User talk:Ghirlandajo

ARCHIVES:

• User talk:Ghirlandajo/Winter 2005
• User talk:Ghirlandajo/Summer 2005
• User talk:Ghirlandajo/Autumn 2005
• User talk:Ghirlandajo/Christmas 2005
• User talk:Ghirlandajo/Winter 2006
• User talk:Ghirlandajo/Spring 2006
• User talk:Ghirlandajo/Summer 2006

After many hundred articles contributed to this project, I lost motivation to persevere with my active and time-consuming participation in this project. Due to the encouragement provided by other wikipedians, I still try to contribute new articles but not as often as I used to.

Holy crap! Holy crap, you've contributed exponentially! I envy you! Good work. Aaрон Кинни (t) 06:24, 8 July 2006 (UTC) on leaving Take it from me who's been living here in the West for ten years. They look and sound more menacing than they are. If you can, please don't become angry. You can keep any article you like for yourself, but not on Wikipedia. They do it to prevent a hierarchy from springing up. I'm not telling you to be awash wtih joy when your article becomes edited, but it wouldn't hurt to take a filosofskaja perspektiva on the thing. --VKokielov 17:58, 8 July 2006 (UTC) Second that. I would be devastated if you really quit. Check the preceding heading, for instance. --Pan Gerwazy 20:19, 8 July 2006 (UTC) Thirded. I would be immensely sad if you would quit, Ghirla :( Please stay! -- Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 23:29, 8 July 2006 (UTC) Fourthed. Per above - you are one of the most productive editors. It would be a significant loss for Wikipedia if you left. --Tēlex 23:33, 8 July 2006 (UTC) Fifthed. You simply cannot do it to us abakharev 01:14, 9 July 2006 (UTC) But of course! Also, please see this. --Irpen 04:40, 9 July 2006 (UTC) I haven't read all of the context here, but from what I have seen of your contributions, I hope you stay! Jbhood 10:34, 9 July 2006 (UTC) Ghirlandajo! how could you have ever got caught up in such a knot? Think of me! think of User:Giano" We need you here. --Wetman 16:51, 10 July 2006 (UTC) DYK On July 9, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Spanish Baroque, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page. --Mgm|(talk) 20:55, 9 July 2006 (UTC) Romanesque, Baroque...Quousque tandem, Ghirlandajo? Dear Ghirla... I think that there is a structural problem with our editions. I thank (again) your efforts and encourage you to continue with this project, I think that it is worthwhile. When I first heard about it, I felt so surprised and emotioned thinking in a free, universal Enciclopedia, at everybody´s hands, free and collaborative, I couldn´t resist to form part of it. I don´t know more of your leaving than the messages above, but think it twice. Now...I think part of the problem could be that we cannot think that the only valid point of view is ours. I know that you write a lot (A LOT) in this wikipedia, and it can be tiring to see that your editions are changed. If we change what we think is bad (or false, or incomplete...) somebody else can think that that was complete, or true or fine. THAT IS THE POINT FOR THE TALK PAGES. I say this for several editions and reversions you have just made because that was your point of view, without a simple word, as if you were tired of giving explanations to poor ignorants. Some of them have been already discussed, but now I find: 1- That the article you have made of Baroque Architecture is "untouchable": no word can be added or removed without a reversion. The only explanation is: "Garcilaso, please integrate your additions into Spanish Baroque and Spanish architecture; this article is just a brief overview; it cannot be endless)". Well, you may think that the article is perfect like that, but I think it is not. If it gives the only explanation of Churrigueresque as a superficial, decorative style for plain facades, the vission of the style is incomplete, and not "enciclopedian". After that briliant speech about facades, one can be mistaken. Not mentioning two important baroque spatial structures like Granada`s Charterhouse or Transparente from the Cathedral of Toledo is form my point of view, unwise for a general overview of the style. The same happens to the Madrid 17th century baroque. Who are you to decide about what is relevant or what is not more than other wikipedists? I told you once, and I implore again: Ask before deleting! 