User talk:Deavenger/Archive 2

PIIR Project

Still active got a bit busy with working on Indian Cities article. Enthusiast10 (talk) 17:48, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Sikh Extremism by User Talk: Satanoid

Hi Deavenger

Please pay your kind attention to article Sikh Extremism written by User Talk: Satanoid alias His Biography alias User talk: 90.192.59.43 (his previous IP) alias User Talk: 90.196.3.37 alias User Talk: 90.196.3.246. His past and new acts have been duly documented by several editors on User Talk: Master of Puppets in several sections. This respected user with extremist ediology was blocked several times.--Singh6 (talk) 08:24, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

He had tried getting permission from User Talk: Master of Puppets to create this article and instead he has received a warning with heading "Hi Again". He has come up with this account after getting numerous warnings to his three IPs, i.e. 90.196.3.37, 90.196.3.246 and 90.192.59.43.

Sikh Extremism means using an abusive word for an entire religion which is definitely a POV article. I strongly believe that this POV article should be deleted.--Singh6 (talk) 08:24, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Even Admin User talk:DJ Clayworth has called this article an Insult to Wikipedia.--Singh6 (talk) 09:12, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi there, regarding this dispute, hopefully the issues can be sorted out on the article's talk page. Your input would be much appreciated --Flewis^(talk) 13:01, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Sikh extremism

An article that you have been involved in editing, Sikh extremism, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sikh extremism. Thank you. Singh6 (talk) 08:49, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Respected User:Deavenger, please participate in the discussion and please vote.--Singh6 (talk) 08:49, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

November 2008

Sadly, many articles do not have adequate sourcing. We *STILL* must have sources for new content. I kept seeing a new edit, breaking the sentence, with no source, and I killed it. I do understand how frustrating that is. I would encourage gathering the source 1st, then making the change. Oddly, I was seeing your edit summary as blank. I have rebooted, and now I see them. My apologies, and good editing to you. :) sinneed (talk) 03:02, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Brazil

Yes, we've had some problems in the past with editors unilaterally adding Brazil to the article. Hopefully, this is simple a periodic issue and won't require further intervention. But if this continues, we should engage in a conversation with the editor and if needed request a 3rd opinion. In regards to a potential great powers article, I don't think it's a bad idea. However, we would have to be more rigorous this time with citing reliable sources that actually comment on future great power status. Last time, the article was deleted because the sections were based on complete OR and synthesis. Nirvana888 (talk) 02:13, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Comments on article you were involved in AFD debate

Hi there! You had participated in the AFD on Sikh Extremism. I've had some time to look into the article and commented on the talk page here. Thanks, --RoadAhead ^=Discuss= 01:06, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Italy

Thanks for your explanation on the editor's Talk page. I was unsure if he was familiar with Wiki policy and was thinking of starting a conversation on the article Talk page. I also have a sneaking suspicion that two editors in question are the same editor given their editing pattern. Nirvana888 (talk) 23:25, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Possible sockpuppetry

User:Atlantix Cristall, User:Potito m. petrone, and User:Right Nation all have a remarkable similar modus operandi in their user page edits, mainspace edits, POV pushing Italy as a great power. Two of the users seem to be newly created accounts with the sole purpose of re-adding reverted material. Do you think that they could be sockpuppets or at least a tag team of meatpuppets? Nirvana888 (talk) 16:55, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Obviously there must be a mistake.

I would like to thank ACamposPinho, Lorenzop, - Izzo, Hadrian1, Philip Baird Shearer, Kayac1971, Chanakyathegreat and many others for the important research material produced in these discussion's pages - Great powers. I would like to thank Viewfinder too for your reason.

Thanks anyway to everybody – in particular UKPhoenix79, Nirvana888, Colliver55, Deavenger (in Italian Language Commarelle) – for the kind assistance. I go to work.

Poti —Preceding undated comment was added at 16:07, 26 November 2008 (UTC).

Atheism in Hinduism

Bhagat Singh was born into a Sikh family and the artcle you added his name is Atheism in Hinduism. Docku: What up? 08:21, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

U r very welcome. Docku: What up? 17:40, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to the Economics WikiProject

Hi, and welcome to the Economics WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to Economics.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• Most of our important discussions about the project itself and its related articles take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

• Expand some economics stubs.
• Pitch in on our current FA drive.
• Assess the quality and importance of unassessed Economics articles.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the members, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! --Patrick (talk) 00:40, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Your request for rollback

After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback can be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback may be removed at any time.

