User talk:Damianmx

Balkan cuisine

Hi there. I was directed to you by GB fan as the editor that proposed the "Balkan cuisine" article for deletion. GB fan has just deleted the expired Prod, and I've noticed that various redlinks are left. I was wondering if you thought it would be better simply to remove the redlinks, or alternatively to recreate the page as a disambiguation page linking to the culinary articles for the various Balkan countries. Polly Tunnel (talk) 14:31, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Polly Tunnel: I don't mind it either way. The original page was deleted because it was an unsourced list of disparate culinary topics, which could not stand as an article of its own and added no value. If you want to create a disambiguation page and list cuisine pages for individual Balkan countries for reference, I think that would be fine. In fact, that's probably how it was supposed to have been in the first place.--Damianmx (talk) 17:00, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Aqa mshvidoba

Damian salams gitvli, aseti damwerlobit da ucnauri qartulit imitom gwer rom arc targmna shedzlon da arc enis dadgena :D. Shen tu gaqvs rame socialuri qseli mitxari da shevxmiandet. Aqtiuri redaqtori xar da urtiertanamshromloba sachiro sakitxebze gamogvadgeba, me chemi saxelit vidzebnebi zukeris qselshi.--g. balaxaZe★ 12:31, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to climate sections

If you continue to revert authentic edits and show more disrespect, I will need to report you for vandalism. If you do not have the knowledge and expertise on climates, better to leave it to people who do, or at least have the incentive to learn. The map is incorrect, and not only for Tbilisi. What matters is the climate data from weather stations. But the more important thing is you need to respect other editors on Wikipedia. You can't insult people. I give it to your inexperience, if you don't follow the Wikipedia etiquette, your account will be banned indefinitely. Berkserker (talk) 05:27, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"What matters is the climate data from weather stations." It sounds to me like you're doing WP:Original Research. Have your work published first and then you can cite it. I already provided one source and I don't think anyone should have to take just your word that you're a climate expert.--Damianmx (talk) 05:48, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Climate of Tbilisi

I am warning you one last time, even though you have violated the 3RR rule. You still have time to revert your own changes, if not I will have to report you. I'm not your enemy, nor of Georgia. I love Georgian cuisine, have lots of Georgian friends to name a few. I am in fact improving the article, which is full of biased statements such as the one stating the all green Tbilisi is borderline semi-arid. But it seems you only see what you want to perceive.. Berkserker (talk) 05:45, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What makes you think that I or anyone else here cares what climate classification Tbilisi falls under? If you think the maps and other climate content is wrong, provide sources, instead of doing original research and throwing around your purported climate expertise. But whatever you add, saying that winters in Tbilisi are "cool" is just misleading. There have been instances of people freezing to death, I would not descibe that as "cool" winters. [1]. --Damianmx (talk) 05:54, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also, take note that I have not broken the WP:3RR, count carefully.--Damianmx (talk) 05:57, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am not thinking anything, just replying to what you are saying. And I am not throwing around "my expertise", I was coerced to make a defence due to your harsh and insulting comments. My intention was only to warn you not make changes so boldly. Yes, Tbilisi winters are cold, but climate classification isn't really about how we perceive these values as humans. Years ago, at first, I was also puzzled with these cold, cool, warm and hot classifications of climate and I used to think they were misleading. However it is just how these climates are classified scientifically. Anything that lies in the subtropical and oceanic climate zones has a so called "cool" winter, as the mean temperature is above freezing during their coldest month. This isn't something specific to Tbilisi either, you can look at many other cities to see what I'm talking about. For example, Berlin, it is a cold city right? It is also classified as having "cool" winters, even though it has a lower mean temperature during its coldest month compared to Tbilisi. This is why I had to change the wording, not that I am trying to downgrade Tbilisi. As for the figures, I am not making anything up. The weather data on the Tbilisi article is provided by Pogoda.ru.net and the Hong Kong Observatory. And the rules for classifying climates are stated on the Köppen climate classification page. I just apply these rules to the given set of data on the respective pages, as do other editors. However you know what would be a constructive argument? Providing official meteorological data from the State Meteorological Service of Georgia. It would be beneficial to change these secondary sources with the official data from the official source of the respective country. Since I don't speak any Georgian, and you do, you can go ahead and find the website to publish these figures. As for the 3RR rule, you don't need to only revert from the revert button to qualify as a revert. Manual changes are also inclusive. Berkserker (talk) 06:28, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your reasoning about "cool" vs "cold", but keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a scientific journal and the readers don't care about the classification terms as much as what those terms convey. I think the best way to avoid confusion is to say that "winters in Tbilisi are classified as 'cool' because their average temperature is just above freezing; however, temperatures can fall double digits below freezing level, which has resulted in deaths in the past."
As for your other point, I could not find official raw climate data, but the Tbilisi Mayor's Office gives the following climate classification for Tbilisi in Georgian: "moderately warm semi-arid to moderately humid subtropical transitional climate" [2]. It sounds complicated but largely true based on my observations. It is some central parts of Tbilisi near the river that can get lush, but on the outskirts you can clearly see dryness and nothing more than some shrubbery.--Damianmx (talk) 06:50, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is true that Tbilisi is relatively drier compared to some other regions of Georgia, however still too far off from the threshold to be mentioned. It is similar to some regions in Germany and South Eastern Britain. As for the continental influences, I find it fit to be mentioned in the article. In fact I was thinking about it myself as well. Btw, I hope now you see it wasn't original research I was proposing. I am just trying to maintain the linear consistency between climate sections of articles. Berkserker (talk) 07:14, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

One thing to add though, semi-arid is defined for steppe vegetation only. Berkserker (talk) 07:17, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Btw i offer to change the heading for this conversation, to its old and less hostile version. Berkserker (talk) 15:38, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sputnik Edits

I'm sure neither you or I have any desire to enter into an edit war, and from what you've said on the Sputnik talk page I think we're broadly in agreement. Can we try to improve the article in such a way that the tenets of Wikipedia are placed at the centre though? Let's try to work on a wording which works, ie neither biased for or against the subject, rather reflecting as accurate a portrayal of it as is possible. I'm here, and I'm actually pretty much in agreement with you. let's have a dialogue rather than an edit war.Jackinscotland (talk) 14:36, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not what the source says

It's ironic for you to revert my edit with a caption of "not what the source says" when that's exactly you did in your edit in the first place.

Encyclopedia Britannica you linked to actually says:

"While Kazakhstan was not considered by authorities in the former Soviet Union to be a part of Central Asia, it does have physical and cultural geographic characteristics similar to those of the other Central Asian countries."

...while you wrote:

"Despite its bi-continental placement, Khazakhstan's physical, cultural, and geographic characteristics are more similar to those of the other Central Asian countries."

Not what the source says. Quackriot (talk) 09:18, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]