User talk:Goldsztajn

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

Hi Goldsztajn. Welcome to wikipedia. I saw your name at WikiProject Organized labour and thought I would stop by to say hello. It's always nice to see another editor interested in labour. Let me know if I can help, or answer any questions. Cheers.--Bookandcoffee 02:04, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

International unions[edit]

You can start by just leaving a note on the talk page of the project. (Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Organized Labour) Outline what you're thinking, and see what others think. Be prepared to wait a few days for responses though, people tend to be a bit slow to get involved in group conversations here. (unlike myself, who's more likely just to barge in and say something!). BTW, one small point - when you leave a note on a talk page (like you did on mine), sign your name by using four tildes (~~~~). That way it automatically produces a link back to your page when you save the page. See Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages for more detail. Cheers. --Bookandcoffee 13:58, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

On Union Busting[edit]

Information.svg Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, talk pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.LedRush (talk) 04:29, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

The talk page guideline clearly states it is best treated with common sense and the occasional exception. Fixing your username is a reasonable exception; however next time just fix the spelling instead drawing attention to the change by striking through. Gerardw (talk) 15:19, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
What are you talking about? I only edited your comments to replace your references to me as "Gold" with "Goldsztajn". I asked you to do this, waited 3 hours and noticed you continued to contribute to the talk page but did not make the requested change. It is confusing and I indicated I did not wish to be referred to that way.--Goldsztajn (talk) 04:41, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
I didn't see where you requested this until recently. After I reverted your first edit of my edits, I mentioned that I would try and remember the full name. You went on to change it, I assume, because you didn't see my response yet. For that reason, I just gave you the lowest template possible so you would notice that editing other editors' comments can be seen as negative. Anyway, delete the warning, if you long as you don't alter my edits. Thanks.LedRush (talk) 04:54, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Please don't "try" to do it, just refer to me with my full username. I find it rude the way in which you referred to me. Please fix those references.--Goldsztajn (talk) 05:39, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
I find your tone and response rude. I will not "fix" past comments.LedRush (talk) 06:50, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately, it's what happens when you make assumptions about other people, engage in unthinking behaviour and are rude in the first place.--Goldsztajn (talk) 07:15, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
I employ a common and friendly way to address others. You assume bad faith and accuse me of being insulting to you. I clarify my intentions and tell you I will try to remember your name. You further insult me. Who is unthinking, rude, and making assumptions?LedRush (talk) 15:49, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
As noted, you ignored a reasonable request and continued to edit the talk page ignoring that request. You chose a term for me I did not appreciate. It was not considered a friendly way to address me. Your assumptions were wrong.--Goldsztajn (talk) 23:58, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Also, so people can see the progression of Goldsztajn's temper on the talk page (and understand this conversation better):

You seem to have a compulsive need to broadcast to others. My tone towards you is perfectly in proportion to your actions.--Goldsztajn (talk) 23:58, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

(after Goldsztajn started tinkering with my edits and I asked him to stop but told him I would use his full name from then on (all in edit summaries):

I consider it rude how you referred to me. Please revert the edits I made or make the corrections yourself.--Goldsztajn (talk) 05:06, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
I consider it rude how you change my edits and make demands of me. I have told you that I will try to use your full name in the future. Also, for most people, using a shortened version of a name is endearing and shows familiarity. You should have taken it in this manner (as almost anyone would), as a way to become friendlier. But of course, it is your name, not mine, so in the future I will address you the way you want.LedRush (talk) 05:18, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. Perhaps if you had thought about the origin of the name you would have understood why shortening it as you did caused offence.--Goldsztajn (talk) 05:57, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
I still have no idea why you are offended by the shortening of the name.LedRush (talk) 15:51, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

I can't fathom your obsession with this issue. But this is my talk page and I will always have right of reply. You failed to respond to a polite request in a reasonable time while continuing to edit the talk page and ignoring the request. The request did not not assume bad faith on your behalf (ie I did not assume you intended to offend me), I simply noted it could cause confusion as the username was not written properly. I did not tinker with your edits (which implies changing their meaning), stating as such is acting in bad faith. All I replaced were your references to my username with my correct username (no other changes were made). You replied in a passive aggressive tone, indicating you would try to get my name right in the future. Rather than stating you would do as requested, you qualified your response ("try and remember"). We are on computers, copy and paste are the simplest of functions, you hardly need to "remember" my name.--Goldsztajn (talk) 23:58, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

On personal attacks in union busting[edit]

Information.svg Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.LedRush (talk) 15:50, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

