User talk:Apokrif

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

apokrif1 at yahoo.com

Contents

comparative polynesian phonetics chart[edit]

hey. can you check and comment on my reply to your inquiry on the Polynesian languages article's talk page? TShilo12 05:00, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

  • Hi, I believe that there is in actuality one police force.--Tombombadil 01:55, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Gendarmerie + garde territoriale + royal police(s) Apokrif 18:31, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
      • I stand corrected.--Tomtom9041 04:01, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Suicide[edit]

Hi, I noticed you made some edits to the suicide article. I've created a sample layout in an effort to improve the page. I would appreciate your comments to my proposal. If you're too busy with other stuff, don't worry about it. :) Gflores Talk 21:31, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Article title[edit]

Actually, we usually favour the common name. See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names). "When choosing a name for a page ask yourself: What word would the average user of the Wikipedia put into the search engine?" The average person would most definitely put in MI5. The other problem with using the official name is that Security Service points to a disambig page. Yes, you can add a qualifier as you did, but it makes it rather ugly (particularly using the full qualifier that you did - would UK not have been better?). -- Necrothesp 23:55, 16 March 2006 (UTC)


Vandalism after "last warning"[edit]

If that happens, it's always best to report that to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. That's where administrators can take the appropriate actions to temporarily (or permanently) block or ban the user for vandalism. Thanks for the message; I reported him. Buchanan-Hermit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 19:11, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Larry Nevers[edit]

Hey there. Just here to help you with your recent disambiguation pages - it's best to have them follow the traditional disambig style. I've fixed up Larry Nevers to follow this; it would be helpful if any past and future disambig pages you make look/are formatted similarly. Have fun! (|-- UlTiMuS ( U | T | C [] M | E ) 18:27, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Careful[edit]

The whole point of Did Six Million Really Die? is that it is not a history book; it's "revisionism" - that is, lies. Adding it to the category of "Holocaust history books" is pointless and invalid. DS 15:44, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Re:Template:SCOTUSCase[edit]

The template is widely used and has remained pretty constant for awhile. If you feel that there should be more wikification, I'd suggest taking it up on WP:SCOTUS and seeing what other people think. I don't particularly care either way whether or not more linking is included, however, if it's done, the linking should be systematic and consistent. Cheers. --MZMcBride 22:16, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Vanuatu Scouting[edit]

Can you help render "Be Prepared", the Scout Motto, into Bislama? Thanks! Chris 06:00, 13 August 2007 (UTC)


No content in Category:Usenet control message[edit]

Information icon.svg

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Usenet control message, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Usenet control message has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Usenet control message, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 00:01, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Max Mosley[edit]

Hi. See response at my talk page. Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 07:01, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

re: Tamil Script[edit]

Hi Apokrif. I've fixed the punctuation error you had pointed out. Thanks. -- Sundar \talk \contribs 13:07, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Curry bashing[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

Please do not make statements attacking people or groups of people. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Blackknight12 (talk) 11:58, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants[edit]

Re: Talk Page ... Talk:Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants#Information about unreported and unpublished cases

According to PATRICK S. RYAN, Revisiting the United States Application of Punitive Damages: Separating Myth from Reality: "The case is not reported or published, which means that under United States law it cannot be considered as valid precedent for any legal purpose. Westlaw has a simple one-page "unpublished" version available as part of its database service. Lexis-Nexis has no record of the case. Regarding the appeal, there is nothing, either in published, unpublished, or any other unofficial or official form." Is it possible, to get reliable data on a case, to request a copy (perhaps by e-mail) of the judgment form the court, instead of relying on commercial services? How do Lexis-Nexis or Westlaw get their data? Apokrif 22:43, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Remember that this was simply a case that was tried at the trial court level. It was never appealed. Thus, it makes perfect sense that Westlaw and Lexis-Nexis do not have this case in their databases of appeals. (Actually, I think that both sides did indeed file an appeal, but the parties ultimately settled the case before actually arguing said appeal.) Since this was only a trial level court case, there would be no published decision to report. One might, perhaps, get trial court transcripts (at a very hefty cost) ... but there would be no "published" or "reported" decision per se at the trial court level. As far as your question about Westlaw and Lexis-Nexis: they certainly focus on publishing reported / published opinions that are generated at the appeals level. The decisions in these appeals are available to the general public ... and, thus, are easily available for Westlaw and Lexis-Nexis to access. As far as trial level court cases ... only for a pretty significant or important trial case (such as this one) would Westlaw and Lexis-Nexis decide to include the case in their databases. Precisely for the reason you mention. Such trial level cases have no precedential value whatsoever. Thus, they essentially have no real "legal" value at all (to attorneys, or courts, or parties to litigation). Westlaw and Lexis-Nexis will only include a small number of these types of cases (those conducted only at the trial level, and not taken to the appeal level) simply for the general public interest that they generate ... and, perhaps, for academic purposes also. I hope this answers your questions. Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro, 6 September 2009)