2-You didn´t even know about the existence of the First Romanesque and find yourself capable to decide WITHOUT discussing the fact, which is the correct name for the article. As you recognized, there are other wikipedian who know more about that subject. Some have participated in the discussion, and found that the best name for the article is First Romanesque. Please, please, ASK before deleting or moving, yours is not the only point of view in the world, and perhaps others have good documentation too, although their level of English could be worse. I again encourage you to continue with your valious apportations to this project, the only thing I want to transmit you is that listening and talking and improving a poor article is much better that the best of the editions if it is authoritarian, and collaterally, one could learn a lot!. Yours sincerely, До скорой встречи,Garcilaso 16:23, 10 July 2006 (UTC) Hello, my greetings for deciding to stay here. I see that you have changed the article on First Romanesque, thank you for your help. About Baroque, you have a message in Talk:Baroque architecture--Garcilaso 18:40, 10 July 2006 (UTC) So the only way to have an opinion of yours is to edit the article and get it together with your reversion... I am still waiting for your answer, I don`t want to be acussed of "revert warring" if I change the article Baroque architecture after your silence. Yours eagerly, --Garcilaso 09:00, 12 July 2006 (UTC) Father Arseny I was wanting to create a father arseny page but lack info. Please help. Thanks LoveMonkey 17:12, 10 July 2006 (UTC) You are not to even think of leaving! I leave this site for five fucking minutes, and what do I return to? - Shock! I'm mortified you uncouth bastard Ghirla, you have used the "eff word" in public - what sort of dumb fucking bastard are you? Rude edit summaries too? - it's beyond belief - you should be flogged off the site while simultaneously being tarred and feathered. Well that all seems to have happened, so would you mind now returning so we can all get on with the project in hand, and in future remember some people have very middle class sensibilities and while you and I may periodically say to each other "your last edit was a load of fucking rubbish" some other people are of a little more delicate disposition. I'm glad to see Wetman has tried to talk common sense into you - (he could be forgiven, as the only gentleman on the site, for thinking he keeps some very strange company) - so come on get real and lets get on with it! Oh and if you are now seeing sense, could you please expand Alessio Tramello (no-one else, save Wetman, is likely to have the ability) as per request on my talk page as I have been skiving from a real life job to go and watch football, and now have to spend a few serious days in the real fucking world Giano | talk 20:12, 10 July 2006 (UTC) Hi there, Andrey! I've registered as KNewman in Russian Wikipedia myself like a month ago. I certainly understand your position, for I see how people abuse Wikipedia and its valuable contributors. I'm also thinking about moving to the Russian Wikipedia myself (you prolly noticed how I've been submitting only stubs lately). I'm gradually losing interest, but the habit (addiction?) won't let me go :). Maybe, something will change. Anyway, what will your name be in the Russian Wikipedia? Lemme know. Take care and try to visit us here more often. Cheers! KNewman 05:07, 11 July 2006 (UTC) Sorry to see you go. This is a big loss to the English Wikipedia. Good luck with the Russian language version. 172 | Talk 06:00, 14 July 2006 (UTC) What a Delightful Contribution What a delightful contribution, Giano. I'm sure Ghirla will reconsider his thoughts on leaving, especially since you actually left your real life job momentarily, to go and watch football. Dr. Dan 22:55, 10 July 2006 (UTC) Thank you! - are you trying to make a point here? Giano | talk 13:36, 11 July 2006 (UTC) No, can't I give you a f-----g compliment without there being a hidden agenda, or some deep thought behind it? If I was trying to make a point, believe me, you wouldn't have to ask me if I was. Dr. Dan 13:47, 11 July 2006 (UTC) No you f-----g can't, because this is the grumpy page; and Mr Grumpy himself seems to be sadly absent - let us all just hope he returns to continue his valuable edits, or in all seriousness, it will be Wikipedia's loss. Giano | talk 22:23, 11 July 2006 (UTC) Alright fine, then don't f-----g, thank me in that case! Dr. Dan 02:11, 12 July 2006 (UTC) Winter War Your edit comment for undoing Kurt Leyman's edit on Winter War was "rvv", despite his edit comment and his entry on the Talk page. While I agree with your revision, I don't think Kurt's edit was vandalism. Please assume good faith when dealing with other editors. See Wikipedia:Assume good faith for the guidelines on this. -- JHunterJ 15:08, 11 July 2006 (UTC) JHunterJ, Kurt have shown enough to assume POV pushing rather than bad faith. And please do not use patronizing templates to leave a message to anyone but newbies. If you have anything to say to the user, like Ghirla, please take a minute to write it on your own. --Irpen 19:02, 11 July 2006 (UTC) Terminals Don't we all just love Nixer. I could explain him for the zillionth time that what he does in plain rude, but technically he is not violating anything. As long as he doesn't, I just don't want to waste my time on one letter discrepancy, moving stuff back and forth. In this context, it doesn't make one iota of a difference. Unless his moves interfere with work of other editors (and please let me know if they do), I abstain.