Jump to content

User talk:Lothar von Richthofen/Archive4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mediation Cabal: Case update

Dear Lothar von Richthofen/Archive4: Hello, this is to let you know that a Mediation Cabal case that you are involved in, or have some connection with:

Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/02 October 2011/Holodomor

is currently inactive as it has not been edited in at least a week. If the issues in the case have been resolved, please let us know on our talk page so we can close the case. If there are still issues that need to be addressed, let us know. If your mediator has become inactive, also let us know. The case will be closed in one month if it remains inactive. You can let us know what's going on by sending a message through to your mediator, Steven Zhang, on their talk page. Thanks! MedcabBot (talk) 15:12, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Military Historian of the Year

Nominations for the "Military Historian of the Year" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so here. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the coordinators, Nick-D (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:40, 15 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject.

The Bugle: Issue LXX, January 2012

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:19, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Mediation Cabal: Case update

Dear Lothar von Richthofen/Archive4: Hello, this is to let you know that a Mediation Cabal case that you are involved in, or have some connection with:

Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/02 October 2011/Holodomor

is currently inactive as it has not been edited in at least a week. If the issues in the case have been resolved, please let us know on our talk page so we can close the case. If there are still issues that need to be addressed, let us know. If your mediator has become inactive, also let us know. The case will be closed in one month if it remains inactive. You can let us know what's going on by sending a message through to your mediator, Steven Zhang, on their talk page. Thanks! MedcabBot (talk) 12:43, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Inter-factional fighting

Since the Libyan war is tentativly over since late October I was thinking we should create an article about the inter-factional fighting between various rebel factions and also it seems resumption of hostilities with pro-Gaddafi elements today with the loyalist take-over of Bani Walid. Do you agree with this assesment? I was thinking of calling it 2011-2012 Libyan inter-factional fighting or something along those lines. If you got an idea for a better title please share it. Thank you. EkoGraf (talk) 19:41, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, he seems to be the only one who thinks that its only riots over housing (could have think of something better)[1][2][3]. Not realy surprised he try to cover up a potential re-emergenc of loyalist elements. EkoGraf (talk) 02:14, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

I perssonaly expected this kind of situation. What to expect from a people that has known only control and results through fear for more than 40 years, they don't know of any other way of doing things. I at least give credit to Gaddafi that he was efficient and nobody even thought of criminal/rable behavior during his time. XD These guys can expect a loooong road ahead of them in trying to rebuild the country and I think its questionable that they ever will compleatly rebuild. By the way, finished that article, check it out 2011-2012 Libyan inter-factional fighting.EkoGraf (talk) 03:12, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

With the Hitler thing, in Germany itself, it was more of a case of country-wide indoctrination than subjugation. But yup, we gonna see how this all turns out in a few years, time will tell, nothing can be definetly said yet. EkoGraf (talk) 06:30, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Agree with two out of three of your edits. Don't agree with the removal of the loyalists from the infobox, cause even though they may not be responsible for yesterdays fighting in Bani Walid, they were proven to be the ones responsible for last months killing of 15 NTC soldiers in Bani Walid, the cross border attack, and the hit-and-run attacks in Tripoli and Benghazi yesterday, so for now leave them in the infobox until situation is clearer. And I never stated that the loyalists were gonna retake the country, what I said was that the NTC will have a hell of a time rebuilding the country, and that it was questionable if they would be able to do it totaly. EkoGraf (talk) 04:36, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Relevance of Biblical References in article on Social Security in the U.S.

Dear Sir! The Biblical references in the article on social security in the U.S. is relevant. You may be opposed to Christianity, but the Biblical references are part of the story !

ChristianContributor — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChristianContributor (talk • contribs) 09:19, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Social Security Act". Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChristianContributor (talk • contribs) 08:23, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

You're at 3RR at AN/I

FYI. 28bytes (talk) 05:14, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Had 28bytes not placed that note, I'd have been issuing you a block under the same conditions that Roux has been blocked under. Three reverts is not an entitlement. - Aaron Brenneman (talk) 05:23, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
I also note that you used rollback to edit war, so I have removed rollback privileges from your account. 28bytes (talk) 05:29, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Mkay. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 05:34, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Romania

Hi! From your edits, it looks like you might be interested in contributing to WikiProject Romania. It is a project aimed at organizing and improving the quality and accuracy of articles related to Romania. Thanks and best regards!

