User talk:Al Khazar

2S25

Next time please read the sources mentioned at literature section or at least use {{Citations needed}} template before revert edits. If you don't, your edits will be classified as destructive. Best regards, Smell U Later (talk) 20:35, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I did. There was no mention of this vehicle being produced during the 1980's. That's in direct violation of WP:OR. Khazar (talk) 20:38, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, You didn't. Smell U Later (talk) 20:45, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Don't make false accusations. This vehicle is based on the BMD-3 chassis which was made since 1990. Its SPRUT anti-tank gun was made in 1989. So I don't know where you're getting this date from. Khazar (talk) 20:49, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just read the source, ok? Smell U Later (talk) 20:53, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for my behavior. Can you provide a link to that source please? Khazar (talk) 20:55, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Smell U Later (talk) 21:00, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you can read about object 934 experimental light tank of the 1970's, on wich base was made BMD-3 and first Sprut prototypes. Smell U Later (talk) 21:04, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks man. It's hard for us English speakers to get all the information on these vehicles. If it isn't too much to ask, could you also add that information to the English version of that article? Khazar (talk) 21:06, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, i'll try may be tomorrow or at the holydays. Smell U Later (talk) 21:11, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Full Apology

Listen, you were right I did act uncivil and would like to formally apologize about it. After seeing the way you were talking about Karaites and Sephardim/Mizrahim I was under the impression you were going to try to make all Jews out to be Rabbinic Ashkenazi Jews. I do hope though that you have learned something about Karaite Judaism. Any way I'm formally apologizing here. I do think you should consider however how your username might be problematic. I hope you can forgive me and if you want I can try to erase that part of the discussion. I hope in the future we can work together for the betterment of not only Wikipedia but Jewry as well. Anyway do look up Karaite Judaism and the difference between that and the Crimean Karaites. And please accept my apology.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 00:55, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I fully accept your apology. Karaite Judaism is very interesting and I'll be sure to read more about it. I admit that my username can cause some people to be wary of me when I edit articles related to Jewish people and Judaism. But that never occurred to me because I was more interested with Central Asian history at the time than the Khazar theory. I'm glad you took the time to note your mistake and apologize and I'd also like to thank you for being empathetic regarding my username. Khazar (talk) 02:46, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So here's a kitty. We good?-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 06:34, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rainbowofpeace has given you a kitten! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Your kitten must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{subst:Kitten}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or kittynap their kitten with {{subst:Kittynap}}

Yep, we're good. Everyone loves kittens! Khazar (talk) 21:32, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Russians

Before you blindly revert, have a look what was done. You obviously didn't, so... This is the proper way of adding multiple images in infoboxes. Not the crappy kludge that was there. It is also very easy to understand for newbies to understand. There is absolutely no reason to revert. You want more images, then add them, but you cannot do four in a row. That breaks accessibility rules for being too small as people with bad eyesight will not be able to see it. Add images, don't revert. Bgwhite (talk) 04:38, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Then why do other infoboxes have images just as small such as Ukrainians and Han Chinese? Khazar (talk) 04:41, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

They aren't. Rules change, they might have been done under older rules. The Image array is new as of September 2013. This is the new and better way of doing things. This will be added to all articles like the Russians eventually.

AGAIN!!! If you add images, it will look EXACTLY the same as before. THERE IS NO REASON TO REVERT, JUST ADD IMAGES. I'd suggest adding another row. Bgwhite (talk) 04:50, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A source is much needed. Almost all the ethnic groups infoboxes have a collage or that "shitty" kludge method present on that page. Khazar (talk) 04:52, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No a source is not needed. New templates get added, deleted and changed all the time. Use a simple template that will look exactly the same as the old method, but much easier to maintain. Where in the world do you need a source for that. It is common sense.

You have violated the Three revert rules and can be blocked. Revert the last edit and add images to make it exactly the same as before. Bgwhite (talk) 04:57, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll stand aside for now. Khazar (talk) 04:59, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

However, the size will be shrunk. Khazar (talk) 05:00, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can see why you were upset, I left off adding Anna Kournikova. Leaving off the most beautiful Russian ever to have lived is a disgrace. :)

I've added another row, so only one image is now missing. Go ahead and adjust the photo size as you see fit. I won't revert if you goto four photos in a row. btw... Ukrainians does use this new template. Bgwhite (talk) 05:15, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

April 2014

Your recent editing history at T-80 shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Thomas.W ^talk 20:41, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Equipment of the Syrian Army shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Thomas.W ^talk 20:41, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Two things for you to remember until the next time: A) Use edit summaries explaining what you do and why you do it, and B) Report edit warring to the edit-warring noticeboard instead of letting it go on for days. Thomas.W ^talk 20:57, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Russians