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:03, 11 July 2006 (UTC) Lvov family Thanks for the reply. I was in Aleksin and Popovka yesterday. I now know that the last 2 sentences in that little section I wrote on the estate were rubbish. The house burnt down before WW2 having been used as a Dom Kulturi since the revolution. Are there any problems other than that? I think it would be a good idea to have some reference to the L'vov family's estate in Popovka on their page. I belive they were only there from the mid 19th century until the revolution but I still think it's relevant. There are various memorials to Georgi Evgenevich in both Aleksin and Popovka. Thanks again. http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Аварцы Could you expand Caucasian Avars by translating above mentioned article? I would be very grateful. Regards, Luka Jačov 23:04, 12 July 2006 (UTC) Hello, I shall try to find time to translate some bits of this stuff over the following days. I don't relish their unsourced genocide blabber, though. --Ghirla -трёп- 12:44, 14 July 2006 (UTC) Don't bother me Any time you revert without discussion I will be happy to re-revert you. Note that I did not re-revert Mikkalai's revert even though he made the exact same revert because he entered discussion on the talk page. --Ideogram 01:36, 14 July 2006 (UTC) Ghirla, please, please,please forget about this guy and his reverts. Remember June 17th? Yes, that was when you had a row over the redirection/disambiguation page Oleg, had a row with Halibutt and supported me against a RUSSIAN user over Pyotr Leschenko. June 17th was also the day when Ideogram proposed to mediate between you and Suicup. [1] The same day, he was at the village pump asking whether sending e-mails to other guys someone had a tiff with before proposing that person for RfC, would be considered canvassing for votes. [2] (archive, so you'll have to search for "Ideogram") Three days later, he is at your talk page, threatening with ArbCom. When you take this off, he suggests an RfC on you at the Russo-Turkish War talk page. All of this within his first month at Wikipedia. And now the mediator is in a revert war with you over exactly the same matter! So, forget it, putting up a NPOV disputed tag over that section was the only thing to do.--Pan Gerwazy 12:22, 14 July 2006 (UTC) Many thanks for your alert. I have had apprehensions about this account from the very start. It would have been instructive to check it for sockpuppeteering, too. --Ghirla -трёп- 12:42, 14 July 2006 (UTC) He's either really a young newbie who, in spite of or because of being at the computer for 16 hours every day, has failed as a moderator - or he's a returnee making calculated errors. In both cases, he won't be socketpuppeteering, I think. But again: forget about him. Take care and uspehov at Russian Wiki. (yes, I've been there) --Pan Gerwazy 13:40, 14 July 2006 (UTC) It's quite amusing how paranoid you people are. Ghirla has accused me of trolling, wikistalking, revert-warring, and now sockpuppetry. You people are really incapable of assuming good faith, aren't you? --Ideogram 13:46, 14 July 2006 (UTC) Manuel Tolsá Hi. That's not ridiculous at all, although I admit I should have cited a source for it. It's not my opinion, but an opinion expressed in several of my sources. (I'm not qualified to have an opinion on that question.) Here is one source: "It is one of the finest in America, and, according to [Alexander von] Humboldt, second only to the statue of Marcus Aurelius in Rome." [3] The original Humboldt quote is "M. Tolsa, professor of sculpture at Mexico, was even able to cast an equestrian statue of King Charles the Fourth; a work which, with the exception of the Marcus Aurelius at Rome, surpasses in beauty and purity of style everything which remains in this way in Europe."[4] I actually toned that statement down somewhat to allow for the passage of time, for one thing. Both of the statues mentioned in the quote are used as illustrations in the Wikipedia article Equestrian statue. Here is a quote from Frances Calderón de la Barca's Life in Mexico: We spent a long time here examining these antiquities; but we have seen nothing in Mexico to equal the beauty of the colossal equestrian statue in bronze of Charles IV, placed on a pedestal of Mexican marble, which stands in the court of the University, but formerly adorned the middle of the square. It is a magnificent picture of sculpture, the masterpiece of Tolosa, remarkable for the noble simplicity and purity of its style, and was made at the expense of an ex-viceroy, the Marquis of Branciforte.