Proposed deletion of Sairam[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Sairam has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The 2 terms are not even close to each other so no need for disambiguation.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ridernyc (talk) 15:41, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Sairam[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

I have nominated Sairam, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sairam. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ridernyc (talk) 16:56, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Arbre[edit]

Hello Apokrif, this is a message from an automated bot to inform you that the page you created, Arbre, has been marked for speedy deletion by User:Xtzou. This has been done because the page is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader (see CSD). If you think the tag was placed in error, please add "{{hangon}}" to the page text, and edit the talk page to explain why the page should not be deleted. If you have a question about this bot, please ask it at User talk:SDPatrolBot II. If you have a question for the user who tagged the article, see User talk:Xtzou. Thanks, - SDPatrolBot II (talk) on behalf of Xtzou (talk · contribs) 15:31, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Recruiting french speaking members[edit]

Hello, I noticed your contribution to the MK article and am grateful for it but I noticed on your page that it says you are fluent in French. I'm asking that you could please translate or at least find something of interest in this video: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x52xat_making-of-mortal-kombat_shortfilms It's the making of the first MK film (however the language is in french) and I would like to use this to add more to the film's development section the article. Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 23:05, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Arbre[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

An article that you have been involved in editing, Arbre, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arbre. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Trovatore (talk) 09:21, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Madryga[edit]

I saw you tagged this article as a possible copyright violation of Applied Cryptography. I see that the three design principles not fulfilled by DES are copied verbatim (I'm not sure if those are copied verbatim from W.E. Madryga to begin with or not), but I'm not seeing any other copy/paste or even close paraphrase from the book. Can you elaborate on what part(s) looked like the copyright violation to you? VernoWhitney (talk) 17:08, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I did sit down with Applied Cryptography second edition when I looked over it. I'll look through the first edition later today but if that doesn't turn up anything I'm going to tentatively mark it as clean. If something else comes to mind, please let me know. Help with spotting copyright issues is always appreciated! VernoWhitney (talk) 17:40, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer[edit]

Wikipedia Reviewer.svg

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 04:51, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Category:Phosphate mining in Nauru[edit]

I see that you created Category:Phosphate mining in Nauru. DO you think it may be to small a topic for a category. Admittedly, the phosphate mining had a major effect on Nauru but I don't know if it will get a lot of articles. Cheers. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 22:53, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

CFD for Category:United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit[edit]

Please note that a category you created, Category:United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for discussion page. TJRC (talk) 21:41, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

State court[edit]

Hi, now that State court is a disambig, please remember to help WP:FIXDABLINKS. This tool makes the job a lot easier. Thanks, --JaGatalk 17:51, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

I've done some of them, but there are still a lot of links to fix. Your help would still be appreciated, since your edits created the need for cleanup. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 20:35, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Merge discussion for Einheitspsychosen [edit]

Information.svg An article that you have been involved in editing, Einheitspsychosen , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. FiachraByrne (talk) 20:03, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Sanitätswesen move[edit]

I noticed that you moved this article to Sanitätswesen (German concentration and extermination camps). Modern-day Germany has no such camps. I find the title a bit unwieldly anyway, but shouldn't that read "Nazi" instead of "German"? I mean, not all Germans are Nazis, but writing something like "German concentration camp" makes it sound like it could be an ongoing, rather than a historical thing. Thanks. Marrante (talk) 17:00, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

A shorter title might be to make the parens read "(Nazi Germany)" instead of the much longer "concentration and extermination camps". Doesn't "Nazi Germany" sort of cover it? Marrante (talk) 17:02, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
I see the German WP uses "Sanitätswesen (KZ)" on their disambiguation page, with "(in nationalsozialistischen Konzentrationslagern)" as an explanation. We don't have the same ease of use with "KZ" but I'll work it out. Thanks for telling me your intent with the move. Marrante (talk) 18:42, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Bletchley Park?[edit]

Hi. You seem rather insistent on including Bletchley Park in Category:Cryptographic attacks, which is inappropriate. Bletchley Park is as much a crypto attack as is the NSA or CIA. Examples of the articles included in the category:

  • Adaptive chosen-ciphertext attack
  • Adversary (cryptography)
  • Attack model
  • Banburismus
  • Birthday attack
  • Bit-flipping attack
  • Black bag operation
  • Black-bag cryptanalysis
  • Boomerang attack
  • Brute-force attack
  • Chosen-ciphertext attack
  • Chosen-plaintext attack
  • Ciphertext-only attack
  • Clock drift