--Codrin.B (talk) 19:19, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Battle of Pankow

Hello Baron. I've found a new article that needs some thorough cleaning and referencing by an expert on the Eastern Front of WW2. You might want to have a look at it. De728631 (talk) 22:00, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Tieck

Could you be more specific on where you see "peacockery" in the Tieck article? I've looked it over several times now and don't think that's the most appropriate template. "Chock full" is a bit of an exaggeration, don't you think? Sindinero (talk) 22:33, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time. Sindinero (talk) 07:10, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Secretive Brain Technology in use by Reliance Group (Mukesh Ambani)

Secretive Technology is known by different names like Remote Neural Monitoring,Remote Brain Reading, Voice to Skull, Synthetic Telepathy etc. The technology uses 5-50 Hz 5 milliwatt Electro Magnetic Field generated by individual to remotely read thoughts, send voice in head bypassing ear etc. This satellite based technology uses every individuals unique brain signature to track him 24 by 7 anywhere on earth. This technology can track thousands of individuals if not more simultaneously.

The Bugle: Issue LXXI, February 2012

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 10:07, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Libyan civil war: The contribution of Albania

You removed Albania from the list of NATO. This is unacceptable. In mid-April, the International Business Times listed Albania alongside several other NATO member states, including Romania, Turkey, Greece and Bulgaria in one list with modest military support [4]. We or eliminate all this country or add Albania. Wikipedia should be balancing. Irvi Hyka (talk) 23:10, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

...for fixing my error. I got so dizzy looking at that gigantic list and trying to figure out what to say to the person I was warning that I forgot the rather necessary step of logging the warning in the right spot! A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 18:54, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

No problem! ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 18:57, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Vladimir Lenin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Chekist and Armavir
Tertius (sandbank) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to High water mark

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:47, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited World War I, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Louvain (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) 10:04, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Battles and Conflicts Without Fatalites

First of all 'Me again' has nothing to do with anything, if i added a wrong category, i apologise but don't make it personal.

Secondly, which article was a wrong about exactly? 81.98.167.142 (talk) 23:18, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Okay, so i was wrong for some of them, but when it comes to cyberwarfare, hackers may not be soldiers but nothing says it has to be actual military operations. There are riots in that category, not to mention old-West gunfights (Not all of which were added by me for the record).
When it comes to my success rate, i've but at least 50 articles into the category over time but that really doesn't matter, Wikipedia isn't about statistics.
All in all, i'll throw my hands up and admit i was wrong on some of them but i can't help but feel this is partially personal. Also, i stand by the cyberattacks, they're conflicts that didn't have fatalities. 81.98.167.142 (talk) 00:00, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Like i said, i'll admit i was wrong about some of the pages, but please don't feel like i did any of this to get at you. 81.98.167.142 (talk) 00:24, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Rollback

Hello, this is just to let you know that I've granted you Rollback rights. Just remember:

If you have any questions, please do let me know.

Wifione Message 15:06, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 15:13, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Mistakes teach faster than any other form of experience. Don't worry. I've been kicked out of the ACC Toolserver Interface for mistakes like these only; and then gained the same back after a similar lesson :) Do well, see you around. Wifione Message 15:28, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXII, March 2012

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:22, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

ANI

Regarding this[5], you're correct but that has nothing to do with what I'm saying. Just because someone can do something doesn't mean they will. The fact is that ANI has almost twice as many page watchers. This is an issue that concerns the whole community, not just admins. It should be in a venue where more of the community will see it. Or as I suggested, we can open an RfC and post something at the Village Pump so that more non-admins will be aware of this incident. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 00:15, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Re

I've tried a couple times, my internet connection has been really in and out. I thought I managed to a half hour ago, should have double-checked that. Thanks for pointing that out. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 04:57, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

AN

Lothar, your weighing of INVOLVED versus BLP was very thoughtful; I wish I could have said it so well. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 05:02, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Restricting access to users in Armenia-Azerbaijan

I would like to pick the brain of more experienced users about the ongoing exchange between [User:Grandmaster] and a couple of administrators. Grandmaster suggests to restrict access to some and potentially to all articles in Armenia-Azerbaijan by excluding new users [6]. You can reply on my home page if you wish. Dehr (talk) 19:26, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

An award for you

A Barnstar!
Golden Wiki Award
You are among the top 5% of most active Wikipedians this past month! 66.87.0.87 (talk) 21:24, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
Am I really? Huh. Well thanks! ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 21:49, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Lothar von Richthofen. You have new messages at BuickCenturyDriver's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

–BuickCenturyDriver 02:56, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Frisia