Why have you revert my changes? The current list is rubbish. Fyodorov, Losev or Tsvetayeva as examples for great Russians? That's ridiculous. It need to be changed! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Misanthropo (talk • contribs) 20:15, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Some aren't even ethnic Russians. Read the talk pageKhazar (talk) 21:09, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Who of them is not ethnic Russian?! Everybody of them is at least 50 % Russian, that's enough. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Misanthropo (talk • contribs) 22:20, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: BMD-4

The article you submitted to Articles for creation has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Fiddle Faddle 19:03, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Khazar (talk) 22:18, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted your collage on the History of the Jews in Russia

I was surprised because usually your contributions are of very high quality and standard, but the collage you created was just weird. You can't just do such radical changes without discussing them first. I wrote a more detailed response on the article talk page, and for the future if you want to make such changes, make sure to use the talk page. 2.124.27.175 (talk) 00:31, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not letting any of this pass. I won't revert your edit because I'll talk to you about it. Khazar (talk) 02:55, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Strike that. I thought you were talking about Russians, my mistake. Khazar (talk) 02:56, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nah just the Russian Jews :-D 2.124.27.175 (talk) 07:09, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your Only Warning

Never threaten me again, or I will report you, and I am thinking of doing it as you are ignoring the source - that is NOT what it states in the sourceSmart Nomad (talk) 21:22, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hardly a threat. Now why not discuss your actions on the article talk page rather than mine? I'm not the only one objecting to your proposition. Khazar (talk) 21:24, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It seems you are, and why not reply to my question directly - why are you ingoring what it says on page 14?Smart Nomad (talk) 21:34, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will not let this go, you are ignoring the source and that is unacceptable. Additionally I didn't break the three revert rule, not even close as I was well out of the 24 hour range. You continue to evade my question on commenting on the source? What is the matter with you? If you cannot read the source just say so Smart Nomad (talk) 12:46, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need to break that rule for it to be considered edit warring. Khazar (talk) 18:14, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is sorted. You didn't need to report me, that was completely unnecessary. Smart Nomad (talk) 20:18, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Al Khazar. You have new messages at Molestash's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Russian Jews

Hi :-)

So based on your proposal to change the style and on Off-Shell's personnel ideas, I tried to create a new proposal. I haven't don't it "physically" yet because first need to get your and Off-Shell's approval. I am using your proposed style of 5 lines of 3.

Please take a look at the proposal on the bottom of the Russian Jews talk page! 90.198.246.7 (talk) 12:22, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PS I apologize for "snapping" at you in the beginning when I blamed you for what Avaya1 did. You are a brilliant editor who proposes good ideas and sticks to the procedures. 90.198.246.7 (talk) 16:33, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All is forgiven. :) Khazar (talk) 22:01, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Russian Jews contribution barnstar

		The Barnstar of David
		For proposing a new yet rational style for the Russian Jews infobox. Also, for taking part in the discussion and helping reach a quick consesus. Mr. Sort It Out (talk) 23:19, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

		The Civility Barnstar
		For taking an active part in the discussion regarding the Russian Jews infobox, and for reverting edits which were done without a discussion. Mr. Sort It Out (talk) 23:26, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Are you familiar with Israeli Jews?

Hi,

I was wondering how familiar you are with Israeli society, culture and cultural history? The reason I'm saying this is because the Israeli Jews image, in my opinion, looks just horrific. Over-crowded, un-balanced between Ashkenazi and Mizrahi Jews (if this image would be done by proper Israelis they would be obsessed with it and for a good reason), it has a higher amount of politicians and Prime Ministers than any other infobox could allow itself (5 prime ministers!), and most of al, it has some chavy selections like Eyal Golan, while somehow they managed to miss out on Ofra Haza (but they had space for Dana International and Eyal Golan. Yep, I know), they managed to miss out on Josef Tal (the greatest Israeli composer ever), Ephraim Kishon (the greatest Israeli director, twice Academy award nominated, with Hebrew Films), and Arik Einstein (voted as the great Israeli singer ever).

If you are unfamiliar with Israel nevermind :-) I did start a discussion and didn't do any change yet, but the problem is... no one responded to my discussion. Here is a link to it.

