to the ArbCom probation enforcement page. Feel free to leave any comments, if you'd like. All the best, --Cinéma C 02:21, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I found an interesting collection of references on a page titled ALBANIAN HISTORIANS: ALBANIANS DO NOT DESCEND FROM ILLYRIANS (http://www.geocities.com/aia_skenderbeg/albanian_sources.html). What do you think of these references, and if you agree, we could try adding them to the appropriate articles, providing a more NPOV perspective on the issue. --Cinéma C 05:06, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, I'll look into it. We have to be careful with geocities-type websites, though. I tend to use google books, which gives printed material and as such is much harder to challenge. I have used material I have found on google books to make a number of changes to the Origin of the Albanians article. Let me know what you think. I also have a hunch this article is going to be targeted by nationalists in the near future. Take care, --Athenean (talk) 05:14, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

sockpuppetry by User:Pantepoptes

good pick up. I had my suspicions too. LibStar (talk) 00:16, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. We should keep an eye out. He will almost certainly be back. --Athenean (talk) 06:23, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
yes one of the least subtle POV pushers I've ever seen. and resorts to personal attacks whenever you revert his changes. LibStar (talk) 07:40, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

hellο there! Ι've recently created this article and made a wp:dyk prοpοsal. Βut there is a debate οn the hοοk. Yοur view wοuld be vital.thanksAlexikoua (talk) 20:04, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ARBMAC restrictions

To me, this seems like the only option to get you to engage strictly in talk page discussion rather than edit warring. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 18:32, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LOL

A couple users didn't agree... and noted yours and your (friends) connected editors have violated 3RR as noted on the R1a1 history. Your and your friends were overturned because we agreed to be balanced, and not one-sided like you. Your making threats and POV pushing with your incorrect assertions of the figures, Trying to have an Eastern Europe origin and YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW THE ALPHABET or YOUR ARE PERPETUATING VANDALISM (i.e Your edits with the Central Asia, Then Eastern Europe, The South Asia LOL ) Let's see here, main Region is Asia (southern part) and somehow the eastern part of Europe is ether Sandwich in between or ahead???? Yeah keep that in mind when you put your foot in your mouth. I will always be here protecting the integrity of Wikipedia, Regardless. Cosmos416 12:04, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greek genocide

Just a note to say thank you for promptly reacting to vandalism and other mallacious attacks on the Greek genocide page. Your contributions are appreciated. Bebek101 (talk) 17:11, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't mind, I'm going to comment-out the {{RFCU}} template there so that your subpage doesn't get categorized under open SPI cases awaiting clerk approval. Thank you, MuZemike 15:37, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, thanks for the heads up. --Athenean (talk) 17:01, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was searching for 3 days this spi case in order to find a single evidence that makes Alarichus inccocent and a different person from Sarandioti, but fruitless. I'm curious to see his convincing arguments.Alexikoua (talk) 07:54, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Already there

List of ancient cities in Illyria mapped tooMegistias (talk) 23:55, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been reported

Sources are very clear and concise by Aigest. They have page numbers and ISBN numbers as well. Your nationalistic POV pushing has gone too far.--I Pakapshem (talk) 00:22, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Origin of the Albanians

We were editing at the same time it seems and I removed this reference you added. Sorry! We can try to reinsert, but I also removed the sentence it was attached to for the simple reason that it was not needed: the whole article makes clear already that no one is certain that Albanian descends directly from Illyrian. Presumably though, this reference was arguing more than just that?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 21:12, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks for writing me. I was about to write to you. If you ask me, I think the sentence and ref should stay. Whether or not the Albanian language is of Illyrian stock is important to the article, and I don't think it is repeated elsewhere in the article. We can re-add it with either point #4 or #5 (I'm leaning towards 5). Thanks again.--Athenean (talk) 21:16, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Self-published book

I'm working on compiling a book containing information about almost all Non-indigenous ethnic groups living or working in Pakistan. The population of a particular ethnic group would be obtain respectively from their diplomatic missions in Pakistan including regions with significant populations, languages spoken and religious affiliations. I'm not very good with writing so it would be great, if you would like to collaborate with me.--116.71.53.25 (talk) 06:00, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it's time to improve this article. Any help would be vital.Alexikoua (talk) 04:54, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, it is high time that article was improved. I am going to start gathering sources. I think we should use Ancient Egypt, which is FA, as a model.

Nice

Hmm, nice of you to warn me, but I've made a single revert today and one yesterday (a different one). --Laveol T 21:17, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tag-teaming is never acceptable. Even a single revert can be considered edit-warring if it's part of tag-teaming. --Athenean (talk) 21:19, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that was necessary, Athenean. It's pretty hypocritical to warn an user who has just warned another user and backed up every single of his two edits with solid arguments. You should probably turn to Megistias, he's the one with the three reverts in a little more than 24 hours.

P.S. I fail to see how a single revert can be considered part of tag-teaming. You do know that a single revert is done by a single user, right? Think about it. TodorBozhinov 21:22, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And how exactly is it tag-teaming? I've expressed my views on the subject, so has Todor. We're not a team and have our own right of editing, no? --Laveol T 21:24, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) You and Laveol are both edit-warring and tag-teaming against Megistias. Come on, pretend, we know what's going on. We're all experienced users here. I've got a good mind to notify Moreschi about what's been going on in Thracians. --Athenean (talk) 21:27, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And how exactly is it tag-teaming? I've expressed my views on the subject, so has Todor. We're not a team and have our own right of editing, no? --Laveol T 21:24, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Let's ask Moreschi and see if he thinks you are tag-teaming, shall we? --Athenean (talk) 21:27, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't threaten me with justice :) You sound like Moreschi is going to come over with a razor-sharp chainsaw and teach me not to misbehave ever again! :D Wikipedia doesn't work that way: the ultimate goal of a discussion is to reach a decision that works, not to turn to the big bad admins to crush a rebellion. TodorBozhinov 21:41, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I had it with you

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on R1a1. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing.

I have strong reason to believe you are a user with Multiple accounts, and also edit war by reverting any of my edits and harassing me. Warning others about your conduct is not against any rules. Cosmos416 17:35, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]