Hi there, and welcome to the club! I see you've been creating some nice North Frisia-stubs lately. And I've now added a subgroup "former islands" to the {{Frisian Islands}} navbox so should you write more articles about former parts of the Uthlande, please add the links to the box. De728631 (talk) 09:58, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I'd love to see some articles promoted. I think Amrum and West Frisian language would be some decent candidates to lift to Good status but I don't think we have any feature class aspirants right now. De728631 (talk) 16:23, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
On a side note, when we translate pages from other Wikipedias we're supposed to cite the source articles on the talk page of the new English article with {{translated page}}. That's required to keep the free licensing of the translated text. I've done that for your last articles on the hundreds but please remember to use that template next time. It has an option small=no to fit nicely with the regular talk page stickers like project ratings etc. De728631 (talk) 15:53, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
Yes, Sylt could use some improvement as well. I remember that a few years ago I translated about half of the German article but I somehow got stuck in the process. De728631 (talk) 12:03, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Putin's photo

You recently reverted a change to the photo in the infobox for the article on Vladimir Putin. Please give your views at Talk:Vladimir Putin#Photo in the infobox.--Toddy1 (talk) 08:29, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

iBan (tm)

I note you use circle-R -- but was I the originator, you, or someone else? <g> Or did Apple really trademark it? Collect (talk) 13:35, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Libyan army article nominated for deletion

Hi, could I ask you for your view on this particular issue? Wikilink is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Libyan National Army. Thanks. EllsworthSK (talk) 01:22, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Hainshallig, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hooge (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) 14:29, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Dispute resolution survey

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite

Hello Lothar von Richthofen. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released.

Please click HERE to participate.
Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts.

You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 00:26, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of 2012 Siachen Glacier avalanche

Hello! Your submission of 2012 Siachen Glacier avalanche at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Prioryman (talk) 22:44, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

ITN for 2012 Siachen Glacier avalanche

Feel better now? :D --BorgQueen (talk) 00:40, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Haha, yes I do. Thank you very much :) ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 00:53, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

ok lets talk about it here , why did you insult me ?

ok you dont understand it wasnt the photo that was issue , it was your personal attacks (nothing to do with any "policy" i should never brought it up) , then you give me a block warning just because you insluted,i dont know where else to say this . Ocnerosti (talk) 20:12, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Your HighBeam account is ready!

Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know:

  • Your account activation code has been emailed to your Wikipedia email address.
    • Only 407 of 444 codes were successfully delivered; most failed because email was simply not set up (You can set it in Special:Preferences).
    • If you did not receive a code but were on the approved list, add your name to this section and we'll try again.
  • The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code.
  • To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1; 2) You’ll see the first page of a two-page registration. 3) Put in an email address and set up a password. (Use a different email address if you signed up for a free trial previously); 4) Click “Continue” to reach the second page of registration; 5) Input your basic information; 6) Input the activation code; 7) Click “Finish”. Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive.
  • If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
  • A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate
  • HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
  • Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
  • When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi t | c 20:50, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Ocnerosti

You keep saying that Ocnerosti is a blocked user. He/she is not blocked - see [7] I imagine that he/she will be blocked soon. --Toddy1 (talk) 22:05, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

your comment

laughed my royal butt off at this. well done. 2eschew surplusage (talk) 10:21, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Of course

Of course, someone should have thrown out the earlier intermediate edit [8]. Why didn't you? -DePiep (talk) 00:02, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

"This thread is frivolous"

Why did you object to Cyberpower's raising of the DePiep issue at WP:AN? I see no reason to object to the thread; please don't make comments such as "frivolous" simply because you have evidence that the situation is otherwise. Nyttend (talk) 01:49, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

There was no "issue" other than DP was being an obnoxious twit. The account was obviously not "compromised". I meant what I said and I said what I meant. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 02:00, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
In that case, you should read this policy page — your comments were out of line. Nyttend (talk) 02:56, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Skip the patronising policy-pointing; I know the ropes around here. I commented on the content (i.e., the thread), not the contributor. Were my remarks snippy? Yes. But this stifling "civility-crusade" environment that has taken root around here lately is twice as toxic as having some sarcastic remarks thrown around in debates. I made a single mildly dismissive remark. Since you seem so offended by this sentence, I shall remove it. But please don't condescendingly wag your finger at me—that is also highly disrespectful. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 03:10, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
I award this barnstar to Lothar von Richthofen for defending Wikipedia from both civil anarchists and polite totalitarianists with these wise words: "Civility crusaders create the same toxic environment that serially abusive editors do. It goes both ways. On the one hand, having a lawless, caustic, Youtube-comments-section style free-for-all is sure to drive people away. But on the other hand, who wants to stick around when you have to sanitise your every word for fear of getting sanctioned for a slightly snippy phrasing? You can't "strictly enforce" a policy to be civil and unoffensive. That in and of itself creates hostility." Viriditas (talk) 04:16, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Oh frabjous day! Callooh! Callay! My first real barnstar! Thanks much; good to know I'm not alone! ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 04:38, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm looking forward to more of your words of wisdom. Add me to the list! Viriditas (talk) 04:52, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Outing of members