If you are interested, feel free to join the discussion and contribute as you always do! I think the whole collage should be rebuilt from scratch its so bad. . Mr. Sort It Out (talk) 08:07, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just did a proposal for a new collage, I hope it looks decent. Would love to hear any ideas/opinions from you there on the topic of style or selection. 90.198.246.7 (talk) 21:51, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ew! You're right. That collage is horrific. All I can say is that keep the gender relatively balanced. Also, try not to exclude Mizrahi/Sephardic Jews. They're 50% of all Israeli Jews. I don't know a lot about Israel and its society. All my knowledge about it comes from historical wars, aliyahs, and censuses. I'll join the discussion soon enough. Khazar (talk) 03:44, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi :-) Hope you are well! Sorry to disturb you, I have 2 favors to ask you:

I kind of developed a collage, and Off-shell said it looks good, which is great, but I really want to see your opinion there. It can give a lot to the discussion and the collage. On Talk:Israeli Jews#Opinions/ideas/proposals/comments.
You are the only expert I know on images, and I really don't get what happened. On the Israeli Jews page... do you see the collage? When I put it in, all the number/statistics/number of Jews in every country... basically all the infobox except the collage disappeared. Can you guess why it happened? I really don't get what the issue is with the collage... it didn't happen with the previous ones.

Thank you so much! 94.2.161.214 (talk) 22:24, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Israeli Jews Barnstar

The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar

Thank you for sorting out the Israeli Jews infobox! Because the new collage to the infobox was inserted by me in a different format from the original infobox, all the information disappeared. As the tireless contributor you are, you sorted out the problems and brought the infobox to a perfect condition. I must mention, it's not the first time you improve and fix collages to various pages. Mr. Sort It Out (talk) 13:01, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale

Your argument seems to be basically that we can use the image on any article mentioning Anne Frank - sorry, but that's just plain wrong and would mean we could use copyright images as though they weren't copyright. Dougweller (talk) 09:12, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If that's how you see it, then you need to re-analyze the conditions of the fair-use image. Khazar (talk) 18:18, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's policy, I'm not going to try to change it. Dougweller (talk) 08:26, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of BMD-3

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article BMD-3 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jrcrin001 -- Jrcrin001 (talk) 05:21, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of BMD-3

The article BMD-3 you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:BMD-3 for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jrcrin001 -- Jrcrin001 (talk) 23:00, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of BMPT

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article BMPT you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 10:41, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tupolev Tu-160

Sorry I accidentally reverted your edit to Tupolev Tu-160 I was looking at the IPs Iraqi addition and clicked at the wrong point. MilborneOne (talk) 12:00, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's OK. I reverted every single one of his edits already. Khazar (talk) 13:27, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

T-80U Armor Value Reference

Protection of T-80U is KE 780mm CE 1320mm. Reliable Reference? Here you go. http://www.amazon.com/T-80-Standard-Tank-Champion-Paperback/dp/B00JYHGSCY/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1418792857&sr=8-2&keywords=t-80+standard+tank -> page 24~25 Also the armor value of Kontakt-5 ERA is 120mm~200mm KE 500mm CE. Reliable Reference? http://www.amazon.com/Soviet-Russian-artillery-design-practices/dp/B003HKR6VG/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1418793023&sr=8-1&keywords=Soviet%2FRussian+armor+and+artillery+design+practice http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015041280499;view=1up;seq=185 Marine Corps Intelligence Activity, Soviet/Russian armor and artillery design practices : 1945-1995, 1996 -> page I-125 I highly doubt whether you can bring BETTER SOURCE than these ones.1.233.171.186 (talk) 05:13, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you're not a complete idiot like when you vandalized the Sheridan page. This was exactly what I was looking for from you. But understand that you were reverted not because the information (1000 mm vs KE) was correct, but because you can't remove content even if it is uncited. Autobiographies are an exception. You still strike me as troublesome because I've seen many Korean ultranationalists come and go. Be careful with your next edits. You saw what happened with the next person who had a dispute with me didn't you? Khazar (talk) 16:28, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of BMPT

The article BMPT you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:BMPT for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 17:21, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Have never seen this happen before. I haven't failed it, I've only failed one criteria, and am still looking at prose. Maybe it automatically does it, or maybe it was triggered by the move. I'll see what happens if I change it to on hold. Otherwise, I'll have to get someone with the mop to fix it. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 23:33, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PokpungHo Source

http://milidom.net/index.php?mid=maniareview&search_target=nick_name&search_keyword=unmp07&page=4&document_srl=28919 http://gall.dcinside.com/board/view/?id=arm&no=162286&page=1