[5] My intention was to show the level of artistic achievement in Mexico at the time. I think that is an important point to make. I plan to put the direct quote from Humboldt in the article. I don't see how there could be any objection to that. But please let me know what you think. Rbraunwa 17:27, 14 July 2006 (UTC) Hi. I put the Humboldt quote in the article. Thanks for adding the other image, by the way. Rbraunwa 06:09, 15 July 2006 (UTC) DYK, again On 15 July, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hospicio Cabañas, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page. --LV (Dark Mark) 15:21, 15 July 2006 (UTC) On 17 July, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Vitebsk Rail Terminal, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page. -- Grue  11:17, 17 July 2006 (UTC) Image:Falconet - Pygmalion & Galatee (1763).jpg Actually I do not know when the photo was taken. What it would be your advice? (meladina 13:21, 17 July 2006 (UTC)) I have reuploaded my photo as PD-self. Are you sure it is Falconet not Pietro Stagi? abakharev 15:54, 17 July 2006 (UTC) It was not me who uploaded the image, so I'm not in the position to comment. --Ghirla -трёп- 16:00, 17 July 2006 (UTC) Avars Thanks anyway. Did you translate the Avarian Khanate from Russian Wikipedia too? Two new articles came from this who couldnt be more satisfied. Luka Jačov 16:48, 17 July 2006 (UTC) Congress of Berlin POV problems We seem to be unable to agree on what to leave here, as I've changed it several times now only to have you revert it. Since continuing as we've been is pointless and fruitless, let's see if we can come to some sort of agreement about what to put in. The official name of the city on the Bosphorus has not been Constantinople for several hundred years, since the Ottoman takeover in 1453. It seems like a better idea to me to list the then-official name of the city rather than a Western name, but I am not hard set on that. However, I have a problem with the phrase "Bulgaria and several Orthodox Slavic states were precluded from gaining independence after centuries of the Muslim Ottoman yoke." The whole sentence reads as being negatively biased against Muslims and Ottomans, and positively biased towards the Orthodox Slavs. The word "yoke" in particular has only negative meanings in this context. While some may have/do consider the Ottoman rule of the Balkans to be oppressive, it is not the place of a neutral encyclopedia to decide whether or not it was oppressive. And finally, just to set the record straight, I am neither Turkish nor Muslim, nor do I have any feelings one way or the other about Turks or Muslims. My changes have not been nationalist, rather they are simply an attempt to keep the article neutral. Considering the anti-Muslim Ottoman and pro-Orthodox Slavic nature of this phrase, however, I can't help but wonder if you may have some bias yourself? I don't mean that as an insult, just an observation. I sincerely hope we can work this problem out to both of our satisfaction. Please feel free to post any comments on my talk page as well. Tev 23:27, 17 July 2006 (UTC) See Tev's talk page. --VKokielov 07:24, 18 July 2006 (UTC) You asked me for my third opinion. I gave it to you. It wouldn't insult you if I did what you just did? I wipe my hands. Do what you want. Settle it between yourselves. --VKokielov 07:58, 18 July 2006 (UTC) Have you ever heard that it's easier to break than to make? Take a look at my history of contributions. How many times did I revert anything? How many times did I erase anything? Why is that? --VKokielov 08:01, 18 July 2006 (UTC) I don't consider this sentence to be POV. I interpret it as a reflection of the 19th century state of mind of the involved Balkan Slavs, as an explanation of their feelings and motivation, which itself is a historical fact. -- Voyevoda 09:31, 18 July 2006 (UTC) Not sure I got everything of what VKokielov said there, but I'm satisfied with the article as it is now. Thanks to everyone involved, I'd much rather have resolved this peacefully, and I'm glad we could do so. Tev 14:51, 18 July 2006 (UTC) Oh well, "yoke" is actually a word I would, too, usually avoid using. When I deal with the topic I'd almost always refer to the period as 'Ottoman rule', because I believe this term reflects the essence of it better (although 'Turkish yoke' was once used in the Bulgarian historiography, it is now obsolescent). Also, referring to the Ottoman Empire as 'Turkish' is anachronistic. The years Bulgaria spent under the Ottoman Empire are about 480, so 'almost five centuries' would be better in my opinion (this is usually how it is referred to). Hope my opinion was of use to you :) Todor→Bozhinov 22:24, 18 July 2006 (UTC) Other opinions are always welcomed in a dispute, and I think you managed to sum up my point in regards to the use of yoke far better than I managed to! Tev 05:42, 19 July 2006 (UTC) Dafni redirect Hi Ghirlandajo, You changed the redirect of Dafni from the disambiguation page to the monastery page, stating that it caused the article to be orphaned. I don't understand this, as there would still be tonnes of links to the monastery page, especially from the World Heritage template you recently changed to reflect the move. The point of a disambiguation page is for people who type a