If you no longer want rollback, then contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some information on how to use rollback, you can view this page. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, just leave me a message if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Happy editing! Tiptoety ^talk 01:47, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

RE: RFC

I've replied to your comments on my talk page. Emw2012 (talk) 07:51, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Great power

Hey, I think you are doing well mediating the dispute and asking for RFC is a good idea. I think the article could definitely use stylistic and prose improvements so I have no problem with it being delisted. However, we should work to improve the article and bring it back to GA. Regarding the peacock wording, bias that the IPs and Viewfinder suggest, I don't think these arguments have any merit. As you have explained, the term great power is in full (academic, popular) use today. A quick search on Google scholar, Google books, Google search tells you that. I would suggest that you just ignore the inflammatory remarks and again ask for evidence regarding their arguments. Remember, without evidence from reliable sources, their arguments can easily be dismissed in the context of Wikipedia. What books/media on IR are you reading these days? There is a great show on CNN by Fareed Zakaria called GPS that you might want to check out online. CFR and Fora.tv also have some great recorded talks from noted speakers. Congrats on the rollback btw! Nirvana888 (talk) 16:09, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Well seeing that there is only User:Viewfinder and User:Dejvid pther than the IP who suggest that "great power" is an "archaic, peacock term", I would think they are very much the minority. Besides, they still do not have an argument that is backed up by sources; therefore their opinions are not likely to stand up. So far, this talk has been largely restricted to the Talk page; however if an edit war erupts we'll have to bring it up with an admin. Nirvana888 (talk) 00:08, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Joker (graphic novel)

That example was far too long and was a pretty much blow-by-blow retelling of the story, which isn't what we need (if anyone wants the plot in that detail then you'd read the graphic novel) and various policies state this is a bad idea: WP:WAF and WP:PLOT (as too comprehensive a rehashing of the plot gets us into copyright difficulties too).

As I mentioned on the talk page the areas that need expanding are the reception and publication history, which if properly done and with enough sources, should give the creators' thinking (on the book, the character development) and structure), as well as reactions to this and whether it worked or not (respectively). It would touch on the major points and produce a useful, and encyclopaedic, overview of the work. (Emperor (talk) 03:57, 29 December 2008 (UTC))

I'm Back

Hey Deavanger, I appreciate the concern over my absence and hope you had a merry Christmas and a happy new year. I'd been taking a sabbatical from Wikipedia for a while. I just got busy, and then sort of lapsed. I'd hadn't realized so much damage had been done in my absence. I thought that I could take a break, knowing that I had sucessfully and nearly single-handedly brought a new good article into being. Nobody had said anything about the great power article being delisted. We neeed to immediately get great power back to speed. I'd like you to know that I'll be more active in Wikipedia now. --Hobie (talk) 04:27, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

African Regional Powers

Where do you suggest I find sources for african regional powers beyond learned knowledge. I have been looking hard but for example Sudan I based off my and other peoples analysis (i am an avid country researcher) If you could point me in the right direction that would be helpful.

One, please sign your name using four ~ (since you have a shared IP, consider getting an account). 2, look at books. For instance, when I wanted to learn about great powers or superpowers, I read books like the Post American World (fareed zakaria), The Second World (Parag Khanna), China:Fragile Superpower (susan shirk). You could probably find multiple books on the subject. Try looking at google books. Also, there are places such as Stratfor or the Council of Foreign Relations that might help you get or find articles on African Regional powers. However, be wary as some places like Stratfor, you have to pay money to see many of it's articles. Then there might be places like Yale, Harvard that might print articles, and Palgrave that might have journals, though you might need money to see some of them, but you might get lucky, like I did for Russia as a great power [1]. You could also look at newspapers (though I don't suggest it unless written by an academic that's actually in the field of IR, Geopolitics, or Polisci, but journalists can work if they know alot about the subject, like written books on it. However, if it's like this [2], where it just says Superpower only in the title, and no where else in the article calling it a superpower, but a Great power, that won't work). Just remember, they have to be reliable sources, and please if possible, try to make it more then it saying, _______ is a Regional power. Plus, just don't do what some IPs tried to do for Russia, where all they did was a quick google search, which resulted in a whole bunch of journalists saying reemergence of a superpower, but then not even mentioning Superpower status, and just talk about the recent Russian-Georgian conflict, especially when many many academics were going, Russia isn't a superpower. I'm hoping that once we get one of the other articles to GA status, we'll go to Regional Powers next to clean up on bad/unreliable sources and make it a GA. Good Luck Deavenger (talk) 01:44, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Carly and Jax

