User talk:QZXA2

Internal security

Good job creating and maintaining the Internal security article. I especially appreciate you adding links to Internal security from related articles like Government.--Kevinkor2 00:56, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please use edit summaries

Hello. Please be courteous to other editors and use edit summaries when updating articles. The Mathbot tool shows your usage of edit summaries to be very low:

Edit summary usage for QZXA2: 17% for major edits and 100% for minor edits. Based on the last 47 major and 2 minor edits in the article namespace.

Using edit summaries helps other editors quickly understand your edits, which is especially useful when you make changes to articles that are on others' watchlists. Thanks and happy editing! --Kralizec! (talk) 00:31, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to remember that! QZXA2 20:04, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hello, QZXA2! Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Biophys 23:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Contradiction

You said the main article seems to contradict the section on the country article, can you be more specific and elaborate? --Mardavich 06:24, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The paragraph about the human rights situatuion in Yemen on the Article Yemen says that the human rights situaation is poor, however, the article Human rights In Yemen says that human rights in Yemen have improved significantly. Sorry if I may have been confusing before QZXA2 14:48, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HR in Russia

QZXA2, want an advice? Go on. Just do in the article that what you consider would be good. You have a human feeling of what's right and wrong, use it. WP policies are needed, but you can't work constantly thinking of them. Don't allow anybody to prevent you from working by only referring to WP policies. Any way, good luck and, have fun! ellol 13:46, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, for a while I will be unable to edit Wikipedia; the problem is, I'm having exams. I'll try to return then. ellol 04:33, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Deletion of large portions of well sourced text without discussion and consensus, as you did in articles Human rights in Russia and FSB (Russia), is considered vandalism. Please do not do it again. Biophys 00:18, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last warning

Please revert you last deletion of text in article Human rights in Russia back. Otherwise, I will report you to administration noticeboard.Biophys 00:20, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I need to say that QZXA2 made interesting contributions (tho there's still the need to source them). I agree with many of deletions he made. Not all sourced material should be allowed. Indeed, we can't use Al-Quaida sources to describe Human Rights in America (or even the famous Akhmadinejad's letter). But this is what often happens for Human rights in Russia, where are used sources of highly politized organizations. Alas, Biophys contributes only that text which has anti-Russia sentiment. ellol 12:00, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please understand the WP rules and importance of sourcing. For example, you have created articles Internal security and Light Strike Vehicle. This is great, but your first article is not supported by any sources. It means that anyone can delete anything from your article after marking it for a while as ^{[citation needed]}. I worked hard, studied the sources, and made some sourced work. Now, you are coming and simply deleting everything. If you think the articles are POV, please study some sources on the subject and make justified changes.Biophys 01:17, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

QZXA2, please, don't pay attention to Biophys, he was creating far more unsourced articles than you, based just on conspiracy theories and pure allegations. Besides, Mr. Biophys, is at his best, deleting information about his sources in article Internet brigades where he deletes the information that his sources are immigrants. QZXA2, you may need to look into Biophys contribs, Jeffrey Nyquist (famous US conspiracy theory writer), Poison laboratory of the Soviet secret services and the stuff. So you don't need to worry. You contributions into Human rights in Russia article are great. Vlad fedorov 04:27, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed

Could you comment on Biophys revert warring on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Disruptive_editing_and_possible_wikistalking? Your help would be appreciated. Vlad fedorov 08:50, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hello, QZXA2. I appreciate your willingness to supply Human rights in Russia article with other sources, perhaps less biased. Meanwhile I started some editing, and these few days I think I'll try to do some considerable amount of contributing job (yes, I'm deleting no information yet, just contributing). And, of course, no need to say that your assistance/criticism (of course, if you have time/will) would be appreciated. ellol 22:29, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed

Something is "disputed"when it's disputed (you didn't even try). I don't see many, say, Americans going around and falsely placing POV tags on My Lai or Wounded Knee articles, and saying it's "Americanophobic" (what). Do you have complexes? --HanzoHattori 00:49, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1) I am not Russian if that6 is what you are implying 2) The article I have tagged are worded in an ant-Russian tone, that is why I am labeling them as POV. QZXA2 00:55, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Example of dispute: QZXA2 comes around and says "no, it's not true, Russia actually won the case in the court and was not found guilty and ordered to pay the victims of the murders and looting", and provides a link to back this up - not mutters about "phobics". Don't you REALLY see "see talk page for related discussion"?

