User talk:Koavf/Archive005

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
An icon of a file folder
User talk:Koavf archives
001 81 topics (2005-03-05/2006-03-07) 63kb
002 56 topics (2006-03-07/2006-08-08) 44kb
003 47 topics (2006-08-08/2006-09-14) 48kb
004 60 topics (2006-09-14/2007-06-05) 73kb
005 48 topics (2007-06-05/2007-08-21) 80kb
006 35 topics (2007-08-21/2007-11-30) 73kb
007 42 topics (2007-11-30/2008-02-19) 44kb
008 34 topics (2008-02-19/2008-03-26) 46kb
009 38 topics (2008-03-26/2008-04-19) 38kb
010 39 topics (2008-04-19/2008-05-31) 60kb
011 88 topics (2008-05-31/2008-08-04) 88kb
012 40 topics (2008-08-04/2008-09-11) 61kb
013 46 topics (2008-09-11/2009-04-13) 47kb
014 60 topics (2009-04-13/2009-09-29) 50kb
015 37 topics (2009-09-29/2009-11-21) 46kb
016 22 topics (2009-11-21/2010-01-04) 22kb
017 49 topics (2010-01-04/2010-02-18) 54kb
018 63 topics (2010-02-18/2010-03-23) 63kb
019 44 topics (2010-03-23/2010-05-02) 48kb
020 46 topics (2010-05-02/2010-06-28) 56kb
021 46 topics (2010-06-28/2010-09-01) 71kb
022 54 topics (2010-09-01/2010-10-14) 43kb
023 49 topics (2010-10-14/2010-11-26) 43kb
024 54 topics (2010-11-26/2011-01-22) 37kb
025 61 topics (2011-01-22/2011-06-08) 37kb
026 43 topics (2011-06-08/2011-07-12) 39kb
027 44 topics (2011-07-12/2011-08-15) 48kb
028 44 topics (2011-08-15/2011-10-08) 42kb
030 73 topics (2011-11-25/2012-02-17) 62kb
031 47 topics (2012-02-17/2012-03-14) 74kb
032 40 topics (2012-03-14/2012-04-15) 39kb
033 41 topics (2012-04-15/2012-05-01) 43kb
034 42 topics (2012-05-01/2012-05-30) 38kb
035 58 topics (2012-05-30/2012-07-27) 73kb
036 44 topics (2012-07-27/2012-09-03) 87kb
037 41 topics (2012-09-03/2012-10-26) 61kb
038 47 topics (2012-10-26/2012-12-01) 111kb
039 56 topics (2012-12-01/2013-02-05) 78kb
040 63 topics (2013-02-05/2013-05-14) 69kb
041 71 topics (2013-05-14/2013-09-04) 135kb
042 81 topics (2013-09-04/2014-01-09) 109kb
043 53 topics (2014-01-09/2014-05-15) 69kb
044 62 topics (2014-05-15/2014-09-17) 92kb
045 123 topics (2014-09-17/2015-05-16) 156kb
046 66 topics (2014-05-16/2015-11-11) 73kb
047 91 topics (2015-11-11/2016-09-30) 113kb
048 43 topics (2016-09-30/2017-01-09) 74kb
049 67 topics (2017-01-09/2017-07-21) 96kb
050 35 topics (2017-07-21/2017-09-11) 75kb
051 50 topics (2017-09-11/2017-11-25) 83kb
052 82 topics (2017-11-25/2018-06-13) 106kb
053 99 topics (2018-06-13/2019-01-01) 219kb
Current discussion

Archive
Archives
1 81 topics (2005-03-05 - 2006-03-07)
2 56 topics (2006-03-07 - 2006-08-08)
3 47 topics (2006-08-08 - 2006-09-14)
4 60 topics (2006-09-14 - 2007-06-05)

Please do not modify other users' comments or formatting.

Non-free use disputed for Image:Page and Plant No Quarter DVD.jpg

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Page and Plant No Quarter DVD.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 00:13, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Speedy Delete Tags

When you put a speedy deletion tag on an article, such as you did on Non si sevizia un paperino, remember to include a reason it should be deleted. This can be done by typing the reason into the template (example: {{d-article is patent nonsense}} or by using a pre-formatted template, such as {{db-spam}}. Clamster 00:46, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Speedy Delete AllAfrica.com

You tagged AllAfrica.com for speedy deletion per WP:SPAM, but provided no explanation. I'm contesting this as I don't think it's spam. In addition the subject is notable, see Alexa data. It does need references, sourcing, wikifying etc but not deletion. --Javit 01:06, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Now we have external sources --Javit 01:47, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Your recent edit to A D D (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 01:23, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of The Enterff Language

It's okay with me to delete it. /Since so few people know about it; it's not an important article. Go ahead and delete it!

Thanks,

Meldshal42 01:44, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Page and Plant No Quarter DVD.jpg

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Page and Plant No Quarter DVD.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:06, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Blind reverting

Please stop Please stop blind reverting my edits (e.g. on the Sahara conflict template and the links page listed above.) There is no point to it and it's only going to escalate things. If you have an intelligible reason to change things, you can at least post on talk. If this doesn't stop, we'll have to seek mediation or arbitration on the relevant articles; I'm not going to edit-war with you. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 15:57, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

The first thing you did after the unblock is to start reverting edits by dozens of editors to the miserable state they were when you left. If you want to restart the edit-warring coupled with empty lengthy discussions, I think the people who believed you would be useful again will soon find they were mistaken. Discuss instead of reverting, and no one has plenty of time to engage in those usual lengthy diatribes.--A Jalil 16:06, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Flag template

Why? Why did you break the flag template? Did you even read the talk or the page itself? Why would you put a map on the flag template? -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 17:23, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I removed the flag of SADR from the WS related template because it does not belong there. Western Sahara does not have a flag.--A Jalil 17:29, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes, it does See Flag of Western Sahara. Even if that wasn't true, you ignored my simple and direct question: why would you put a map in a flag template? -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 17:31, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I answered you but you don't read: Western Sahara does not have a flag. There should not be a flag template for Western Sahara in the first place.--A Jalil 17:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
This is ridiculous Okay, so why would you insert a map? This is the third time I've asked you, Jalil. How does that make any sense? If it shouldn't have a flag template, there are ways to go about it, but this is not one of them. If you keep on editing like this, we'll have to seek mediation or some kind of admin action from WP:Point. If you can present a rational case for inserting a map into a flag template, please do, and I'll join you. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 17:39, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
For the n:th time I will repeat again: Western Sahara does not have a flag. There should not be a flag template for Western Sahara in the first place. So it should not have a flag template. Please call on admins to look at this, I am not wasting more time on it.--A Jalil 17:43, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletions

