Page semi-protected

User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise

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


Your Revert

Please only warn the part that's not based on a correct resource after understanding the historical issue of 50 years very well.
It seems you do not even know about the issue nor read the contents.
Also, you did not point out which part is how wrong; they are all facts, based on accredited sources.
It was not based on neutral point BEFORE from only one sided SOUTH KOREAN activists and I have added the neutral points.

Mount Athos border

Hello, thank you for contacting me. The mistake with the map is on the border. You can see the correct border in the link below. The problem is that in the image the border is more east than it should. Correct border:,23.9295459,10z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x14af3505d1d88cf3:0x7cdbcab532ff9281!8m2!3d40.2644928!4d24.2152731

Illyrian languages

I'm guessing there's some kind of dismal nationalist subtext to the way a raft of dubious Serbo-Croatian sources all got rolled out to support "languages", plural; I don't suppose you know what it is and can summarise it, please?

I'd ask if every page pertaining to the Balkans has to be a complete nightmare but sadly I already know the answer to that one. Pinkbeast (talk) 00:34, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Heh, yes, there's got to be a subtext indeed. First, the three editors who turned up at the talkpage are all part of a notorious travelling circus: people who keep following each other around to antagonize each other in national teams. It's always certain Greek and Serbian editors lining up against certain Albanian ones, always taking up opposite positions in a kind of knee-jerk reaction. These three have been at it for as long as I can remember. It's massively tedious and stupid. The deeper subtext in this particular article is probably the fact that Albanians like to think of Illyrians as their ethnic ancestors, and our Greek and Serbian friends like nothing better than to deconstruct and downplay anything that might have the appearance of contributing to a coherent national narrative of Albanian origins. If it was up to some of them, then Albanians never existed in history, nobody notable ever was an Albanian before the 20th century or thereabouts, nobody ever had an Albanian name, and so on. So, by extension, everything that makes the concept of "Illyrian" look more fragmented, less like a coherent group, less like an ethnic unity, must be good and will find staunch support with the Greek and Serbian team (and obviously, the converse goes for the Albanian editors). Now watch them come here in flocks to protest about "personal attacks" and "ethnic profiling". Fut.Perf. 07:16, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
A few words on my part. The Illyrian page is on my watch list. I saw that you placed a proposal in the talkpage [1] and i added a comment of support [2]. I also called for civility [3]. I have not engaged in antagonising anyone over the matter as my edits [4], [5] and comments [6], [7], [8], [9], [10] show when other editors have felt free to do so either on my talkpage [11] or in their edit summary [12]. Not all editing by the editors involved within this article is on the same par. As for other editors, their sources or behavior, they can speak for themselves. If my editing was not constructive toward improving the article or that what i have said here is wrong, please kindly point it out. Best.Resnjari (talk) 22:04, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification. Sigh. Pinkbeast (talk) 09:47, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

World War Two Talk page

Hi, FPAS. I've seen your work as an administrator in the topic area of World War II in the past nine years, most memorably when we were addressing a war between editors that involved a troll, sock-puppets and eventual blocks. I recently joined discussions at the current World War Two Talk page and have suspended my involvement there for the foreseeable future. I'm inviting you to read the whole page, for future reference at least. All the best, -Chumchum7 (talk) 06:13, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Listed as a party

Hi Future Perfect at Sunrise, at the direction of the Arbitration Committee, you've been listed as a party to the Fred Bauder arbitration case request. Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 22:00, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fred Bauder

You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fred Bauder. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fred Bauder/Evidence. Please add your evidence by November 27, 2018, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fred Bauder/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, --Cameron11598 (Talk) 20:49, 16 November 2018 (UTC)