Inclusion of Bletchley Park in this category makes no sense. The way to deal with these things is to discuss them, not just to revert. I would love to talk about it on the article Talk page with you. If, however, you continue to mis-categorize pages, we'll be talking about this on an Administrator's Noticeboard, instead, and I'd really rather not do that. — UncleBubba T @ C ) 22:59, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Congressional Research Service reports, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Copyright Act (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) 10:29, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Tsirang District, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chirang (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) 10:53, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Aimal Qazi[edit]

Nomination of Aimal Qazi for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Aimal Qazi is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aimal Qazi until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. LuciferWildCat (talk) 20:42, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Bruno Gollnisch, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages St Peter's Square and Vatican (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) 10:39, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Defense Language Aptitude Battery, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page English (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) 10:18, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 4[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited G.I. Jane, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hell week (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) 10:29, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Category:Sex discrimination[edit]

Category:Sex discrimination, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 05:33, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 20[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Merit badge (Boy Scouts of America), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eagle scout (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) 10:57, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 17[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Directorate-General for External Security, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page AFP (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) 11:34, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Anthropophilia in animals‎ for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Anthropophilia in animals‎ is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthropophilia in animals‎ until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.

TRW move to TRW Inc.[edit]

Hi Apokrif. Could you please clarify why you made this move? It caused more than 300 articles to point to a disambiguation page. I have looked at most of those articles in the past and I can't remember any that should point to anything other than the moved article. Best Regards, Overjive (talk) 04:29, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Wow, you guys are addressing these links quickly. Let me know if I can help! Overjive (talk) 11:15, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Bagdasaryan[edit]

A tag has been placed on Bagdasaryan requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either

  • disambiguates two or fewer extant Wikipedia pages and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic); or
  • disambiguates no (zero) extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Pichpich (talk) 18:26, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Administrative category titles[edit]

Hello,

I recently came across Category:Wikipedia:Public domain, which you created, and wanted to let you know that the titles of administrative categories, although they are prefixed with the word "Wikipedia", do not need a second colon. Hence, I have nominated that category for speedy renaming to Category:Wikipedia public domain. For details, see Wikipedia:Category names#Special conventions.

Cheers! -- Black Falcon (talk) 17:33, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Page move request[edit]

If you want to request a page to be moved (renamed), use WP:RM. I've closed your edit request at Talk:Geneva Conventions, since the page is not edit protected and your request doesn't involve any editing. RudolfRed (talk) 01:13, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 28[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Xenu's Link Sleuth, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Broken link (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) 01:15, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 24[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sable Island, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Sandy Island and Sand Island (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) 17:10, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 22[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Brebeuf Jesuit Preparatory School, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Preparatory school (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) 11:47, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia:Hoaxes[edit]

Category:Wikipedia:Hoaxes, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 19:48, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 29[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bin Laden Issue Station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Drone (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) 11:11, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia:Chinese language[edit]

Category:Wikipedia:Chinese language, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:51, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Albanian help needed[edit]

Hello Apokrif, I'm contacting you because we need some Albanian translators to help with the deployment of the new VisualEditor on sq.wikipedia. There are help pages, user guides, and description pages that need translating, as well as the interface itself. The translating work is going on over on MediaWiki: Translation Central. I also need help with a personal message for the Albanian Wikipedians. If you are able to help in any way, either reply here, or head over to TranslationCentral. Thanks for your time, PEarley (WMF) (talk) 17:12, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Sorry but I have only basic skills in Albanian. Apokrif (talk) 09:45, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 9[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited High Court, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page High Court of Parliament (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) 10:49, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Category:Sex discrimination[edit]

Category:Sex discrimination, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 15:38, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Fields Medal page[edit]

Hello there,I'm that user who's been the victim of editing the Fields Medal page(i.e.I got blocked with charge of Vandalism.).I've got three question:1)When the current protected status of that page ends,Does the page current contents remain in place or they are replaced with the old version? 2)I've prepared a new and somehow comprehensive table about Fields medalists.I posted this table on the discussion section of the Fields Medal page,and I request for comments about this(If You come there and see my that table I will be really glad,and don't forget to put your comment about it down there!;-)),but so far,just one person did so.Is it normal? 3)Should I submit a request for edit to replace the new table with current one?Or should I wait for reaching a consensus?Thank You. Rezameyqani (talk) 07:50, 19 August 2014 (UTC)Rezameyqani (talk) 08:30, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Please respond at Talk:Motion in United States law[edit]