"ant-Russian" does not even make sense. --HanzoHattori 00:58, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very funny. Ever hear about a typo? Or a Personal attack? QZXA2 01:00, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And if you meant "anti-Russian", the policemen murdering Russian civilians are "anti-Russian" (and deadly serious about this), not the HRW, European Court of Human Rights, or Wikipedia. --HanzoHattori 01:01, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If it was American policemen murdering and looting Russian citiziens they would be "anti-Russian" without question, right? And yes, the soldiers at Wounded Knee were anti-American alright. And I don't even mean the Native Americans (who were not citizens until next century), I mean the American values. --HanzoHattori 01:07, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The text is worded in way that makes the event seem more brutal than it really was (yes it was brutal). QZXA2 01:10, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I think the Wounded Knee article was screwed since I've last seen it - things like "but as the Indians ran out of ammunition for their repeating rifles, the fight moved as the Indians sought to escape fire from the troops." Escape from firing soldiers = fight? But you are entitled to your opinion. However, I am DISPUTING THIS, and not just pretend. (oh, I even actually forgot to add the tag. whoops.) You can also see "my" My Lai Massacre article for the "Americanophobia" or whatever. --HanzoHattori 01:19, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently you didn't notice that "your" article has a POV tag on it as well. QZXA2 01:24, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added by me a moment ago. Also check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:My_Lai_Massacre#Cleanup for example. Am I "anti-American" much? Quit your complexes already. Another comparable article I worked on recently was Kielce pogrom. That's all as of my discussion with you here. --HanzoHattori 01:28, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good, your rude comments are not welcome here. QZXA2 01:36, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I also noticed you declared yourself "pro-Russian government". Well, I'm pro-Russian people. --HanzoHattori 01:50, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What I mean "pro-government" is that I do not belive the country is unfree or a dictatorship. I will not deny that there are human rights abuses in Russia, but I just don't belive it is servere enough for Russia to be considered "not free". Of course I don't like massacres. QZXA2 01:54, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also please check out the definition of dispute. "Dispute" is not a declaration of dispute, it's a dispute. --HanzoHattori 01:58, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What the hell does that mean? QZXA2 01:59, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that Hanzo is right here. Please follow WP policies. See the "links for newcomers" that I posted previously at your talk page.Biophys 04:09, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What of "Please see the discussion on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved." you don't understand? (no, not THIS talk page) --HanzoHattori 07:18, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:NPOV dispute

What part of "Drive-by tagging is strongly discouraged. The editor who adds the tag must address the issues on the talk page, pointing to specific issues that are actionable within the content policies, namely Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Simply being of the opinion that a page is not neutral is not sufficient to justify the addition of the tag. Tags should be added as a last resort." you don't understand, too? --HanzoHattori 07:20, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you do not stop harassing me I will report you to Wikipedia administrators. QZXA2 16:31, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Harassing"? I explained you in detail what "the hell does that mean". Don't ask question, if you don't want responses. --HanzoHattori 22:15, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your tone is quite rude, this is very well harassment. If you are to tell me about wikipedia POV disputing policies, say it in a more civil manner. QZXA2 20:20, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again

Please, follow the Ten Commandments and there will be Heavens on the Earth... QZXA2, hello. Is there anything new about the Human Rights in Russia article? How do you consider its contents? ellol 19:29, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello ellol. Sorry I have not been able to concentrate on the HR in Russia article.I have had my hands full lately, having discovered a slew of biased Russia/FSB (and Brazil)related articles and as usual Biophys has been giving me a hard time. From what I can see the Human rights in Russia page is as biased as ever, but I have put a suggested solution on the talk page. I would appreciate if you would comment on it. Cheers! QZXA2 19:54, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last warning

QZXA2, I can see that you are interested in Russian history and politics. This is great. But could you please contribute positively in articles, that is add more content supported by reliable sources, instead of deleting relevant and sourced text or inserting POV labels without any justification? This [1] is unacceptable and may be interpreted by WP administrators as vandalism. Please respect work of other wikipedians.Biophys 23:45, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well I don't see what is wrong with adding a POV label on a clearly biased article. This is done in countless country articles without any kind of problem. QZXA2 23:51, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see explanation about POV label provided above at your talk page by HanzoHattori. However, main problem is deletion of sourced text. Please do not do this again. I told you many times: if you think that an article is POV (which any article might be), please study sources, and add more content that would provide alternative views or data on the subject.Biophys 23:57, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As about a positive contribution in WP, could you please improve article Internal security created by you. It is completely unsourced and looks very much like OR. I left my notice at the article talk page. BTW, what is the difference between "Internal security" and State Security? Biophys 00:56, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:39, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]