Please do not out me on Wikipedia, as you did in Talk:Vladimir Putin. It is not anyone's business what nationality I am. Please remove the comments that out me.--Toddy1 (talk) 07:06, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

It wasn't meant to be outing; I was just trying to extend a friendly hand toward a new editor. Nationality is hardly "sensitive personal information" (I still have no idea who you are or where exactly you live or anything like that), and I only guessed at it from what is on your userpage and the nature of your English. I've removed the mention of you, though. Sorry about that. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 07:31, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I knew that you meant no harm. Thanks for cooperation.--Toddy1 (talk) 08:27, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
BTW, you should talk to Greyhood about removing his mentions of you on the talkpage as well. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 07:33, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Done.--Toddy1 (talk) 08:27, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

you've got message

Hello, Lothar von Richthofen. You have new messages at Drimidiri's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The Bugle: Issue LXXIII, April 2012

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:22, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

WP:AE

This a notification to inform you that an WP:AE discussion related to you is taking place. -- ◅PRODUCER (TALK) 09:19, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Icelandic name conventions

Hi there. I noticed your edit on Veigar Páll Gunnarsson, which you say should be referred to as "Veigar". That might be true, on Iceland, but this guy have played most of his career in Norway, where he is referred to as "Pall Gunnarsson" or "Gunnarsson". Shouldn't that be taken into account? Mentoz86 (talk) 12:42, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

He's been playing for Iceland or an Icelandic side for even longer, and retains Icelandic citizenship AFAIK. "Gunnarson" is not a surname, and calling him by that makes as much sense as referring to Vladimir Putin as "Vladimirovich". ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 12:48, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Yeah you are probably right, but in my opinion it would be own research to call him "Veigar" when all sources refer to him as "Pall Gunnarsson" or "Gunnarsson". Out of curiousity, is this the same for all islandic names, like Eidur Gudjonsson? Mentoz86 (talk) 13:17, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Adherence to proper naming conventions is hardly original research. It is quite simply wrong to refer to Icelanders by their patronymics only. Guðjohnsen is a bit of a special case; his last name is actually a true surname. In Iceland, he would still be referred to as Eiður in all contexts, but it is more acceptable to use the surname because it is actually a family name. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 13:23, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Look, if the use of his proper name bugs you that much, then you can use the full "Veigar Gunnarson" and it will still be acceptable. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 13:32, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
(Edit conflict)My point is that it's not up to us as Wikipedia-editors to "find out", we should only do what the sources tell us, and after almost 10 years in Norway he is referred to by his patronymic name. Same goes for most of the other Category:Icelandic expatriates in Norway, or those in Denmark and Sweden. Are you telling me that all those should be changed? And how do we know what is patronymic, like Gunnarsson, and what is family name, like Gudjonsson, cause it looks kinda similar to me. Mentoz86 (talk) 13:34, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Guðjohnsen. The non-Icelandic Danish ending is a good tip-off. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 13:37, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia tends to follow local naming conventions; see WP:LASTNAME where Jóhanna Sigurðardóttir is given as a specific example of not improperly using the patronymic later on. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 13:52, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
I still think it's a little weird to refer to him as Veigar, when he almost his entire career have been referred to as Pall Gunnarsson, and probably have Gunnarsson on his national team kit. But I don't want to oppose wikipedia's policy, so thank you for the enlightment. Mentoz86 (talk) 08:31, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Looking at e.g. [9] [10] [11] [12], it would seem that the Icelandic national kit doesn't have names—probably to avoid patronymic confusion. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 16:39, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Template cruft

The templates make it too difficult to give proper citations. They are a bad thing.--Toddy1 (talk) 14:20, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

