User talk:Goltak

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

Hussein Darbouk[edit]

Greetings Goltak, Just wanted to let you know that I saw that you created the new article Hussein Darbouk--It would be great if you could also add references to the related article Al Maya.

Have a good day!Amy Z (talk) 19:15, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to WikiProject Germany[edit]

Flag of Germany.svg

Welcome, Goltak, to the WikiProject Germany! Please direct any questions about the project to its talk page. If you create new articles on Germany-related topics, please list them at our announcement page and tag their talk page with our project template {{WikiProject Germany}}. A few features that you might find helpful:

  • The project's Navigation box points to most of the pages in the project that might be of use to you.
  • Most of the important discussions related to the project take place on the project's main talk page; you may find it useful to watchlist it.
  • We've developed a number of guidelines for names, titles, and other things to standardize our articles and make interlinking easier that you may find useful.

Here are some tasks you can do:

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me or any of the more experienced members of the project, and we'll be very happy to help you. Again, welcome, and thank you for joining this project! Agathoclea (talk) 23:31, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Fips Asmussen[edit]

Can't believe he hasn't been covered yet. Good job! I've tagged the article for now, but will get to work editing it soon. noisy jinx huh? 19:19, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Your recent edits[edit]

Information.svg Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button Insert-signature.png or Button sig.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 17:24, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Der Stechlin and Oxford Companion to German Literature[edit]

This article seems to be essentially the same text as the referenced article, which is marked as copyrighted by OUP. AllyD (talk) 21:05, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Fixed. Goltak (talk) 21:49, 21 December 2011 (UTC)


Vote on Syrian Talk page[edit]

I set up a vote on whether to include alqaeda in the infobox.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2011–2012_Syrian_uprising Sopher99 (talk) 20:33, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

The 47 soldiers executed[edit]

It doesn't matter if they werent part of the FSA yet, I never said they were part of the FSA, but they WERE part of the collective syrian opposition the moment they decided to rebel. Every major media outlet and organisation is calling them defectors and the casualties section in the article clearly states army defectors. It would be more wrong to present them as loyalist fatalities, they stopped being loyalists the moment they decided to defect. You should take a look at this [1] opposition website. It lists all civilians and FSA/military allied with the opposition. And on their military fatalities list they clearly list all of the 47 soldiers killed. Thus the opposition themselves have declared them part of their movement. In any case they most certainly weren't loyalists. EkoGraf (talk) 04:37, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

That's the main problem there, what you just told me. All you are saying, about them going home, them not being part of the opposition officialy, sunni soldiers killed while fighting for the government weren't actually loyalists cause they didn't get a chance to defect and such is simple personal speculation on your part and borderline OR (Original research). Wikipedia is based on facts and sources and the fact (sources) is both the opposition and the international media has termed them as defectors and part of the opposition (opposition has put them on their list of military alligned to the opposition). Anything farther than that is your personal opinion which in all due respect doesn't count on Wikipedia, only sources. We edit per the sources and only per the sources (which all say they were defectors), please put your personal feelings and thoughts on the side. Please stick to the basic Wikipedia rule, verifiability, and please don't go in the direction of OR and personal POV. Friendly advice. Thank you. EkoGraf (talk) 20:16, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Abdul Rahman Orfalli for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Abdul Rahman Orfalli 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/Abdul Rahman Orfalli 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. Basalisk inspect damageberate 12:26, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Copyright violation[edit]

Hi Goltak, Thanks for your work to improve Houma massacre, but beware of cutting and pasting large amounts of text, as you did here.[2] This falls under WP:COPYVIO; it's important that we re-write our sources in our own words. Let me know if you have any questions. Khazar2 (talk) 21:19, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Government death toll[edit]

I have removed from the main article on the conflict the death toll provided by the government because it was becoming out-of-date. The last civilian deaths number was back from March, 3,600, the last rebel deaths number was back from September of last year, 700, since than they only sporadicly updated that, and the last number for security forces deaths was a week ago, when it was approaching 4,000 and came in line with the SOHR number. If a new and fresh number is provided by the government I will add it. For now the numbers are SOHR, VDC, UN, Shuhada and the LCC. But I'm thinking of removing the LCC number because they have not provided a solid overall number for two months now. Will have to think about that some more. EkoGraf (talk) 18:39, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

SOHR number[edit]