You created quite a mess but never responded. The article should have stayed at Motion (legal) because the vast majority of jurisdictions use terms like application or request instead. --Coolcaesar (talk) 06:55, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 4[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited North Texas State Hospital, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Medicare (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) 10:16, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Repeated vandalism and edit warring.[edit]

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia. Jeppiz (talk) 19:53, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Could you please be more careful?[edit]

In November of 2013 you redirected Penny Lane (Guantanamo) to Guantanamo Bay detention camp#Facilities. In my opinion, this redirection was highly problematic, because the article on the Guantanamo Bay detention camp should be devoted solely to the secretive MILITARY camp. Like Camp Strawberry Fields, Camp Penny Lane was an even more secretive CIA camp.

In my opinion, this redirection was problematic because the "facilities" section does not say anything about Camp Penny Lane.

May I suggest that if you ever come across a red-link and consider redirecting it to some larger topic, you pause, and give this more thought than you did here? How much effort should a quality control volunteer perform before they add a {{prod}} tag? Policy-compliant contributors comply with WP:BEFORE, and do a web search on a topic, before they suggest deletion, to make sure they are not suggesting deleting our coverage of a strongly notable topic simply because the current article was weak.

Your change of the red-link to a blue-link is confusing to other contributors. In my opinion, Camp Penny Lane is an important enough topic to merit a standalone article. When the wikilink for that topic is blue, it looks like that article has already been written. A red-link, on the other hand, is a strong reminder that the article hasn't been written yet.

I suggest that it would have been better for the wikipedia, if you weren't going to write the artilce yourself, for you to have left it as a red-link.

I am also very concerned by a trend I find ill-advised of redirecting to subsections within larger articles. In my opinion, if a topic is worthy of a wikilink, it is almost certainly worthy of an article on its own. In my opinion, the reasons why wikilinking to subsections within larger articles is a mistake, include:

  1. Proper articles have a lede sentence, lede paragraph -- something not appropriate for a section within an article;
  2. Only full articles can be placed on our watchlists;
  3. The "what links here" button only works on full articles.
    Contrast this with the situation for those poor souls who write web pages on the plain old world-wide-web. They have no idea how many other web-pages link to their page. So they can only guess at how many external web-links they will break, if they change the name of the url of a page.
  4. Redirection is not full supported when the target of the wikilink is a subsection heading within a larger article. We have hard-working robots which quietly work in the background to make sure redirects always work. When someone changes the name of an article, the hard-working robots that look for double redirects find all the redirects that point to the old name, and change them to point to the new name.

    Contributors feel they are free to change section headings, correct spelling, grammar, punctuation, or change them to bring them up to date with what the section is about, when that has been changed. And if one contributor changes a section heading that someone else has made part of a hybrid wikilink to a section heading within another article, then that wikilink breaks. When contributors follow the practice you followed here they make fragile wikilinks that silently break, are hard to fix, and hard to detect that they have failed.

I am going to repeat the opinion that if a topic is important enough that it merits a wikilink it is almost certainly important enough to merit its own standalone article. Geo Swan (talk) 07:39, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

ANI[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Jeppiz (talk) 16:08, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Scientology is covered by discretionary sanctions under WP:ARBSCI[edit]

Commons-emblem-notice.svg This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Scientology, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

EdJohnston (talk) 16:53, 21 October 2015 (UTC)


$cientology[edit]

Apokrif, I reverted you (I won't do so again, however ). You're whitewashing the Scientology article. Bottom line, it's not a new religious movement, it's a cult, made up by L. Wrong Hubbard on a bet he had with another Science Fiction writer. Read the Penthouse interview with his son - he states this outright, and remember, his son has every reason in the world to keep his mouth shut, after all, he stood to gain a lot of money , and possible power and prestige within the cult of Scientology, therefore he'd have no reason to have given the candid interview that he gave. You don't say on this page or your French page if you're a scientologist yourself, and I don't think I can ask you or speculate on it, so I won't do so, but at the very least you seem to have a conflict of Interest based on your editing, you may want to edit elsewhere for the time being. KoshVorlon 17:24, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

"it's not a new religious movement, it's a cult" We are not interested in you points of view.
"you seem to have a conflict of Interest based on your editing" No. Apokrif (talk) 17:27, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Uh, it's not my point of view, it's actually the point of view of the late L.Ron Hubbard JR, he stated as much in his Penthouse interview, and you answered my second question by showing my your contribs. Remember, it's not how much you contribute, but how you edit certain article that shows COI or POV, I'll reiterate, I can't and won't accuse you of having one directly, but your whitewash of $cientology sure looks like it. KoshVorlon 19:31, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
It looks like you don't distinguish between expressing a wikipedian's point of view in the article space (which is forbidden by policy) and stating the point of view of notable people (here, various French public authorities who wrote about cults), which is not. Note that I don't necessarily agree whith all the people I cite in WP articles (I often don't). Regarding your edits on my talk page, I suggest you read Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a forum. Apokrif (talk) 14:04, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Embedded link and template in Kenji Goto article[edit]

