User talk:Renamed user df576567etesddf

@

This user can be reached by email or through facebook.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18

Falsification of sources

He's banned now, but I wonder if he's done this on other articles. Jayjg ^(talk) 20:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a look through some of his contributions and see if anything sticks out. I'll keep you updated. —Cliftonian (talk) 22:30, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of Malmö FF seasons

Hi! So I've requested a peer review for my upcoming FLC but unfortunately without replies for five days. I've done some work since nominating it for peer review and I must say that I'm quite happy with it's current form. I suspect that I would receive substantially more feedback at FLC so I'm tempted at withdrawing the peer review and nominating it for FLC but I thought that I'd drop you a line before doing so to see if you have any comments. Thanks! --Reckless182 (talk) 23:01, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See the peer review. A tip: if you want peer reviews to work, you have to give people a bit of a nudge, because many people don't really check the peer review lists very much (I don't, for example). So, you did the right thing by poking me here, and it's a good thing you did because this isn't quite ready for FLC just yet. See my comments for a more specific explanation. I'm sure there will be no problems in the long run. —Cliftonian (talk) 23:56, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Coey

Thanks for addressing the issue so adeptly. IMO he has a better wikipedia article than he deserves, and that does you credit. I agree with your stance on mercenary ... our article does make it clear it is personal gain, where as he was all ideology. Indeed, my edits to that article have not been amongst my most successful; so, sorry for that ;).

I still have a problem with one sentence: "His attention was caught by the situation in Rhodesia (modern-day Zimbabwe), where the unrecognised government, made up predominantly of the country's minority whites, was fighting a war against black communist guerrillas who were attempting to topple it and forcibly introduce majority rule." That's one way of describing it. The Bush War article calls it a civil war leading to universal suffrage. In short, I think the article could do with setting up some context for the war Coey involved himself in. None of the articles on Zimbabwe African National Liberation Army, Zimbabwe African National Union, Zimbabwe People's Revolutionary Army, Zimbabwe African People's Union mention communism, and whilst I'd be surprised if it was entirely absent, it was as I recall much more a fairly straightforward war of independence against a fairly illicit government which opposed No independence before majority rule. We should not see the conflict through Coey's eyes (which I think we are doing in that sentence) but rather through a more objective and more dispassionate description of the conflict. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:08, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, that's a fairly persuasive take. I am, for the moment, persuaded. I, too, was a little surprised at the various Z articles failure to identify the ideological borrowings of the various parties. This clearly being your territory, I hope you'll find time to address that. FWIW, I once took a photo of a freight train crossing the rail bridge at Victoria Falls, on the same day as reading in The Times of Zambia's complete trade sanctions with Rhodesia. But that would be OR, and this is not my area ;) --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:50, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]