Please give reasons for speedy deletion. Sometimes it's obvious than an article is nonsense, but this isn't always the case. --Wafulz 20:12, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Sahara Conflict template

Why? I would like you to justify why you claim that the Spanish Empire reference is "ridiculous" when it it obviously applicable, and why you deleted some clearly relevant links to the Greater Morocco ideology and the Intifadas. Feel free to do so here or on the talk there. If you keep on blind-reverting back and forth, I'll have to seek some kind of intervention on this page. Notice on the talk there, I've left several posts that you've ignored. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 19:22, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

  • First, it is miserable to see that Colonial with a capital C is pro-Morocco POV. Even Spaniards consider those wars and that period as Colonial.
  • The regions occupied by Spain during the Colonial period were not legally part of the Spanish Empire, but part of Spanish Morocco, to distinguish it from the part of Morocco that was under French Colonial rule. So the territory in question is Spanish Morocco not the Spanish Empire.
  • The term intifada is used to mean a popular uprising of the population on a daily basis and with a an important number of participants, as was the case with the Palestinian intifada. What was happening in Layoune is sporadic riots by less than 40 people in a very small part of Layoune, Maatallah suburb. The riots happen once in couple of months, and with sometimes even less than 10 persons. That does not qualify as an intifada and should not be part of the template.
  • As to some admin's intervention, I am more than happy with that.
  • Again, the talk pages on Western Sahara are and should be no different from other articles. write your input and wait for others to give their view. No one has plenty of time to be sitting all the time in front of the PC to answer you immediately.--A Jalil 20:16, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
What?
  • What on earth does your first point have to do with anything?
  • See Spanish Empire. What do you mean they weren't legally a part of the Spanish Empire? Weren't they under the authority of the king?
  • These intifadas are still ongoing and you're redefining the term "intifada" to exclude them. Clearly, they are relevant, aren't they?
  • Okay.
  • Okay. I don't know what you want me to say to something like that. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 20:21, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Try writing like an adult mate. Jalil is making, with respect to hte issue of legal status, a very specific point. The Spanish North African territories - one of specific historical and legal importance that if you were (as is not the case) well informed you would have some sense of - (excluding the Medieval territories such as Melilla et Ceuta) were "protectorates under international law, rather than annexations. See the difference between Algeria on one hand, and Morocco and Tunisia on the other. Rather different (if often theoretical) legal situations. And utterly different reality than the wider Spanish Empire dating from their Age d'Or.
Your usage of intefada is amusing; without foundation or any sense of actual language ( you don't have any Arabic, that is to be sure ) usage, but amusing. American college students, so very excitable.
As for his critique, well, if history is an example, you're an ideologue without even the poor excuse of real experience. collounsbury 23:43, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

CSD Notes

I saw that you listed a page as recreated material here. Instead of typing it like {{db|Re-created deleted content}} use the proper template for reposting which is {{db-repost}}. You may want to check out the correct speedy deletion templates. Thanks and if you need any help/have questions ect, contact me on my talk page! SuperBall53 00:57, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Of course! Anytime! Thanks for not being mad that I corrected you! Here is a barnstar
Original Barnstar.png The Original Barnstar
Thank you for understanding my comments! SuperBall53 / [[User talk:SuperBall53|Talk]] 01:03, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Kirsten (given name)

You were a little quick to blow this away. I can't clean up disambig pages by splitting them if you are going to claim they have duplicate entries before I have a chance to save both pages, and I can't save them at exactly the same time. Please read the edit descriptions, and allow human editors to do their work. Happy editing! Chris the speller 02:00, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

You asked: Why Kirsten (given name) instead of Kirsten (name)? Not 100% sure, but the (given name) and (surname) seem to be in vogue, not that (name) is officially deprecated or anything. The (given name) qualifier more closely matches the suggested section "People with the given name Title" that is in MoS:DAB, and matches the predominant category "Given names". To prevent a hodgepodge of entries with Kirsten as given name, then surname, then given name, it makes sense to put them in separate articles. A reader looking for a surname would probably not want to look through all the given name entries, and there are cases where the onomastics are different for the given name and the surname, so having them in one article might not be appropriate. In the case of Kirsten, I don't know the onomastics for the surname, and there also might be enough surname entries later to warrant moving them to Kirsten (surname). Having the given names at Kirsten (name) would complicate things at that point. Just my opinion, there might be other opinions available at the MoS:DAB talk page. It may turn out to be a good idea to change the guideline to specify when each qualifier should be used. BTW, above, I should have said "allow human editors time to do their work"; that may have come across as being a little harsh the way I put it. Chris the speller 04:31, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Mediation

Koavf, regarding your comments on AN/I, I'll try and help in the dispute if you want some extra assistance. These are the main questions about the dispute:

  • What is the dispute about?
  • Is it an edit war or a move war?
  • Are personal attacks involved, and how many users are personally attacking one another??
  • How can the dispute be resolved amicably?

If you can answer some/all of these questions, it would be much appreciated. --SunStar Net talk 11:35, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
  • There are a variety of disputes, but the most immediate one is the dispute about the move.
  • Again, the most immediate issue is the move(s).
  • Juiced lemon and I haven't had any personal attacks as far as I'm concerned.
  • The page needs to be moved back to Foreign relations of Western Sahara (its original name), and the proper process for moving (WP:RM), including discussion, needs to be engaged. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 21:16, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Blocked

In accordance with the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Koavf, I have blocked you for 24 hours for violating your revert parole at List of unrecognized countries ([1] and [2]). You are restricted to one revert per page per day for one year, which you broke by reverting twice on said article. Please refrain from edit warring in the future. Cheers, Sean William @ 04:17, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject African Union/to do

Information icon.svg

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Wikipedia:WikiProject African Union/to do, by Warlordjohncarter, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Wikipedia:WikiProject African Union/to do fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason:

Page was included in debate to delete parent project, but mistakenly not deleted with it. John Carter 16:09, 13 June 2007 (UTC)


To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Wikipedia:WikiProject African Union/to do, 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. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Wikipedia:WikiProject African Union/to do itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 16:18, 13 June 2007 (UTC)


What are you doing?

