User talk:Mzajac

Wikipedia 15

Wikipedia15 Winnipeg maple leaf golden boy thunderbird house provencher bridge YWG

Wikipedia is celebrating its 15th birthday on January 15, 2016. I have thought for a while that it would be neat to meet some local wikipedians. According to the wikipedians in Winnipeg or Wikipedians in Manitoba category you are one of us. I am contacting people in this category to say: Let's celebrate this milestone. If you know other wikipedians, please ask them to join in as well.

I am posting this to your talk page as a transclude so that any updates will show up automatically.

Hope to see you there! Tenbergen (talk) 04:46, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

One other Winnipeg Wikipedian showed up, in addition to a number of regular skullspace members. It was nice to actually talk to someone else who has worked with Mediawiki and actually "gets" transclusion. Cake was eaten! Tenbergen (talk) 06:37, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Aw, apparently I haven't logged in to Wikipedia in over 6 years and I totally missed this message and the event! I guessed I missed any 20 year celebration, too. Let me know if you end up doing a 25 year one. :) Clayton Rumley (talk) 22:52, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho

Iryna Harpy (talk) is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec16a}} to your friends' talk pages.

Talkback

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

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Wikiproject Ukraine

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Template:Wikiproject Ukraine, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here.

Happy St. Patrick's Day

Happy St. Patrick's Day! I hope your St. Patrick's Day is enjoyable and safe. Hopefully next year there will be more festive celebrations. Best wishes from Los Angeles.   // Timothy :: talk

A barnstar for your efforts

		The Current Events Barnstar
		Awarded for efforts in expanding and verifying articles related to the 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis and 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Awarded by Cdjp1 (talk) 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Talk:2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine#Commanders and leaders

This post is quite clearly a straw man argument. In responding, I did WP:AGF despite this. A strawman argument is a logical fallacy: A fallacy is reasoning that is logically invalid, or that undermines the logical validity of an argument. Your response (the first paragraph) not only represents a statement as a quote when no such statement was made but it is not even a reasonable paraphrase of what was actually said. It is another strawman argument. Given the first post referred to herein, I cannot see how this can be ascribed to a misunderstanding; however, if it is, I don't see that there would be a problem with redacting the first paragraph, notwithstanding that you might make a substitution. On the other hand, I would note that WP:STRAWMAN statements intentionally made are considered inherently against the civility policy. Either way, I would believe it appropriate to redact (strike through) the first para of your most recent post. I would also note that (per WP:P&G) it would be inappropriate to make edits to that paragraph at this time. Cinderella157 (talk) 12:34, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Replied there. —Michael Z. 14:17, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Michael, I believe you are doing this again - ie talking to only part of a statement (out of context) rather than the full statement in which I said: While Crimea is disputed territory in the greater scheme of things, it was nonetheless held by Russia preinvasion. [emphasis added] I did not sneak anything in nor did I imply that the Russian claim was legitimate or had been legitimised. I was simply pointing out that being in Crimea is not so clear cut and [i]t is certainly not a clear line that an Iranian presence in Crimea constitutes "boots on the ground" and an act of aggression. Cinderella157 (talk) 23:22, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

@Cinderella157, I replied to a statement that is absolutely wrong, in that context or out of it. Iranian illegal military presence within Ukraine’s borders is literally boots on the ground. Its participation in the invasion on the side of the aggressor state is clear involvement in the conflict and complicity in Russia’s crime of aggression (and may even constitute direct aggression according to the UN’s definition, para. 3[b]).[1] —Michael Z. 00:25, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

My statement that: While Crimea is disputed territory in the greater scheme of things, it was nonetheless held by Russia preinvasion. is factually correct in every respect. And it is not a a clear line that an Iranian presence in Crimea constitutes "boots on the ground" and an act of aggression. To argue that it is would be WP:OR - until we have authoritative sources (ie the UN) declaring that it is (as we have for Belarus?). Please dial back the WP:BATTLEGROUNDy rhetoric and refrain from WP:STRAWMAN type arguments that misrepresent the full context of what was said. One can have a robust discussion within the reasonable bounds of civility. Cinderella157 (talk) 01:54, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

In the most recent discussion on this subject, you make the statement: I think you are wikilawyering by creating your own non-consensus interpretation of the guideline that you foxiest mentioned here, to prevent perfectly normal and reasonable information from being placed in the infobox. Earlier, you stated: That a lot of dancing around the language. Dancing around language is pretty much pettifogging but it was not stated as a personalised direct allegation regarding conduct. You are now making a personalised direct allegation regarding conduct and bad faith (see WP:AOBF) that can be construed as a personal attack because it has been personalised. You should take the matter to a drama board and substantiate your allegation or redact the statement. Cinderella157 (talk) 11:50, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Pointing out your unsound argument is not a personal attack.