They are divorced. Jax told Kate that he was divorce from Carly. --M42380 (talk) 21:06, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

sorry, about that it was a mistake writing to you. --M42380 (talk) 01:53, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Fareed Zakaria

So..... what are you talking about over here? I can fully understand the desire for some users to delete this information but its an invalid reason. Lets hear your reason now for keeping this out. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 22:14, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Make sure you read the discussion here. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 22:16, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I found and added the reference. Plus, take a look at this. Thats more articles that he has written on wines. Now, are you disputing that he was a wine columnist?

He enjoys wine and champaign and other alcoholic stuff like Martinis as well. So what do you say? --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 22:32, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Here you go. So is this settled now or do you have any questions? --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 22:39, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Alright, cool. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 22:42, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

FTSE Group Developed Country list

Dear Deavenger. I don't know if this should go here or on the article talk page.

My reading of the FTSE Group site is that the FTSE Group has one system for classifying countries.

The glossary has entries for

• Developed Country
• Emerging Markets
• Frontier Markets
• Secondary emerging countries

In the glossary the Developed Country list - the date of production via view source is 2005 , but the FTSE group elevated South Korea and Israel to Developed status in 2008 and 2007. (Developed status)

In the more recent Country Classification http://www.ftse.com/Indices/Country_Classification/Downloads/FTSE_Country_Classification_Sept_08_update.pdf South Korea and Israel are included but here they are refered to as developed markets - but this list does not say developed country. It is a list in which the country "status" is defined as "developed"

The details of the criteria are on http://www.ftse.com/Indices/Country_Classification/index.jsp On the page itself it gives a general description - on the page itself it says: "In 2003, FTSE conducted a widespread market consultation which resulted in the development of a framework and criteria for assigning countries based on:

• Economic size
• Wealth
• Quality of markets
• Depth and breadth of markets

FTSE applies this framework to conduct an annual review of the market status of all countries into Developed..."

The full list including the WB's GNI High Income bit is given in each of the regional bits eg: http://www.ftse.com/Indices/Country_Classification/Downloads/Asia_Pacific_Matrix_Sept_08.pdf.

So on the basis of this my argument is we can say the FTSE Group has a "developed country" list.

• In the glossary an

And that we can get: The criteria for inclusion are the High Income + things related to the Markets.

Anyway it still seems to me odd that there only three lists of Developed Countries that anyone has found.

• The UN one says it is "intended for statistical convenience and do not necessarily express a judgment about the stage reached by a particular country or area in the development"
• The CIA one which it is not clear how it is constructed and is contradictory and has incorrect information about $10,000 and OECD membership and includes South Africa as a developed country and then
• The FTSE list which we have excluded.

I am not sure of why you and the other editors don't like this list, specially compared with the other things on the page. I think I am missing something.

Best wishes, (Msrasnw (talk) 11:08, 1 February 2009 (UTC))

More FTSE =

In their Glossay they have their lists of countries status according their GNI/capita WB plus Stock market/investment environment/Forex market etc

• Developed Country
• Emerging Markets
• Frontier Markets
• Secondary emerging countries

So they have a list of developed countries. The glossary was produced in 2005. They have those that were classifed by them under developed markts or as having developed status acording to their criteria in 2005. South Korea and Israel are in the apporiate categories for 2005.

SK and Israel have since been elevated to Developed Status as the meet all the requirements.

The direct quote from the glossary (2005) reads "The follow countries are classified by FTSE as developed countries: Australia, Austria, Belgium/Luxembourg, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom and the United States." Why are you not insisting on putting this list on Developed Country site?

Perhaps if you look properly through their site things will be clearer. I hope that helps. S PS "FTSE promotes Israel to “developed country” rather than South Korea" - Israel Times September 21, 2007 "S Korea wins developed-country status" Financial Times September 18 2008

PPS (Iceland?)