There are no personal attacks, I have simply described your behaviour, which is amply evidenced at Talk:Union_busting.
"Comment on content, not on contributors."LedRush (talk) 16:07, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
I have repeatedly commented on and responded to the content of your contributions, there is ample evidence at Talk:Union_busting. I have had to comment on the nature of the content because of its effect in derailing progress on the article.--Goldsztajn (talk) 16:29, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Trade unions in Laos[edit]

The only content was "1" -- feel free to repost an article with content. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 03:32, 5 February 2009 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Goldsztajn. You have new messages at Cerejota's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Cerejota (talk) 23:13, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Caribbean trade unions[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Goldsztajn. You have new messages at TriniSocialist's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Dave Smith (talk) 01:05, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Ronnie Kasrils[edit]

The information about Ronnie Kasrils being voted off the ANC's National Executive Committee can be found here

--Herut (talk) 16:06, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reference.--Goldsztajn (talk) 04:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Eastern Block[edit]

Dear Goldsztajn,
I am currently involved into the discussion about the map of the Eastern Block. Since you seem to be interested in the subject, it we would be great if you expressed your opinion on that account. In addition, we probably can elaborate a common point of view to create (or to choose) the map that, to our understanding, would be more correct from the point of view of historical truth.
--Paul Siebert (talk) 02:44, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

I drafted up a new map for discussion on the talk page.--Goldsztajn (talk) 04:24, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Thank you Goldsztajn. The map is excellent. However, to avoid a prolonged dispute with Mosedschurte, I would accept his version, although I like your map more.
--Paul Siebert (talk) 16:00, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, but serious stylistic problems remain with the version currently being used. The map still needs further editing to conform with Wiki standards (which I've outlined on the talk page).--Goldsztajn (talk) 21:14, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Once again, I like your map more. The only problem is the Mosedschurte's position. According to my previous experience, it can be very hard to convince him. However, if you are ready for a long and hard discussion, we can try :) ...--Paul Siebert (talk) 23:53, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, I appreciate the endorsement of the work. Sadly, it has taken a month to get what are completely commonsense issues somewhat resolved with the map, so I can see the problem you raise. The map is of course reflective of the article's much larger WP:NPOV, WP:COAT, WP:SYNTH and WP:OR problems as a whole....oh and I should mention the elements of WP:PUSH and WP:WL on display on the talk page.--Goldsztajn (talk) 05:10, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
--Great talk over here. I'd like to point out that if you'd have just said "take a look at this aesthetically pleasing map format, and this helpful Wikipedia SVG map template showing use of Arial fonts for country labels, a suggested style for captions and suggested html color code for water", I'd have probably changed all of that 5 minutes later (well, more realistically, me fumbling through Photoshop, an hour later). Ditto for the inter-SSR border color. For most images I've made, if people point out some accurate way that it can be improved, I usually do so.
--As an aside, I like the map much better now after the changes (though I thought the old font was actually more clear), and I actually appreciate your suggestions. I'm not saying that to be snarky, and I thought some of them were genuinely helpful.Mosedschurte (talk) 05:43, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm glad you are now making changes to the map, I hope we can continue to improve all aspects of the article and its POV etc problems. One piece of advice: Arial is a proprietary font and hence cannot be used in SVG images on Wikipaedia.--Goldsztajn (talk) 06:00, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
I didn't realize that about Arial, and I'm glad I didn't save it as an SVG file. It's in the Wikipedia SVG Template for "Country" labels (or at least Illustrator saw it as Arial), so maybe someone should give them a heads up on that. The article itself reflects summaries of the many sources therein and also comports with the other Wikipedia individual country history articles where there is overlap (and I do think some other Wikipedia articles go overboard a bit with the Soviet bashing). If anything, for text I added, I usually tried to state things in a more neutral tone than that of most of the sources, which pretty much universally dwell on "brutal" mass murders, constant "draconian" police state measures, "genocidal" deportations and ethnic murders, and repeated anti-Semitic actions, etc. Rare exceptions occur on things such as Rakosi's nickname ("The Bald Murderer"), but that was actually his de facto nickname. I don't add text in a way to attempt to whitewash these things, bur rather, just think they should be quickly summarized (if discussed at all) in a neutral factual fashion.Mosedschurte (talk) 06:17, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Dear Goldsztajn,
To my opinion, the map issue has been successfully resolved. However, other problems still exist. The article treats the Soviet republics as separate countries annexed by Russia and, therefore, it mix the history of formation and expansion of the USSR and the history of the Eastern Bloc per se. To my opinion, the section "Countries annexed as Soviet Socialist Republics" is irrelevant and should be removed. What do you think about that?--Paul Siebert (talk) 22:10, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Paul, I've posted some new comments on the economics section, let's carry on the discussion there. Regards --Goldsztajn (talk) 12:07, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Reply to coment in WP:GL/I[edit]