subject into the search box. Preferably, no article should link to a disambiguation page, but directly link to the desired article. So the argument of changing a redirect due to orphaning reasons shouldn't occur. The links that now link to the Dafni redirect (since the exclusion of the world heritage areas) are mostly trying to link to one the towns. I would like to change it back, but would rather wait for your reply. Thanks --liquidGhoul 11:50, 19 July 2006 (UTC) It was listed on Requested Moves, and it was in the backlogs. Therefore it wasn't moved hastily, as it was at RM for a longer period than it should have been. Secondly, there has been a discussion on the talk page since July 4, which is ample time. Your reason for not moving was addressed by the other editors in the discussion, and you never replied to them. How am I suppposed to know the validity of your claim if you no longer discuss it? I did check for myself, and the article said that "Daphni is a monastery", and there was no mention of a shrine. It has been 15 days since your last edit on the talk page, and it looks as though you conceeded defeat or don't care enough to participate. If you actually persisted with a discussion, then you may have swayed other voters, and your vote would have held more power as it is substantiated. Consensus requires discussion, and according to that discussion, consensus was reached. --liquidGhoul 12:27, 19 July 2006 (UTC) I don't know what Ghirla is talking about. I already reverted the Dafni page so it links to the Dafni (disambiguation) page. One by one, I am fixing all links that the "link to" the Dafni page. A lot of them are meant to link to the suburb Dafni south of Athens while a few of them are meant to link to various other places called Dafni (some of which don't even have articles). Only a few on them were meant to link to Daphni Monastery. Hope this helps.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 14:54, 19 July 2006 (UTC) OK, all done. Please see my note here for more info.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 15:46, 19 July 2006 (UTC) Georgy Zhukov Mediation Hi, I am mediating the Georgy Zhukov dispute and welcome your comments on the mediation page. BrownHornet21 01:16, 21 July 2006 (UTC) Orenburg School project (or whatever that is) is back again, I would guess. I wonder if they are going to pillage articles on Russian cities every semester; it's getting quite tiring. I still have a backlog from previous occurences. I wish they at least answered any inquiries, but they never do, which is a pity. If we could show them how to do things right, they could be very useful. Anyway, I copyedited Orenburg, please feel free to review in case I missed anything.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 12:33, 21 July 2006 (UTC) Alexandrov Was it? I have nothing to look it up at this time. Thanks.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:08, 21 July 2006 (UTC) DYK On 21 July, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sarir, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page. -- Grue  17:38, 21 July 2006 (UTC) Sarir You cited some academics in this article but it doesn't seem to show the source from which you pulled the information. Could you please add that while it's probably still fresh in your mind? gren グレン 07:45, 22 July 2006 (UTC) Девятаев Привет! Как я выяснил, существует 2 статьи про одного моего земляка. Mikhail Devyatayev и Mikhail Petrovich Devyatayev. Нельзя ли привлечь общественнось к разарботке одной и наиболее полной статьи :) Кстати, среди жителей Казани Девятаев считается "сомнительным героем", т.к. как рассказывают, немцы после его побега провели децимацию узников лагеря... зато куда большей его заслугой считается тоЮ, что он испытывал и водил первыые в мире суда на подводных крыльях ("Ракеты"). --Untifler 14:54, 22 July 2006 (UTC) Russo-Turkish War, 1710-1711 I inserted "Russian Tsardom" (the term found in "Muscovy" intro) to avoid the "Muscovy" reference, which sounds stupid in reference to this time period. Could you please split the Muscovy article to make a good reference to a period of Russian history after "великое княжество Московское" and before Russian Empire? Is there a good English term? `'mikka (t) 18:21, 22 July 2006 (UTC) Petrine Russia was Imperial Russia in all but the name. As Russia was de facto imperial, not Muscovite, between the foundation of St Pete in 1703 and Peter's assumption of the imperial title in 1721, the link to Imperial Russia is quite justified. --Ghirla -трёп- 18:27, 22 July 2006 (UTC) But the proble is that in RTW 1710-11 the rererence is to Russia (an article about the modern state). Please re-read carefully my questions. While you are right, it was not called "Empire". IMO we need a good reference term for this intermediate time period. `'mikka (t) 18:44, 22 July 2006 (UTC) DYK On 22 July, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Avar Khanate, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page. -- Grue  