Please stop it See Talk:MENA. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 18:50, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

  • I am removing Malta from that list because it is a European country and not North-African no belonging to the Middle-East.
  • I know companies that count Saudi-Arabia with Europe further to certain economic criteria.
  • We are talking about a strict geo-political description and not how the WB sees the world.
  • You may contact them and ask them to correct that info because it is wrong
  • And, In my view, you should keep a little cool.
Thanks - wikima

No time

For mediation, I'll go through those diffs though. - Francis Tyers · 15:53, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

For Smara you'll need a source or two on those "intifada"s - Francis Tyers · 15:55, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

In general, you'd probably have less trouble if you added more citations/references. You probably already know this, but Google Scholar is quite good, as is JSTOR (if you have access). - Francis Tyers · 16:13, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Block

You have once again violated the term of your parole. I have, therefore, issued a 72h block on this account. Regards, Signaturebrendel 21:45, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Skadi

I respectfully ask you to undo the move for several reasons.

  1. Moving a page without any discussion is extremely bad form.
  2. The new name is entirely incorrect since it is either A.R.S.R. "Skadi" (the name of the article you moved) or Skadi. That is what the club calls itself.

Thanks in advance. Nomen NescioGnothi seauton 19:27, 1 July 2007 (UTC) <moved from my talk page Nomen NescioGnothi seauton 19:36, 1 July 2007 (UTC)>

  • Hello While I would be fine moving the page somewhere, moving it back to its former name is not ideal, as it included abbreviations without spaces and quotations. If you have a better suggested name, feel free to post it on WP:RM and the talk page. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 19:30, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Nonsense. It's official name is the one you have changed. There is a reason I chose it. Second, the abreviation story is silly in light of the previous and also would mean you should have changed it to Algemene Studenten Roeivereniging "Skadi". Again I ask you to undo your edit since it was the official designation chosen by the club. Nomen NescioGnothi seauton 19:36, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Nonsense? The name of the club is definitely not A.R.S.R. "Skadi." The name of the club is Algemene Rotterdamse Studenten Roeivereniging and its nickname is "Skadi." There are no other articles that have a name like A.R.S.R. "Skadi" and for good reason. If you wanted to move it to something else, that might make sense, but since "Algemene Rotterdamse Studenten Roeivereniging" is the name of the team, I can't think of a better place for its article to be. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 19:40, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Are you familiar with the club? If not then please listen to a former member. The club is called A.R.S.R. "Skadi" and it stands for Comprehensive Student Rowing CLub Skadi. If you disagree you might take it up with the club which uses A.R.S.R. "Skadi" in its correspondence. Thank you for cooperating. Nomen NescioGnothi seauton 19:52, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Sure Nomen, I have no doubt that the name is used, even commonly. Note, however, that you yourself used two different names: A.R.S.R. "Skadi" and A.R.S.R. Skadi. Naming conventions would require that the article not be named A.R.S.R. "Skadi" and that's the only reason I moved it; not out of some agenda to keep it at its present name. Again, if you have a better name in mind, feel free to post on the talk page or WP:RM. 19:55, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
I corected my mistake above since you interpret that as acknowlegement you are right. Again you fail to address my argument that A.R.S.R. "Skadi" is the designation the club uses in their contact with other parties. One would think the club knows what it should be called. FYI I have requested your erroneous move to be undone. Nomen NescioGnothi seauton 20:00, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Page and Plant No Quarter DVD.jpg

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Page and Plant No Quarter DVD.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:37, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Issue (BetacommandBot)

Third time's a charm Image:Page and Plant No Quarter DVD.jpg has been tagged three times, but a fair use rationale is given. What's up? -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 00:48, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

there is no FUR on that image. Betacommand (talkcontribsBot) 00:50, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Huh? The tag under "Licensing" reads "This image is of a DVD cover, and ...qualifies as fair use..." How is that not sufficient? (Could you respond on my talk; otherwise, I will not see this.) -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 04:28, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
If you continue to read it says To the uploader: please add a detailed fair use rationale for each use, as described on Wikipedia:Image description page, as well as the source of the work and copyright information., A guideline on writing rationales can be found here 04:36, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Justin (koavf)

  • Hey, Justin (koavf), I'm not being snide with this question, but can you explain to me why it's important to have J.R.'s name's be formatted as J. R. in a Wikipedia title (with a space in between J. and R.) instead of J.R., when his name usually has no space in between it, such as at this site and this site? I see that your reason for moving the J.R. Chandler and Babe Carey article, as well as the J.R. Chandler article is naming conventions. But I point out that J.R.'s name of the show All My Children is mostly spelled J.R. among viewers of the show and among official soap opera commentators (with no space between it), even at official sites.

Also, this is also not a snide question (I state that because the tone could be taken the wrong way), but do you feel that I should change articles that spell a name as J.R. (without a space between the name J.R.) to J. R. instead (which actually has a space in it)? Flyer22 12:32, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Thanks for clarifying. I haven't read over the entire article of Wikipedia's naming conventions format yet, so does this apply to the rest of an article, such as a plot summary as well? If so, which I assume it does, judging by the introduction of the J. R. Chandler and Babe Carey article in which User: Elonka formatted, then I will re-word the J. R. Chandler and Babe Carey article to meet Wikipedia's naming conventions format, if it applies to the plot summary and the rest of an article as well.