I replied your comment in WP:GL/I about the University of Valle. -Andremun (talk) 23:58, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay, been busy... :) Getting on to your request now. --Goldsztajn (talk) 00:29, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I replied your new comment. Regards -Andremun (talk) 01:42, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I wanted to know how things were going. Please let me know if I can be of assistance. Regards, -Andremun (talk) 16:26, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
First draft done.--Goldsztajn (talk) 10:36, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello. I saw the draft. The comments are in the project page. Regards -Andremun (talk) 14:55, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello. I made new comments in the project page. Thanks for your work -Andremun (talk) 05:01, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello! Thank for the message in my talk page. I've already put your excellent diagram in the article. Thanks for the help. I don' know if you are interested, but I would like also to include a pair of maps. The information is in the Talk:University of Valle page. Regards -Andremun (talk) 22:54, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Goldsztajn. You have new messages at Rjanag's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Your inflammatory posts[edit]

You have accused me of getting into a "revert conflict". This is incorrect. I would appreciate it if you retract this statement. Thank you in advance.LedRush (talk) 16:12, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

My exact statement was:

Since returning you have already got into revert conflict with one editor here (given that you would be well aware there are active editors involved with this page, to come here and start deleting sections unannounced was not a good faith return).

Given this is about a set of issues related to edits I am replying at talk:union busting. Please do not edit my talk page again. Thanks.--Goldsztajn (talk) 21:18, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

[from the union busting talk page] What happened was a the proper usage of Wikipedia. I made an edit. Rich reverted. I made a new edit which tried to address both his points and mine. Rich hasn't objected. This isn't a revert conflict. Gold's inflammatory posts and ad hominem attacks belie his apparent lack of good faith.

Furthermore, I do not believe that these discussions are best made in public, but in private. For that reason, I will not respect Gold's request not to post on his wall. Additionally, I will delete posts that are intended to be only used on his wall if they are repeated elsewhere.LedRush (talk) 21:53, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I have previously requested you refer to me correctly with my full username, please do so. For the second time, do not edit my talk page.--Goldsztajn (talk) 23:23, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: Dycebot on GL/I unusual action...[edit]

You are correct. The bot was not ignoring the comments like it should have been. I'll go fix that now. Thanks for alerting me to this problem.--Dycedarg ж 18:49, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Cold war map[edit]

Dear Goldsztajn.
I am looking for a map of European blocks during Cold war. The map you created for the Eastern bloc article is nice, but some modifications are needed to introduce it into the Cold War (1947–1953) article. Could you please modify the colour of Albania and change the legend accordingly? (The time interval the article covers is 1947-53). Thank you in advance.
Best regards,
--Paul Siebert (talk) 16:13, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Paul, I'm happy to do it. Can I suggest you file a request at GL/I, where I spend a bit of time :), and give a little more detail of what you want for the legend etc. Regards... --Goldsztajn (talk) 23:15, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Thank you Goldsztajn for telling me about GL/I, I didn't know about that opportunity. That seems to be a very usefull staff. I've already sent a request.
--Paul Siebert (talk) 03:42, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you Goldsztajn for making the draft. The draft is good, however, Mosedschurte has already created the map reflecting the course of the Cold war in a global scale. Therefore, it seems to me that we need a map that would show the process of division of Europe onto two opposing blocs. To my opinion, this map would replace the existing map of Eastern bloc. In connection to that, what do you think about going back to the original map (I mean, about restricting ourselves with Europe only)? With regards to colours, everything seems correct, but the colours are too bright, and the colour difference between the Brussels countries and other NATO founders is hardly visible.
--Paul Siebert (talk) 18:46, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Dear Goldsztajn.
Unfortunately, I was right. Mosedschurte can be satisfied only when the map authored by him will be introduced into the article. Since he almost addressed all criticism, and, frankly, because the map produced by him is almost identical to the map made by you (larger font looks even better), I think we can support this change. I realise you spend enormous time to create an excellent map, I appreciate your work, however, since WP has no authorship and since yor efforts eventually lead to another good map (created by Mosedschurte), I believe you will not be offended if I support the Mosedschurte's map.
Finally, the concept has won :)
Cheers,--Paul Siebert (talk) 23:01, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