19:17, 22 July 2006 (UTC) что значит by no means typical stalinist? Это как?! Этот стиль - не только высотки в Москве. Такое здание не могло быть построено до революции, ни в эпоху конструктивизма, ни тем более во времена хрущёвок/брежневок. Это типичный стиль сталинского периода. Почему ты думаешь иначе? ----Ъыь (mailbox) 11:24, 24 July 2006 (UTC) А это - тоже не сталинский стиль?! ----Ъыь (mailbox) 11:32, 24 July 2006 (UTC) Ok. P.S. Я не из Красноярска. --Ъыь (mailbox) 14:48, 24 July 2006 (UTC) Thank you Thank you, Ghirlandajo for the explanation of the "peacock language". Now I really agree with you on that. And you really understand about styles of architecture. Drama of songs is when a poet becomes a playwriter and writes a play Juraune 11:40, 24 July 2006 (UTC) You are welcome. --Ghirla -трёп- 12:10, 24 July 2006 (UTC) DYK On 24 July, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Pella Palace, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page. Once again, thanks for the great article -- Samir धर्म 13:20, 24 July 2006 (UTC) Pella Palace It is not the first time I tell you this. You do not have any editorial control over the presentation or content of an article. This revert had no justification whatsoever. Circeus 15:43, 24 July 2006 (UTC) Invitation to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy Hi there! I've noticed that you've edited articles pertaining to the Eastern Orthodox Church. I wanted to extend an invitation to you to join the WikiProject dedicated to organizing and improving articles on the subject, which can be found at: WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy. This WikiProject was begun because a need was perceived to raise the level of quality of articles on Wikipedia which deal with the Eastern Orthodox Church. You can find information on the project page about the WikiProject, as well as how to join and how to indicate that you are a member of the project. Additionally, you may be interested in helping out with our collaboration of the month. I hope you'll consider joining and thank you for your contributions thus far! —A.S. Damick talk contribs 18:18, 24 July 2006 (UTC) re:Template:Hero Cities I'm not sure what is the problem with inclusion. I can see a potential case for not having it at all (that the link is rather coincidental and not necessarily worthy of a navigational template, but I doubt that'll be enough for TFD), but as long as the template exists, I am not sure what arguments can be proposed against its inclusion in Moscow or Kiev. Is there some potential PoV issue that I'm not seeing? I can see one or two ways the template can be refactored, though. Right now, I'm not sure why it should take as wide a space as it does, and the split by countries does not seem to be so relevant. After all, it is their status as Hero Cities that is outlined in the emplate, not their exact location ({{Metros in FSU}}, to take a random example, has no such split). Besides, if I am not mitaken, they were all part of the same political entity at the time they were awarded. Circeus 14:37, 25 July 2006 (UTC) No problem, I'll rework it as soon as I'm done with my watchlist review. Circeus 17:37, 25 July 2006 (UTC) Kola Re this. "Of which it is now considered a suburb" implies that there is an official definition of a "suburb" (there is none in Russia). It also suggests that Kola is currently subordinated to Murmansk or is even a part of it, but in reality it is not directly subordinated to either Murmansk or to Murmansk Oblast. It is a raion-level town, the administrative center of its own Kolsky Raion. The fact is that Kola is located in the vicinity of Murmansk, and that Murmansk and Kola residents probably view Kola as a "suburb", because Kola was Murmansk's sattelite for so long. That, however, is just a colloquial expression. I am not convinced that such wording is better for encyclopedic purposes than my version. If you have any suggestions as to how to improve wording without losing essential information, I am quite open to hearing them. Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:00, 25 July 2006 (UTC) "Incompetent" move back to Pik Lenina I moved the page back to Pik Lenina because it is not clear that Independence Peak is the correct name. A Tajik presidental web page contradicts this and was cited on the talk page. I think that Lenina should be retained until the situation is clarified; this is, after all, a Tajik mountain, not a Russian one. I thought it was OK to move pages (back) in this manner but the move was contested (unfortunately I overlooked this on my watchlist) so I will look into and probably take up the proper procedure. Viewfinder 01:33, 26 July 2006 (UTC) RE:Congrats Hey. I wouldn't speak too soon. The Poles are pretty tenacious, and doubtless will campaign vigorously or find some device to get it moved to a Polonocentric name. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 14:17, 26 July 2006 (UTC)