Let me know. Flyer22 15:08, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Renaming of NFL Draft

I see you have moved all of the NFL Draft pages to National Football League Draft (moved 1998 NFL Draft to 1998 National Football League Draft: Full name). I can not locate discussion to justify this move of an entire series, however I can say that after countless hours of personally repairing the series of pages full of redirects you have just created several more. I have edited the NFL Draft Template accordingly however now the task of cleaning up several if not all of the NFL Draft pages, Player pages, and NFL Articles which linked to these Draft Pages remains and will not be easily edited by a single template. Can you please cite discussion that warranted this move or justifies it? If so, my apologies, if not I encourage you to revert the moves or help with the massive endeavor required in the cleanup of these redirects. Slysplace | talk 21:34, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I have also posted my concern similarly for review on the Wikiproject American football discussion page. Slysplace | talk 21:50, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
It's not just the NFL Draft page, it's many of the individual yearly draft pages, and the player pages which linked to the draft year they were picked. Also note once a paged is moved the what links here will change, it's what linked to the page before it was moved. Slysplace | talk 16:51, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I still have some small items on my personal todo list within the draft page series, I'll try to catch the redirects within the series. The Player pages are a whole other issue that hopefully others can catch. Slysplace | talk 21:15, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
OK SIMPLE FIX for most player pages (as many only have draft links in the Player info box) I've edited and fixed the redirect in the Player Infobox Template, Now there are fewer redirects! Slysplace | talk 21:26, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Just a note that Draft stub Template also had to be edited to reflect the multiple page moves. I've fixed most of the draft sereies pages at this point as well. Page moves of this scale do cause much work for others. Slysplace | talk 01:03, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
No offence but I would have rather seen your work reverted. I find that I've been sitting here for half a day easily cleaning up some minor redirects in the series I've been working on for 3 months. But yet each edit reveals another series of pages in need of redirect cleanup. I've since edited 2 (maybe 3) More templates to accommodate your Moves, and now realize your changes effect the NFL Season series, the Playoff series, the super bowl series, the AFC W, AFC C, AFC E, NFC W, NFC E, etc..... series. You have created so many redirects from NFL -> National Football Leagues it's UNBELIEVABLE. Might I suggest you divert your editing time to cleaning up some of this mess. Slysplace | talk 02:40, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
In reply to redirects: I agree that double redirects are a bit more serious, however I also feel a standard (single) redirect or disambiguous link is just as harmful, having some experience in web development over the years it's my opinion that any extra work for the server (now matter how it's programmed to respond) is indeed extra work for the server and hence clogs up processing time. As for the market "Just figuring out" I feel your doing a disservice to those editors who have taken the time to cleanup multiple articles because it was the decision of a projects group effort. Good articles, seldom have "Redirects" single or double, Featured articles don't have them at all. Because someone most likely by hand edited them, confirmed them, cleaned them, and fixed them. Someone like me, So while I may have a personal and vested interest in the series of NFL pages you moved due to the above type of editing, please keep in mind that it's the months of work spent on such cleaning that make even the single redirect an annoyance, not only to me but obviously from the messages on your talk page to others as well. I in no means meant you ill will, your edits are not inconsistent, irrelevant nor vandalistic, positive additions and edits are what makes a wiki work I just wanted you to understand that often times they cause more work. Personally my work on the NFL Draft page series was 99% complete and you obviously understand my frustration

In the spirit of fair play and taking your advice however I have been approved to use AutoWikiBrowser, and have started to prepare a list of find and replace search terms. In closing I guess I would reply lastly to your question of where I would need your help to edit alongside me with: thank you, should I find a need for assistance with AWB or even a second look at my find and replace search terms your help will be greatly accepted.

J.D. Such and such

Be sure that the person in question actually puts a space in their initials before making moves. WP:COMMONNAME is the primary guideline (I know this because I made some similar moves a year or two ago and had this pointed out to me then). youngamerican (wtf?) 18:47, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

And I generally agree with most of your moves. I was just giving you a heads up that some might get reverted if people find evidence that the given person/entity doesn't use a space. youngamerican (wtf?) 18:52, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Please, that wasn't curt. Look through my talk page history at how many times I've been called "cocksucker." Now that's curt. :) Beware of A.J. Styles, though, or you'll get every rasslin' fanboi on your ass. I can also speak for O.J. Mayo not using a space. Other than those two, have at it. youngamerican (wtf?) 18:57, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

King-James-Only Movement

Recently[3] you capitalized every string that contained "bibl" in the King-James-Only Movement article. This broke external links and introduced other problems that an editor working by hand would not have caused. I am going to undo your change and let you sort out the capitalization more carefully. JonHarder talk 21:38, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

UNLV Rebels

I notice you moved UNLV Runnin' Rebels basketball to the complete school name. IMHO, it should never have been moved, for the following reasons:

  • In the college athletics context, NO ONE uses the school's full name, or even "Nevada-Las Vegas". Sports media in the U.S. universally use "UNLV", as does the school itself within the athletics context.
  • While there has been no official standard established for college athletics articles, AFAIK, the de facto standard is to use the names most commonly used by U.S. sports media, which in this case is "UNLV".

Just some food for thought. — Dale Arnett 15:37, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

L.A. Woman vs L. A. Woman

Regarding this move, which naming conventions are you referring to? The naming conventions for albums (WP:ALBUM#Naming and WP:NC#Album titles and band names) don't mention anything supporting the move. In practice the naming conventions for albums are to use the actual album name, with some minor constraints (mainly normalizing capitalization, but not punctuation). I see now that the front cover of the album says "L.A.Woman", so it might be that the article should really be renamed to that. --PEJL 22:05, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

EJ Wells

You made a move to EJ Wells being E. J. Wells. His name is EJ, those are not initials. So it is not E.J. or E. J. it is simply EJ. Thank you65.13.237.254 20:54, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Move

I see that you move all the NBA finals name to its full name. Then can you move the NBA playoffs and nba season as well. Thanks. Chris! my talk 21:42, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

J.R. Chandler (J. R. Chandler)