It's no surprise, but as you say, there is a concept, and that's much more important. The map still needs some minor improvements, but I think hope we can get them done easily. Again, thanks for your efforts to keep things civil.--Goldsztajn (talk) 01:32, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Glad to see that the dispute seems to be resolved. Thank you for your efforts and for your patience. Cheers,
--Paul Siebert (talk) 05:51, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Dear Goldsztajn. Thank you very much. I really appreciate it.
--Paul Siebert (talk) 04:17, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Yugoslavia's color[edit]

Hi Goldsztajn, I can't help at wondering why you changed Yugoslavia's color on the map into pink? :) I have to say I found the green far more appealing as it recognized the non-association of the SFRY from the rest of the countries that are considered part of the Eastern Bloc. This way it looks like the country was a part of the Warsaw Pact (an observer or something), instead of a leading country in the Non-Aligned Movement. What are your thoughts on changing it back to green or lighter green, though perhaps a grey (darker than the rest) or white color would be more neutral-looking? It doesn't look like it'd make much difference to User:Mosedschurte, and it would be more descriptive of the country's status. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 14:23, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi DIREKTOR, actually, it was meant to be purple! But I see your point and and will revert to green. Thanks for your inputs in the discussion. --Goldsztajn (talk) 02:11, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Animated GIF[edit]

Dear Goldsztajn,
You seem to be an expert in computer graphics, therefore I would like to know your opinion about possibility to create maps that would reflect numerous border changes in Central and Eastern Europe during XX century. How easy it is and is it needed to your opinion?
--Paul Siebert (talk) 16:23, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Paul, yes, it's possible, although it is time consuming and I don't have a lot of time to do something like that at this stage (next month or so). As for how much is it needed? Not sure...what are you thinking in terms of maps: 1938 (pre-WW2), 1948 (post-WW2), 1955 (Warsaw Pact), 1960 (Albania realignment), 1990/91 (fall of Eastern Bloc, German unification) 1992 (dissolution of USSR) 1993 (Dissolution of Czechoslovakia)....dates for Yugoslavia could be contentious and very complicated (but something after 2000 would probably be easiest)....although maybe just best to stop at 1990/1. --Goldsztajn (talk) 02:25, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Thank you Goldsztajn. My question was about a possibility to do that and about your opinion on the relevance of such a map. With regards to details, let's see for the beginning how the discussion on the EB talk page will develop. At present moment, it seems to me that the most difficult task is not a creation of animated GIFs but dealing with Mosedschurte...
--Paul Siebert (talk) 03:59, 29 May 2009 (UTC)


You are invited to participate in a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#PNG better than SVG if the logo is copyrighted ?. Arteyu ? Blame it on me ! 16:35, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Urdu alphabet Graphics Lab[edit]

Just wanted to let you know that I've revived the request you started. If you can finish it that'd be great, otherwise just a notice since someone will probably edit your SVG. Thanks for the work you did :) gren グレン 19:36, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the nudge, will get back to it. --Goldsztajn (talk) 23:45, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed an error. You have "sīn" marked as "śīn". The 's' on the one on the right without the three dots doesn't need the acute accent. I am not sure how to change it since it doesn't use text attributes otherwise I'd try myself. Thanks. gren グレン 21:06, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
Good spot, sorry about that. I'm away from my computer with the files for this, will fix it once I get back to in two weeks. Sorry for the delay. --Goldsztajn (talk) 12:08, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Jean-Paul Hétu and Congress of Democratic Trade Unions (Quebec)[edit]

I expanded the article on Congress of Democratic Trade Unions (Quebec) which you created, and created an article on Jean-Paul Hétu, the second president of the organization. I thought that the current versions of both articles might be of interest to you. - Eastmain (talkcontribs) 03:42, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

3 reverts in union busting[edit]

Please be warned that you have reverted three times in the last 24 hours on the Union Busting article. Please discuss the changes in on the article's talk page.LedRush (talk) 18:20, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Please WP:AGF and WP:CIV, your three reversion accusation within 24 hours is false.
12 June: Reversion 1 Revision as of 2010-06-12T10:22:34
13 June: Reversion 1 Revision as of 2010-06-13T16:37:09
13 June: Reversion 2 Revision as of 2010-06-13T17:11:51
--Goldsztajn (talk) 19:17, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Grievance (labour)[edit]


This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Grievance (labour), and it appears to include material copied directly from

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 20:13, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Don't be silly, I would never do that...oh dear, I'm talking to a bot.--Goldsztajn (talk) 20:34, 22 September 2010 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Goldsztajn. You have new messages at Acather96's talk page.
Message added 07:44, 9 April 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

1912 Brisbane Strike[edit]


My name is Martin Davies-Roundhill, Assistant Delegate Towong Bus Depot RTBU.