Hi. Thanks for your interest in the Kenji Goto article. I had to revert your recent edit to the article for a couple of reasons. Firstly, it added an embedded link, which are now discouraged (see Wikipedia:Embedded citations). Secondly, you replaced an occurrence of the {{As of}} template, which is used to mark dated statements. It is there for a purpose, so please be careful about removing templates or formatting you are not familiar with. Drop us a line here or on my Talk page if there is still anything you are unclear about. Thanks. --DAJF (talk) 00:49, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Court uniform and dress listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Court uniform and dress. Since you had some involvement with the Court uniform and dress redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. BDD (talk) 19:20, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Pronunciation[edit]

Bonjour et voilà (after almost a year). The normal pronunciation in Germany is more like [ˈkʁɪ⁠stɔ⁠f ˈblɔ⁠⁠xɐ], but in Swiss German it's like in the article. --Komischn (talk) 22:27, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Category:Supreme court of the United States child pornography case law[edit]

We don't create such overly specific categories (which is additionally misnamed here) that subdivide the case law of individual courts by topic. If you think it's a viable topic for subdividing case law, create it instead at the country level, as you did with Category:United Kingdom pornography case law (and note that Category:United States pornography case law does not yet even exist, let alone the even more specific Category:United States child pornography case law). postdlf (talk) 00:12, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Tay (bot) has been nominated for Did You Know[edit]

TRW/version 2 listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect TRW/version 2. Since you had some involvement with the TRW/version 2 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Notecardforfree (talk) 22:40, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Tay (bot)[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 8 April 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tay (bot), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that within a day of the release of the Microsoft chatterbot Tay on Twitter, it was taken offline because it started making inflammatory tweets? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tay (bot). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:42, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Category:United States Supreme Court patent case law has been nominated for discussion[edit]

Category:United States Supreme Court patent case law, which you created, has been nominated for merging to Category:United States patent case law. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:39, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Category:Fictional United States federal judges has been nominated for discussion[edit]

Category:Fictional United States federal judges, which you created, has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 02:21, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 May 2016[edit]

Category:Wikipedia:Gender[edit]

Hey, what are these categories you're setting up? This doesn't appear to be how we generally do categories. Perhaps "Gender identity policies and essays" is a better category title?--v/r - TP 21:32, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Of course subcategories (e.g. for policies or essays) can be created, but if we only had a category named "policies and essays", it could not be used for other topics, like templates for user pages. Apokrif (talk) 11:36, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Heck, doesn't really matter what it's called, but the double colon (:) is tripping me. We don't usually create categories like "Category:Wikipedia:Something". Unless you've seen it elsewhere, but I haven't. I've seen "Category:Wikipedia something", though.--v/r - TP 17:48, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure what the consensus is on en.wikipedia.org (I don't really really mind if this category or other Wikipedia: categories I've created are renamed), however the use of this prefix is consistent whith the naming of articles: the Wikipedia: prefix clearly indicates that these are meta-pages, not encyclopedia articles about Wikipedia. Apokrif (talk) 18:12, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 May 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 05 June 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 15 June 2016[edit]

Category:Wikipedia:Christianism has been nominated for discussion[edit]

Category:Wikipedia:Christianism, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. StAnselm (talk) 19:48, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 July 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 21 July 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 04 August 2016[edit]

Move reverted.[edit]

Information icon Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Your bold move of Warrant Officer Basic Course has been reverted because an editor has found it to be controversial. Per Wikipedia:Requested moves, a move request must be placed on the article's talk page, and the request be open for discussion for seven days, "if there is any reason to believe a move would be contested". Such consensus is particularly required before moving a title with incoming links in order to create a disambiguation page at that title. If you believe that this move is appropriate, please initiate such a discussion to form the appropriate consensus. Again, please note that moving a page with a longstanding title and/or a large number of incoming links is more likely to be considered controversial, and may be contested. bd2412 T 14:43, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

August 2016[edit]

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Mentalism (discrimination), disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. These interwiki links are no longer used, instead, we now use Wikidata since one only has to do that once. Laber□T 05:22, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 August 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 06 September 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 29 September 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 14 October 2016[edit]

The Signpost: 4 November 2016[edit]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Apokrif. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 November 2016[edit]