Koavf, I know that we already discussed it, but I bring it up again, because the character of J.R. Chandler on the show All My Children really doesn't put a space in between his initials, and, as I pointed out earlier, it's usually not spelled that way by the soap opera media for his character. And although I was half-discontent and half-okay with the move of the J.R. Chandler and Babe Carey article to J. R. Chandler and Babe Carey, or the move of the J.R. Chandler article to J. R. Chandler, I feel that it's best that "J. R.'s" name be titled under J.R., with no space in between his initials of J and R. His name is sometimes spelled JR Chandler, and most of the time...it's spelled J.R. Chandler, but I never see it spelled with a space in between his initials. And fans of the show All My Children either spell it as J.R. Chandler or JR Chandler. Of course, respond to me when you can on this. Flyer22 00:21, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Thanks for the move-back, Justin. Flyer22 00:41, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Here's two more links in which showcase that J.R.'s name is spelled J.R. or JR by the soap opera media and within the show. [4][5] But moving it back should definitely be spelled as J.R., rather than JR. It's only spelled JR when soap opera columnists or soap opera magazines become lazy in adding the periods in between his initials of J and R. Flyer22 00:56, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

List of sovereign states

Sorry about Western Sahara. Only after the change, I realized that copying as for the other entries is not always correct. I should have made the suggestion to move Western Sahara to the aditional list separately altogether. Please, see the talk page of the article. (Also, if you could, please continue talking there, so I won't lose track of you in case you reply). Thank you.:Dc76 16:02, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Mass page moving

While I can completely understand being bold, you need to stop and think before you make some of the page moves that you've made. Not everything is abbreviated simply because it's shorter - in some cases (UNLV Runnin' Rebels basketball) you wrongly assumed that the spelled-out version was the correct version, and in other cases (NHL video game series), your move changed the meaning of the title (NHL video game series would refer to an article about all different series of video games pertaining to the National Hockey League - the old title would refer to EA Sports' specific NHL franchise of video games). In every case, you're almost certainly throwing out all sorts of naming standards that you haven't bothered to check. If you're going to move pages, fine, but make sure that you're actually making an improvement before you make those moves. --fuzzy510 02:01, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

That's not how it works at all, actually. The athletic departments set out a specific way that the university should be referred to in the athletic realm. That's how you have the University of California, Los Angeles become the UCLA Bruins, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University becomes the Virginia Tech Hokies, et cetera. There are a total of three division I institutions which use "college" or "university" in their official athletic title: Boston College, Boston University (because the two could be confused by simply saying "Boston") and the College of Charleston. Everyone else uses a shortened name.
In addition, before you go any further, you need to check the respective naming standards. Not everything needs to be spelled out - there's even a section in the naming standards that says to go by the known name, not just the spelled-out name by default. By ignoring this, you've moved hundreds of pages that previously conformed to the ice hockey WikiProject's standard of abbreviating league names and caused them to have to fix everything. Not to mention the work undone for the various basketball and football league pages, where the abbreviated names are far more common than the spelled-out name. When the logo for the league itself (NBA, WNBA, NFL, NHL, MLS) abbreviates the name, it's a huge indicator that the reference should be to that same abbreviation. Just because one article spells it out one way doesn't set a precedent that supersedes a majority of articles on the project. --fuzzy510 03:34, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
The parent page (National Football League because it is an organization with that same formal name, and because it is referred to as the "NFL" so often, we have a redirect at NFL (or a disambiguation page, more likely - I'm not actually looking right now). We have List of NFL head coaches because it's not a formal name, and the abbreviation is more appropriate because it's more common.
Also, the abbreviation standard is mentioned here. It doesn't specifically mention it for the other types of articles, but it would therefore be inferred, since otherwise it would not make sense to not abbreviate. --fuzzy510 04:21, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
It's not just the hockey project - it's really anyone involved with the different sports pages. The naming of the pages wasn't done in a haphazard manner - any naming standard, even if it was in an abbreviation, was done with consideration. It's not really fair to assume that spelling names out wasn't considered and go back and expand the article names. --fuzzy510 16:04, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
I think Koavf, by 'moving pages' without first discussing it, you've rubbed people the wrong way. I know it wasn't your intention, to do so. It's just that -moving pages- is a major edit, which requires discussion. GoodDay 16:23, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Clearly so Again, thanks for your input; no grudges here. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 04:47, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Naming Conventions

The wikipedia standard is to use the names most commonly referred to. As mentioned by fuzzy above sports leagues are more often referred to by their abbreviation not by the drawn out full name. Your example of the United Nations Security Council is not valid because the long version is what is used in their official documents whereas in sports the short versions of the league names are.--Djsasso 03:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

To answer your question why the main page isn't and the others are not. My guess is because it was decided on sports leagues to list the full official name for the main page. I am not speaking for the people who decided the standards but my guess is length of name would be an issue on some of these things. No one is going to search for these articles using the full name except maybe in the case of the main article itself. --Djsasso 04:01, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
And I do understand that, it was just my conjecture as to why it was done that way. But when ALL the major North America sports do it, did you not stop to think that maybe it was a standard practice to abbreviate like that? --Djsasso 04:13, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
The most popular name is the convention. So go ahead and move Britney Spears to Britney Jean Spears-Federline. --Howard the Duck 09:29, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Most common name, etc. If most common name was to be followed, then National Hockey League would be at NHL, etc. DJ, honestly, I just assumed that the pages were located where they were out of laziness or happenstance. Since, again, the most common name is "NHL" (or "NFL" etc.), I figured the first person to make these pages would probably make NHL All-Star Game and List of NFL head coaches simply out of inertia. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 14:44, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
I rather agree with you on the underlying question, and I think indeed that the community might, our naming conventions notwithstanding, sanction our situating sports leagues and articles including their names at the fuller titles (I've included the full titles in articles I've created about the National Hockey League, National Football League, Major Indoor Soccer League, and National Basketball Association, although I labored, as apparently you, under the impression that such usage was entirely consistent with practice), but I would, as the others, entreat you, upon the expiration of your block, not to continue to edit in contravention of an apparent (or at least presumptive) consensus. When your block expires, I, for one, will be happy to discuss the sundry sports league issues (although not the collegiate team issues, about which I disagree with you in part; I think the full university/college name should always be used in precedence to the nickname, such that I think Virginia Tech Hokies should probably be at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Hokies, but should be followed by the team "name"/nickname, such that I wouldn't think Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University athletics or Virginia Tech athletics to be a proper title) and perhaps to take the discussion to WP:NAME or WP:SPORTS, but you surely will recognize that in the meanwhile your editing and page-moving are likely to be perceived as disruptive and indeed serve only to make other editors, rightly or wrongly, less likely to listen even to those arguments that might be eminently sensible that you might make. At the very least, you should perhaps take your page-moving as having been an exercise in boldness, which, once reverted, should be followed by discussion (I know you well know all this, and I don't mean to sound high-handed, patronizing, or paternalistic; I mean only to encourage you to be a bit more circumspect, because I believe much of what you do to be beneficial to the project, and I don't want to see even more extreme sanctions levelled against you [or to see you get fed up and leave altogether]). Cheers, Joe 01:08, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks I appreciate it Joe; I'll be sure to bring it up soon. As for the NCAA stuff, apparently, there is an industry practice which is a little esoteric to me... -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 04:48, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Now why don't you move the FA Cup into Football Association Cup? That baffles me to no end. --Howard the Duck 05:28, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
There are only 24 hours in a day I certainly would have had I seen it. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 05:30, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Might as well move all UEFA pages into what UEFA means, and don't forget the FIFA pages. I'll be counting on it. --Howard the Duck 09:55, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Sure Well, again, I would have... -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 13:08, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
There's something I don't get here. You could have done it but you haven't. Why? --Howard the Duck 06:10, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Why? Because I have other priorities in my real life than editing Wikipedia. I spent dozens of hours on it last week, and I can only do so much in so much time. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 14:26, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
I do suspect you're afraid of moving non-North American related pages, that's why. --Howard the Duck 04:18, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Huh? I honestly have no idea what you're talking about or where you are going with this, "Howard." See above for instance. Whatever; I started with the NFL arbitrarily, then the NBA, then, NHL. I am not afraid of non-American leagues (e.g. I moved some Australian ones), and even if I was, again, I don't really see what the point of your hypothesis is. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 05:23, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Then I'm expecting you to move those UEFA, FIFA and FA Cup pages in the coming days. --Howard the Duck 14:43, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Right... See all over this talk page why that won't happen, Howard. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 15:13, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