The author of these articles is one of the most authoritative military expert in SK. The modified version of the first one is contained in Korean military magazine Platoon(2014 FEB), which is also verified by the ROKA.1.233.171.186 (talk) 04:59, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Who's the author? I see a self-published source. Khazar (talk) 07:39, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Self-published? Those articles are written by Kim Bum Jung(김범정), not me. LOL1.233.171.186 (talk) 10:09, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Although There are not many information on NK weapons, it is clearly stated that Soviet refused to transfer technology to NK in late 1980s. So the argument that Pokpungho has incorporated found in the T-89/90 is nonsense. Also a lot of Korean experts(for example 윤용원) claims that Pokpungho is just an upgraded T-62, similar to T-62M.1.233.171.186 (talk) 10:15, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah it was actually 1994.^[1] However this still means that NK did not receive Russian technology and T-90 from Russia since then.1.233.171.186 (talk) 10:27, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Changed the source. "윤민혁(Yoon Min Hyeok), 북한군 폭풍호전차와 신형 차기전차 분석(Analysis of North Korean Pokpungho Tank and Next Generation Main Battle Tank), NOV 2010". You can check this paper at Korean National Assembly Library.1.233.171.186 (talk) 11:07, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good to know. You should be more clear so people don't revert you. Khazar (talk) 22:59, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of BMD-3

The article BMD-3 you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:BMD-3 for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jrcrin001 -- Jrcrin001 (talk) 17:21, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

SPYDER

I appreciate your effort to make SPYDER a better article! Flayer (talk) 07:55, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I'm replacing all the references with reliable sources like pages from Rafael's official website. Khazar (talk) 02:25, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Some references

SPYDER G.A. recommendations

User:Nick-D kindly responded to a request to check the article over. Here are his recommendations in full;

Hi, articles are raised to GA status after passing a GA review via WP:GAN - typically a single editor reviews each nomination. The criteria articles need to meet to reach GA status are set out at Wikipedia:Good article criteria, and the instructions for nominating articles are at Wikipedia:Good article nominations/Instructions. You might also want to look for articles on comparable topics which are at GA status for some practical guidance - there's a comprehensive list at Wikipedia:Good articles/Warfare#Weapons, equipment and buildings. I'm not at all familiar with the SPYDER system (or air defence systems more generally to be honest), but from a quick skim of the article the main things which are missing are material on the development of the system and an independent assessment of its performance (the technical aspects of the article are mainly referenced to its manufacturer's website). A discussion of the roles it fills in each country would also be useful. The operational use and export sections are also duplicative (with it being unclear if Georgia did in fact operate this system), and I'd be interested to know why the Israeli Defense Force doesn't operate this apparently-successful Israeli system. I hope that this is helpful. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 04:24, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

This gives some indications as to areas of weakness indicating improvement. Cheers! Irondome (talk) 18:02, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

Dear Al Khazar,
HAPPY NEW YEAR Hoping 2015 will be a great year for you! Thank you for your contributions!
From a fellow editor,
--FWiW Bzuk (talk)

This message promotes WikiLove. Originally created by Nahnah4 (see "invisible note").

A kitten for you!

I am sorry to see that Shulinjiang has you in his cross hairs as well. Jokes and insults about the Holocaust are never a good thing and I didn't expect him to stoop so low. Again I am sorry that you had to get involved in this and I hope this kitten will cheer you up :)

Pvpoodle (talk) 05:10, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the kitty! Yeah, that Anti-Semitism was pretty low of him. You don't have anything to feel sorry for because I would always be happy to get rid of POV pushing. Khazar (talk) 11:40, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sukhoi Su-25

Can you keep an eye on this article. It has been the object of operatives that are trying to change the specifications page to bolster a completely spurious claim by Russia that a Ukrainian SU-25 was responsible for the downing of MH17. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 12:27, 29 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why me? I've never met you before. Khazar (talk) 23:41, 29 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You appear on the talk page of an editor suspected of vandalism, and have some understanding of Russian military technology. If I am mistaken, please excuse this intrusion. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 18:41, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.--Bbb23 (talk) 05:38, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pokpung-ho, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Type 88 (tank) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

PokpungHo Revert

Why did you reverted the article without any sources given? Your assertion on Pokpungho is far from the fact, as it does not match to information written in thesis and articles that I mentioned on the page. Also, it is impossible for NK to acquire T-80/90 main battle tanks from Russia.1.233.171.186 (talk) 16:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

^ http://newslibrary.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=1994060300209101001&edtNo=45&printCount=1&publishDate=1994-06-03&officeId=00020&pageNo=1&printNo=22531&publishType=00010

[1] ttp://newslibrary.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=1994060300209101001&edtNo=45&printCount=1&publishDate=1994-06-03&officeId=00020&pageNo=1&printNo=22531&publishType=00010

[1]