....huh? Citation templates are one of the most widely used means of making citations on the project—to the extent that the developers even put the function into the upper editing toolbar. They make the citations on the page uniform and greatly reduce nasty WP:BAREURLs, which you restored many of with your reversion. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 14:30, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Throw the citation templates down the well,
then knowledge will be freed.
We should make doing citations easy,
then we have a big party.--Toddy1 (talk) 14:31, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
I dunno, I find the templates pretty easy to work with.... ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 14:32, 7 May 2012 (UTC)


Lalueza and Gilbert

I have noticed that you are including references to Lalueza and Gilbert 2011 in many articles related to admixture hypotheses. I applaud that, but you must becareful not to use the article to support claims that it doesn't actually support. For example you cannot use it to show "growing support in the community" (because they are not speaking for other scholars or claiming a change in the community consensus) or that the OOA model is loosing ground (because they explicitly say that the data suppports an OOA model with subsequent geneflow). It is perfectly fine to include the article, but please try to be as cautious as they are when you represent their views. This topic is already riddled with sensationalism and ill supported claims - we don't need to promote that on wikipedia. But thanks for finding and including the article - and I also agree that many of the articles need updating about the newest developments in paleo-genetics. ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 15:28, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, that was my understanding of it. It's a survey of a whole bunch of other work, and the conclusion they draw is: "The ancient hominin genomes of Neanderthals and Denisovans have demonstrated that conventional models of human evolution based on genetic analyses of modern data are over-simplified. While the out of Africa migration of anatomically modern humans continues to play a dominant role in the origin of modern Eurasians, it is clear that successive episodes of hybridisation with archaichominins have played a role in this process." So, maybe I was a bit overzealous, but not unreasonably so.
OOA/RAO, strictly defined as "single origin" (as in the article), excludes significant admixture. This is almost certainly not the case. I don't think that the genome work supports the orthodox multi-regional hypothesis, either. I personally think the Assimilation Model (e.g.) will be the "theory of tomorrow", but that's for time to tell. I do, however, have some other articles supporting admixture that I will add in when I have more free time. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 15:39, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
There are other recent articles also that argues that admixture isn't at odds with recent out of Africa - (except for the strict single origin models that were basically outdated anyway)·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 15:53, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Yes, that's the gist of the AM. But the ROA article as it stands advocates the strict "single origin (monogenetic)" theory and lists the Neandertal/Denisovan genome work under "Competing theories". ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 15:59, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
We should update it with some recent textbooks then I think. And the Lalueza and Gilbert review is definitely a good source we should use - but they pretty explicity do not claim to challenge the ROOA model - only to complicate it (which I think is an important distinction to be sure).·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 16:01, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Hehe, I think any textbook you try to use will probably become outdated by the time you click "save page" ;)
The ROA is not fully rejected by any mainstream assimilation model, you are correct. But it does refute the purist monogenetic version of it. There cannot be a single source if modern populations have a small but significant portion of their DNA traceable to non-AMHs. I'm not aware of any serious denial of admixture/assimilation as of recently. Currat and Excoffier (2011) are the most critical that I have come across, but they still concur with a limited, traceable amount of admixture. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 16:11, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Paleoanthropology textbooks come out with new editions almost every year, and they are definitely the best for gauging what has already become consensus. Wikipedia doesn't need to be further ahead than that - it is better to be conservative in a field like paleoanthropology that is so ripe with sensationalism and controversy. By the way I apologize for removing the "outdated" tag - I didn't notice it. I definitely agree the article needs to be updated.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 16:24, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Info

Just a mark about this. No, by far no, you didnt get it. I was talking about those several editors that join in here with this enforcement, as they did with several other editors with whom they were in conflict. Not administrators, they see only limited amount of data... --WhiteWriterspeaks 20:33, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Bold

I doubt that your usage of bold and highlighting in the village pump complies with guidelines for discussion pages. Nemo 14:00, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

lol ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 14:36, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Sarcasm

I like your sense of it ;) (particularly on Talk:Vladimir Putin) θvξrmagξ contribs 06:20, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Vladimir Putin

Can you please point me to the talk discussion you used for this removal? Thanks. --NeilN talk to me 12:54, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

He won't have one because he thinks he can vandalise articles at will.

He uses Wikipropagnda to add anti-russian shit to everything he finds.

[13] ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 21:09, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXIV, May 2012

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 14:59, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

GOCE July 2012 Copy Edit Drive

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:10, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Industrial music template

See my comment on Template talk:User Industrial Music, on you reverting my edit. MarsTheGrayAdept (talk) 22:12, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lothar_von_Richthofen/Archive4&oldid=1143140561"