(Reindent) Are you on move-block or something? After much thought the page moves were better, IMHO. --Howard the Duck 16:09, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Not quite No, I am not blocked, but the moves were contentious. I agree that they make for better titles, and I would have been happy to do so with the rest, but I'll have to talk first. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 16:12, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

juiced lemon

Who is this guy and why does he insist on throwing POV into Saharan articles? Chris 10:02, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Justin. Please weigh it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sahraoui Scout Association. Chris 12:31, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks again! Is wikima a sockpuppet? Chris 02:12, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Final warning

I am giving you one warning (and a final warning) to stop moving pages that you think are against naming conventions. Either discuss moves in talk pages, or don't move them. Your recent change of Stop, Or My Dog Will Shoot! was with consensus and without any apparent knowledge of the issue. Nor did you bother to change the occurrences of the title within the article. I can't say I'm an expert on Simpsons episodes, but reading the article, which states that it was named after a movie with a similar title, it goes to reason that the Simpson's episode was titled in a similar fashion, with the word "or" capitalized. Also, from The Simpsons website (http://www.thesimpsons.com/episode_guide/1820.htm), it also shows it is titled there. Anyhow, I'm not here to argue on this one article, I'm here to say that your massive page moves over the past week have been done haphazardly and without consensus, and in seeing the discussion above, many of the moves have been problematic. Pepsidrinka 17:36, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Right Stop! Or My Mom Will Shoot has a capitalized "or" because it is in a different sentence; this does not. The official site capitalizes everything, including solitary "a"s in a title, which is clearly not standard English. As a side note, I didn't do the sports moves per se because of a naming convention, nor did I appeal to any. The names of persons were done according to naming conventions, though, and it was in those moves I appealed to a standard. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 04:50, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Wrong. The official site does not capitalize everything, as can be seen by the episode title The Boys of Bummer. I suppose we should capitalize iPod because that goes against "standard English"? Obviously the answer to that is no, because that is how Apple spells the product name, and we should use that as the standard, not what books on English say about the first letter of a proper noun. Anyhow, point is, the problem seems to be, is that you don't seem to understand the magnitude of your changes and the problems it has caused. What you need to understand that being bold doesn't allow one to be reckless. Pepsidrinka 18:50, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Koavf/Worldguidebook

I respectfully ask you to remove Template:CSI: Crime Scene Investigation from this userpage, as it is unrelated to the CSI franchise and adds an irrelevant article to Category:CSI: Crime Scene Investigation. Thanks. Editus Reloaded 18:31, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Sure In the time that I created this, someone changed the function of this template. Right now, I can't delete it, so you can if you want, or I will when I am able. Thanks for the heads-up; otherwise, I would never have known. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 04:51, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Move issues

I have a couple of issues with your recent spate of moves:

  1. American college athletic departments use certain trademarks to refer to their teams. Like any corporation, we should be using their naming convention instead of coming up with something contrived like Southern Methodist University athletics.
  2. Your moves of pages to space-delimit the initials of personal names seem to be totally without consensus and arbitrary. You say that they are keeping the pages in line with our naming conventions, but I can't find that anywhere in WP:NAMING or its sub-pages. Can you point me to where you got that information?

Please be cautious with future moves, as it's easy for mass page-moving to be considered disruption, which is blockable. Try to achieve consensus on talk pages before simply moving without discussion. (ESkog)(Talk) 18:48, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

The standard Is here. It is neither without consensus nor arbitrary. In fact, it is in line with this pre-existing rule and consistent. How is it arbitrary? Re: the NCAA teams, I have been educated by a more experienced user, so I'll be more cautious about them in the future. Thanks. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 04:55, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Block

Stop x nuvola with clock.svg
You have been blocked from editing for a period of one week in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for disruption, massive page moves absent consensus and/or requirement by convention. Please stop. You're welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Vassyana 19:01, 7 July 2007 (UTC)}}
☑Y

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

Assuming good faith. I trust that you will assist with cleaning up the problem. While I appreciate your desire to be bold, your page moves were previously of concern. In the future, I would request that you discuss significant page moves on the relevant talk page or at the relevant WikiProject.