(Msrasnw (talk) 16:04, 1 February 2009 (UTC))

You are now resorting to abuse probably because you have failed - perhaps deliberately - to understand my point. They have a list of "developed countries" and other people talk about this list. Their definition of a developed country is that such a country has developed markets. Or developed markets make a developed country. What is the definition you are suggesting? None! We just use the CIAs old list which has no clear criteria and other lists just based on high incomes and then welfare states or susbest of membership of OECD.... (Msrasnw (talk) 17:32, 1 February 2009 (UTC))

Your last edit on the Developed countries page looks like vandalism. As it stands our entry doesn't any no longer make sense. You may wish to modify it. (Msrasnw (talk) 17:46, 1 February 2009 (UTC))

Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons

Just dropping by to say thanks again for your help. I'll let you decide where you wanna put the barnstar, if you wanna move it all ;)

		The Template Barnstar
		I award you this barnstar for helping in the construction of the table of signatories on the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons article. Ryan4314 (talk) 17:43, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Forgot to mention, well done on doing the C, G and I's. You have the patience of a saint, also did you see America recently signed all the other protocols!? Ryan4314 (talk) 01:54, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Full fleged Super Powers

I question your understanding of the English language and the world situation. How come a country whose economy is the size of Mexico and has 200 million beggars IS considered a full fledged superpower? It'll take 200 years to India to become a develop country. Besides we are talking about the near future. A country who cannot solve its internal social problems can never be a superpower. Superpower is about projecting power, not about having 200 million people under starvation. Your full fledged superpower definition is so ridiculous that I will not waste my time discussing with you any more or touching your non sense article.--tequendamia (talk) 23:54, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Potential Superpowers

(a copy of my reply to your message on my page)

Hi, and thanks for the invitation. (Let me ponder my wiki-plate:) ... THE PROBLEM we face here is the way the media throws around the word "superpower" per category of influence -- see the article in The Economist they cited: "An economic superpower, and now oil too". "Superpower" isn't the magic word it used to be. :) The other issue is, of course, the word "potential" ... In infinite time, anything is possible, "potentially."

NOTE: Breaking that section out as a separate article is really the heart of the problem. Once you get away from the page which attempts to clarify what "superpower" means, it's harder to argue against, e.g., prestigious magazine headlines.... (But will ponder what to do about this.) Proofreader77 (talk) 22:23, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Disregard my excess noise -- I see you responded (perfectly) to the person who added it. But yes, the problem is not resolved... Will ponder potential long-term responses. :) Proofreader77 (talk) 22:40, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

DID YOU HEAR TODAY: Iranian president Ahmadinejad said: “The world recognized that we are true superpower.” (Got your message. Pondering ... the "complexity" of the article.) Proofreader77 (talk) 03:00, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Thnaks for your edit on State-sponsored terrorism

Thanks for removing 'Support for Mukti Bahini' but you did made a mistake.The Dawn link labeling BLA as terrorist was to cite that this organization is indeed a terrorist organization.It wasn't for proving India's link with it.User:Yousaf465

Yes Bangladesh does need mention but Israel has some problems .You may combine the ltte and bla.Yes response is needed for each country.User:Yousaf465

It's protected right now,but protection please edit it for all your proposed changes.User:Yousaf465

Barnstar of Peace for edits on State-sponsored terrorism

I award this to you for your work on State-sponsored terrorism.User:Yousaf465

Wikipedia Signpost — 2 March 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:

• Books extension enabled
• News and notes: Stewards, Wikimania bids, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia's role in journalism, Smarter Wikipedia, Skittles
• Dispatches: WikiProject Ships Featured topic and Good topics
• Wikiproject report: WikiProject Norse History and Culture
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 19:55, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Hey

I've been pretty busy these days and will probably be for the next little while. But thanks for monitoring the articles for controversial edits. I've added my vote. It is really a senseless vote as again there is only one person supported an argument based on OR. Chanakya has been here before and he is demonstrated before that he is a disruptive editors and may not have a good command English language reading comprehension so just answer his question once and if he keep making disruptive posted I would suggest ignoring them. Nirvana888 (talk) 05:02, 5 March 2009 (UTC)