I should go to a drama board?!  —Michael Z. 15:08, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Pointing out an unsound argument is not a personal attack. Making a personalised (using you) direct allegation regarding conduct and bad faith is. Drama board = ANI. Cinderella157 (talk) 22:18, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

I don’t think you are arguing in bad faith. I think your argument is unsound. I think you are applying an unreasonably strict and narrow interpretation of the advice in the guidelines on more than one count, and you don’t have consensus on your side. It is not a disciplinary matter, but it is needless obstruction of working on the article.  —Michael Z. 22:24, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

I might make similar observations with respect to the arguments made to support inclusion. The distinction is that I address the argument not the person - ie the argument is unsound not your argument is unsound, which is personalised. One should avoid pejorative statements and definitely avoid personalising them (eg ... you are wikilawyering ...) unless you are actually making an allegation - because that is what it is. Cinderella157 (talk) 23:43, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

You have some nerve, after accusing me of “pettifogging.”  —Michael Z. 01:43, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

No, what I said was: such a case [the argument] would appear to fall to WP:PETTIFOGGING. This was after you having stated: That a lot of dancing around the language and such a statement would pretty much be a definition of pettifogging. The distinction is when one ceases to address the argument and starts to address the person. Cinderella157 (talk) 03:08, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Such an argument would appear to fall into the category of horse shit.  —Michael Z. 04:15, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

"Largest seizure attempted since World War II"

Regarding this edit, where the largest seizure attempted since World War II was added, did you mean the largest in general or specifically in Europe? The Reuters source says "the biggest annexation in Europe since World War Two" though I haven't really looked into other annexations but noticed Annexation of Western Sahara if this counts. Regards. Mellk (talk) 21:27, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

@Mellk, my mistake. Yes, it was based on that source, and should reflect what it says. I’ll correct it if not done yet. Thanks.  —Michael Z. 22:37, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Are you telepath?

You literally read my mind but I still didn't get how these templates work. Don't you want to also join here? 85.238.103.38 (talk) 00:41, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Republic of Crimea

Hi

We should also change infobox for Republic of Crimea. Panam2014 (talk) 18:23, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

"Kyiv regime" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Kyiv regime and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 25#Kyiv regime until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. QueenofBithynia (talk) 20:20, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Encyclopedia_of_Ukraine#Reception

I've started a section, perhaps you'd like to expand it with other academic sources. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:59, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

ANI notice board

Regarding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#List_of_Nazi_monuments_in_Canada

As the person who started the article, it would have been courteous to let me know that you started an WP:ANI topic. Please take this as a complaint that you did not extend that courtesy. CT55555(talk) 16:54, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

@CT55555 I hadn’t considered it. You’re right, and I apologize for my oversight.  —Michael Z. 17:20, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Appology accepted. Wishing you all the best, despite our differences of opinion at the AFD. CT55555(talk) 18:40, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Bolding Konigsberg in the lead of Kaliningrad

Hello Mzajac! I noticed that you reverted my edit of reverting an IP user bolding "Konigsberg" (I can't easily type special characters) in the lead of Kaliningrad. I decided to read the relevant MOS and I'm not sure if the MOS supports the bolding of "Konigsberg" as MOS:BOLDALTNAMES says "Only the first occurrence of the title and significant alternative names (which should usually also redirect to the article) are placed in bold" (italics not mine). The main issue I have is that "Konigsberg" does not redirect to Kaliningrad, but instead has it's own article, and the MOS doesn't seem to say what to do in this case. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:43, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf, I will self revert for now (also because the name is a link), but maybe there should be a discussion about this. In my view, these articles are about two (chronologically separated) aspects of one subject that has had two names. See, for example, Istanbul, but contrast with Constantinople and Byzantium.  —Michael Z. 15:55, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Alright sounds good. I figured I would ask you first instead of just reverting since the MOS didn't exactly make it clear what to do in this case. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:56, 2 December 2022 (UTC)