Request handled by: Vassyana 19:06, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Side note: I will check this in the morning/early afternoon of 2007-07-08, and can get started then and certainly that evening. I am happy to assist re-moving and a discussion about standards and practices. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 04:58, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
As an additional comment, I noted some Western Sahara/Morocco edits in the midst of some of those massive moves. I would encourage you to be cautious in editing such articles, for obvious reasons. Vassyana 19:08, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Congratulation Koavf, on your being unblocked. Though I (and others) disagreed with your 'page movements' method, I knew you meant well (good faith). GoodDay 22:39, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks all I've glanced through a few dozen of my pages moves, and all of them seem to have been moved back, but many moves I made that were not controversial (e.g. R.D. Reid to R. D. Reid per a naming convention, or Head Coaches of the Hamilton Tigers to Head coaches of the Hamilton Tigers because of arbitrary capitalization) have been moved back as well. For the articles that were moved back for no apparent reason (typical edit summary: (moved R. D. Reid to R.D. Reid over redirect: revert; controversial page move without consensus by User:Koavf), I will move them back again, per the naming convention that I cited in the first place. Again, I don't see much I can do on these sports moves as it appears that they've been taken care of already. Please let me know if I'm mistaken on that. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 14:37, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
I believe just about everything you moved was moved back. Now please, tell me, where is this guideline you cite everything you move a page (i.e, "Naming conventions"). I would like to read the page myself. Also, you moved Get On with It, yet every search on google gives me either Get On With It or Get on With It, I can't seem to find why you moved it? You do realize it is a CD and is not bounded by the English language? Pepsidrinka 20:04, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
That's a hassle The standard is linked above, but here it is again. If the official title of the CD is literally "Get On With It" then I would be happy to move it back, but I suspect that is not the case. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 20:17, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Have you at all researched the topic? Have you at all researched the hundreds of CDs you moved? I suspect you didn't, noting the speed at which you moved the pages, and the fact that all these "hassle" was started by your original page moves. The onus on you is to prove that your title is correct, not for to move the page, and then the people who named it that originally have to go and prove their case. Pepsidrinka 00:55, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Allow me to jump in here and point out that for albums capitalization should be normalized, which includes making "with" lowercase, regardless of what it says on the actual CD. See WP:ALBUM#Capitalization and WP:NC#Album titles and band names. --PEJL 01:11, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Well I guess I concede on that. Pepsidrinka 01:38, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
As a suggestion, please do not mass page move anymore, do a few at a time so people can catch on. Mass page moving, even ones in good faith and ones that might be standards, could be looked at as disruptive. Page moving is controversial enough without having to do it in massive amount. Discuss every page move with someone and read through the exceptions every time before you go moving something. — Moe ε 19:10, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
And I'll even help you move some of the obvious ones needing moving like the head coaches one (BTW consensus was to move them to: (example) "List of Pittsburgh Steelers head coaches". Another problem I spotted is that, if your moving things per naming conventions, you have to make every instance of that naming convention change in the article. You didn't on R. D. Reid [6]Moe ε 19:12, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:Mohamed_Abdelaziz_of_Western_Sahara.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Mohamed_Abdelaziz_of_Western_Sahara.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. — Rebelguys2 talk 20:42, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

D.A. Waite

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article D.A. Waite, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. KenWalker | Talk 08:15, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

re Mediation, etc.

Hello? I was out for two days, do you have anywhere you want to go with this? Please respond on my talk. Thanks. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 17:28, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I'll be there ASAP. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 03:35, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Let's start. Which article would you prefer to start w/ ? -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 12:18, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Sure If you want to start somewhere in particular, in the main namespace, the most egregious dispute is over Foreign relations of Western Sahara/Legal status of Western Sahara. Others in the main that are troubling are Polisario Front (which is actually over a pretty small matter in terms of content, but large in POV), and Flag of Western Sahara. Outside of main, the Western Sahara WikiProject is causing a real hassle. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 15:54, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
You'd give me an hour or two and i'll be right there. Thanks. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 16:12, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Mediation

Koavf, sorry I haven't been available. WikiProjects on here have been taking up my time. I'll try and get to it as soon as I can. Sorry for the delay! Smiley.png SunStar Net talk 22:20, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Kosovo: country debate

Hello. There's a discussion going on Talk:List of countries as to whether or not Kosovo should be included in that list. You contributed to the same discussion at Talk:List of unrecognized countries and I thought you might be interested. The articles List of countries and Annex to the list of countries (where the inclusion criteria reside) are both relevant. Cheers. DSuser 13:21, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi again. It's probably a minor point, but there a discussion and vote going on at Talk:Kosovo#Kosovo:_terminology as to whether or not it's better to use Kosovo rather than Kosovan or Kosovar in the Wikipedia articles. Perhaps you have no interest, in which case sorry to bother you! DSuser 15:46, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Mangled "main" templates

I have fixed the errors from your recent edit of Friends - you used only one closing bracket instead of two. In the future, please use the Preview button to check what your edits have done to an article before saving the article. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 22:04, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Speedies

If you think something isn't notable then prod it or AfD it, that's not what speedy deletion is meant to be used for (except for bands, people, and a few other categories).--P4k 23:42, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Chad categorically denies restoring diplomatic relations with Polisario