I am on committee organising events to commemorate this event.

There is a facebook page for this strike and I am wondering if you set it up?

I have ben charged to set up a page myself so just want to co-ordinate that.

I see you also work for a Union, is that here in Brisbane and are yo organising anything for the date?

Cheers Martin

PS I am a newbie on Wikipedia so I trust I am doing this coerrectly!!

Martination (talk) 02:49, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Martin, welcome to wiki...there's nothing wrong with what you've done. I didn't set anything up on Facebook and I'm not in Brisbane, but it sounds like a great idea that there will be events to commerorate the strike. You can also have a look at the organised labour project on wiki, you might enjoy that too. regards --Goldsztajn (talk) 13:55, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Marian Wróbel[edit]

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

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

A tag has been placed on Marian Wróbel requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Waterfox ~talk~ 14:37, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Bit of a light trigger finger, eh? I'm working on the page, translating material from the Polish and German articles, perhaps you could have waited 30 minutes, rather than 90 seconds, before tagging.... --Goldsztajn (talk) 14:46, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Eh, sorry. To avoid this sort of issue in the future, I suggest tagging articles on which work is in progress with {{Under construction}}. — Waterfox ~talk~ 14:54, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for removing the speedy delete tag.--Goldsztajn (talk) 15:03, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for creating this article. Please note that if you were to add few more inline references, the article would be eligible for front-line exposure (WP:DYK) at T:TDYK. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:40, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you for the barnstar. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 17:09, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

KCTU redirect[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Goldsztajn. You have new messages at Mlaffs's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Yes, it was relevant as background[edit]

So put it back where you found it. --Pawyilee (talk) 03:19, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

This comment belongs on the discussion page of the article, not my talk page, happy to continue there if you wish. --Goldsztajn (talk) 23:38, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Standard Rule[edit]

Not sure if you are aware of this, but changing another person's post or edit is severely frowned upon and it is a general rule you do not do that here at Wikipedia. I will let it slide this one time as you appear to be new, but please don't do it again. - NeutralhomerTalk • 00:54, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Please, WP:AGF. I made a thoroughly uncontroversial correction to your comment, it's within wiki practice WP:TPO. I ask people to use my username in full. BTW, appearances are deceiving, been here quite awhile.--Goldsztajn (talk) 18:56, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
Been here a little longer than you (didn't bother looking at your original sign-on date, just the edit count), so I know the rules and I know it is severely frowned upon to edit any person's post, no matter what, for any reason. Just don't do it again. Oh and I am AGF'ing, if I wasn't, I would have just issued a warning. - NeutralhomerTalk • 00:07, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
WP:TPO "Editing – or even removing – others' comments is sometimes allowed. But you should exercise caution in doing so, and normally stop if there is any objection." I'm happy to comply with your request not to edit your comments in future; similarily, please use my username in full. Thanks. BTW, if you wish to be perceived as WP:AGF, lose the passive aggression...telling someone you would have issued a warning is not WP:CIVIL. --Goldsztajn (talk) 05:58, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
Once you get to know me here at Wikipedia, you will realize, I use passive-aggression alot. :) It's better than using regular aggression and less block-inducing too. :) - NeutralhomerTalk • 06:07, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
OK, that made me smile. Kudos. Let's try and reach a consensus on the KCTU redirect. --Goldsztajn (talk) 06:19, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
Roger Wilco on that. Oh and you don't have to post a talkback notice each time, I have you on my watchlist. Plus, when you post to my talkpage, I get an email (something new from Wikipedia, check your perferences page to set it up for yourself). - NeutralhomerTalk • 07:50, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 12[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Adolf Sturmthal, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Avon (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, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Cecil Hackett[edit]

I hope you intend to add more material. With just what is there , it would be very difficult to defend his notability. DGG ( talk ) 23:35, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Annika Strandhäll[edit]

Hello, Goldsztajn. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Annika Strandhäll, for deletion because it's a biography of a living person that lacks references. If you don't want Annika Strandhäll to be deleted, please add a reference to the article.

If you don't understand this message, you can leave a note on my talk page.

Thanks, st170etalk 15:23, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 16:17, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Egyptian Democratic Labour Congress[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Egyptian Democratic Labour Congress has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No references or claim to notability.

While all constructive 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JDDJS (talk) 23:29, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Goldsztajn. 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. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Goldsztajn. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)