The SOHR number of defectors dead is highly unrealistic given what other sources say. Two other opposition sources have listed by name well over 1,700 dead defectors, while SOHR has just only spouted out a number, without any fatalities list. A complete fatalities list provided by Shuhada and the VDC trump SOHR in that point. 2 sources vs 1. It's misleading promoting SOHR's number of 870 dead defectors when two other sources have forwarded a complete list of over 1,700. SOHR isn't really reliable anyway on the point of tracking rebel fatalities given that they themselves have declared they count rebels who were not defectors as civilians. That's why the note is in the infobox, to warn people about the inclusion of rebels in the civilian toll. And not just warn them about SOHR but the others as well given they are also only counting defectors as rebels, but it seems Shuhada and the VDC are much more thorough than SOHR on that point. The only reason SOHR's number of government troops dead is being used is because recently SOHR's number has overlapped with the government tally. EkoGraf (talk) 15:53, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

It was stated that the opposition groups count civilians as rebels, long before SOHR openly admitted it, by many political analysts and journalists (sources provided in the article: al jazeera, al arabiya, al akhbar, rt, etc). So what if one is allegedly in contact with the Syrian goverment? All journalists are in contact with them to relay their point of view. Of course the other opposition groups are counting as well, both Shuhada and the VDC, it is simple and pure logic and math if you look at the numbers. Please look at it from a neutral standpoint. The VDC claims 13,328 civilians and the rest defectors, the Shuhada claims 17,000+ civilians and the rest defectors. And they say those numbers are the total number of all people killed by government troops. But where are the rebels that weren't defectors in those numbers if those are the totals? Simply put they are all doing it, otherwise they are lacking at least 2,000 or more civilians turned rebels in their totals, which they are not because they say those are the definite totals. In my opinion it wouldn't be neutral and it would be highly misleading for the readers not to state that the opposition is counting certain rebels as civilians. The fact is if you look at it realisticly the opposition is confirming it itself by saying that the numbers the other activist groups are saying are the definite totals (minus the government troops) and at the same time are confirming that thousands of civilians are turning into rebel fighters. EkoGraf (talk) 19:15, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Besides, forgot one more thing, isn't the LCC openly stating in its reports when a rebel fighter (any fighter) dies and are counting them in their totals? And, per the LCC itself, they and the VDC are coordinating their counts. I think that says it all. EkoGraf (talk) 19:21, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

No problem. I don't think there is a need for a Khan Sheikoun article. The fight for the town was short (2 days) and, for Syrian standards, bloodless (just 6 dead). We should try and not make too many articles on non-notable events and small skirmishes. Due to already being several of these articles me and Elsworth were already talking about merging some of them into unified articles or redirecting them to the timeline articles due to a large number of them being just on or two sentences big. EkoGraf (talk) 20:06, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Halfstar Hires.png The Half Barnstar
Syrian Uprising! Fanzine999 (talk) 17:32, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Treymseh massacre[edit]

Already made the page. Sopher99 (talk) 22:16, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Damascus[edit]

You reverted all of my edits what's the meaning of it? I listed the events in encyclopydic and chronological order and fixed the references and you reverted it ALL. :( EkoGraf (talk) 19:29, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

You reverted them all and I already sorted it in chronological order. Be more careful in the future please. EkoGraf (talk) 19:33, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Damascus bombing move proposal[edit]

Hi, could you voice your opinion on this matter Talk:18_July_2012_Damascus_suicide_bombing. I don´t want to get into another edit war with that "editor" and consensus about it should be easily made. EllsworthSK (talk) 16:43, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

August 2012[edit]

Edit Summaries[edit]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed your recent edit to 2011–2012 Damascus clashes does not have an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks!- 220 of Borg 19:02, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Hassan al-Ibrahim[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Hassan al-Ibrahim has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Nothing notable about him. WP:NOTMEMORIAL

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 {{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. Yazan (talk) 11:23, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Rajeh Mahmoud[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

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

WP:NOTMEMORIAL

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 {{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. Yazan (talk) 11:24, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Mohammed al-Awwad[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Mohammed al-Awwad has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:NOTMEMORIAL

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 {{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. Yazan (talk) 11:25, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Closing remarks on splitting procedure for "Battle of Al-Qusayr"[edit]

Dear user, you have participated in the splitting procedure for the article "Battle of Al-Qusayr". Please check the talk page of this article for closing remarks at Talk:Battle_of_Al-Qusayr#Split. Thank you.Greyshark09 (talk) 08:16, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Ali Khalifa el-Zaidi[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Ali Khalifa el-Zaidi has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Wgolf (talk) 03:04, 3 March 2015 (UTC)