  • If you can read:
"Rabat, July 23 - The Republic of Chad on Sunday categorically denied the news claiming that it would have restored its diplomatic relations with the so-called Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR)." more
  • Will you stop your blind reverts one day, please?
Thanks - wikima 18:53, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Again Your post on my talk is offensive, implying that I'm illiterate. Please don't resort to tactics like this in the future. As for our respective sources, mine is a source from one of the interested parties, while yours is not and is, in fact, from a party that has an incentive to deny this story. If you have a more reliable source, I'd be happy to see it. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 02:24, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Your source is the known propaganda agency of Polisario: SPS-RASD (BTW a very bad one).
  • If we have discussed this in the talk page and if I had showed you that there is information on Chad denying that news, then at least wait and discuss instead of blindly reverting.
  • If you just could stop reverting everything that does not suit your pro-püolisario POV, that would be great.
  • Please make an effort.
Thanks - wikima 18:26, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Propaganda I never said that SPS wasn't propaganda; furthermore, I have freely admitted that it is. That having been said, whether or not it is propaganda is irrelevant to whether or not it is true. I have still not seen any information from Chad denying this; only third-party sources. If you just could stop reverting everything that does not suit your pro-Morocco POV, that would be great. Please make an effort. Thanks. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 02:49, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Your behaviour is simply unacceptable and you are exhausting the community again.
  • There is an information by SPS that Chad has diplomatic ties, again, with the so-called rasd. But MAP has published a denial of Chad's governement.
  • You, however, keep reverting to the initial "source". It seems to be true for you because it is SPS.
  • This information must at least be kept out until it is clarified and a neutral source has been found on this.
  • And now, give it a think and give some peace please, because what you are doing is beyond reason.
wikima 21:49, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
  • And now here is the source MAP is referring to. It is on the site of the government of Chad, which was down yesterday when checked it:
Mise au point
Par La Primature
vendredi, le 20 juillet 2007
«« Retour journal
" Dans un article dénué de tout fondement, truffé de mensonge et publié sur Alwihda, il est fait mention de signature d'un accord de reconnaissance de la République arabe sahraouie démocratique par le Premier Ministre, Chef du Gouvernement Dr Nouradine Delwa Kassiré Coumakoye. Aucun Acte de rétablissement des relations diplomatiques entre le Tchad et la RASD n’a été signé au cours de l’audience que le Premier Ministre a accordé au Ministre sahraoui des Affaires Etrangères Mohamed Salem Ould Salek. Nous faisons la mise au point suivante."
wikima 22:03, 9 August 2007 (UTC)


Chad's site? That site is owned by a German and hosted there; I don't know that it's "Chad's site." Furthermore, I don't know enough French to really read this article, but I'm willing to believe your translation is accurate. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 05:29, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
The site is being hosted by a German IP, but the owner is Tchadian, mate. "Mahamat Hassane Outmane" Strange article, stranger yet you write about a subject requiring mastery of French and Arabic, but no matter. The article rather violently denies Tchad has recognised the Polisario republic. Regardless, that is the Prime Ministerial site for Tchad, so it would appear to be authoritative. Not that Tchad recognising or not means much. collounsbury 01:27, 20 August 2007 (UTC).
Chadian He may even be Chadian, I don't know. All I know is that it isn't the government of Chad's site, or even registered under their top-level domain; it's just some .org site hosted out of the country; that's hardly credible to me. The subject does not require a mastery of French and Arabic, Collounsbury. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 17:11, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Tchadian. I like to spell it that way kid. And it does indeed appear to be the Gov site, kid. Poor countries often have funky websites, because, well, they're fucking poor and don't have things all tied up like oh, Indiana. Of course fucking poor countries like Tchad. Actually knowing something about the region, knowing French and being able to read the site, and well, having a fucking clue, is often helpful. Now, because you know fuck all about what you're whanking on about, let me give you a little citation: http://ndjamena.usembassy.gov/ - If you look down your government's Embassy website, why surprise surprise you find they link to ... wait for, bit of a drumroll: http://www.presidencedutchad.org/ and http://www.primature-tchad.org/ as official sites. Now you can either hold that your US Embassy knows fuck all about the country it is located in or that as I state, poor countries often have funky little things about them, like being too fucking poor to have proper websites per Indiana standards. (collounsbury 19:41, 21 August 2007 (UTC))
  • This is simply silly.
  • If you are willing to believe that information is accurate (unless you prove someone is making jokes on behalf of the gov. of Chad) so why do you revert to your version on the page of the so-called sahrawi republic?
wikima 19:00, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Silly You're right; it is silly. I do not believe the source is accurate; I never wrote that. I think your translation of the source is accurate, although I'm not sure. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 16:12, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
  • What sense does make an accurate translation if the source isn't?
  • By willing to believe the translation is accurate you assume the source is.
wikima 09:18, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
What? No, not it does not. I believe that you took the words in the source and wrote the equivalents in another language correctly. I do not believe the claims made by the original source have any connection with reality. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 00:31, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Pray tell what is this particular lunacy about now? collounsbury 01:27, 20 August 2007 (UTC).
? You know as much as I do; what is your interest in it? -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 17:11, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:StateName

Please stop changing this back, you are causing strange links to occur, such as Atlanta, Georgia (U.S. state). There were only a handful of article pointing to the dab page and that was a result of a couple templates that called this template. I have fixed those templates to point to the correct Georgia. --Holderca1 15:14, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I took care of {{Flag entry}} and the Georgia dab issue, it appears to be linking correctly now. --Holderca1 17:19, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

New York town and village article naming convention

I noticed that on July 1 you moved the following Onondaga County, New York town and village articles according to a new naming convention:

Tully (town), New York → Tully, New York (town)
Tully (village), New York → Tully, New York (village)
Marcellus (town), New York → Marcellus, New York (town)
Marcellus (village) → Marcellus, New York (village)
Manlius (town), New York → Manlius, New York (town)
Manlius (village), New York → Manlius, New York (village)
Fabius (town), New York → Fabius, New York (town)
Fabius (village), New York → Fabius, New York (village)

As far as I can tell, these are now the only New York town and village articles that follow the new convention. All of the hundreds of other cases of ambiguous place names in New York use the former convention. Are you planning to change them all to the new format? If not, I would vote for putting these back the way they were — for consistency sake if nothing else. — Nonenmac 02:34, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

You can go to Category:Towns in New York and Category:Villages in New York to find all of the New York town and village articles. You can also look at List of towns in New York and List of villages in New YorkNonenmac 18:52, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
To be consistent, you might also want to look at Category:Cities in New York, List of cities in New York, Category:Census-designated places in New York and List of census-designated places in New York for similar ambiguous place names. All use the previous convention (e.g. Batavia (city), New York and Altona (CDP), New York). — Nonenmac 02:09, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Ayyavazhi

Hai Koavf,

I found that you removed the browse bar in the reference section in the Ayyavazhi article. You see the article is too lengthy and so I prefer a seperate browse bar for the reference section so that it may be more comfortable for the readers. What you say? - Paul Raj 15:37, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, But see the reference section alone is as big as the article. So seperating it not only comforts the reader(while scrolling) but also makes the article looks good and well arranged. Any way, this too is my personal opinion. Anyway if you dislike it let it remain as it is. Paul Raj 14:06, 20 August 2007 (UTC)