Al-Khwarizmi this article is being reverted without any dispute actually discussed in the talk page, there is clear evidence that this guy was born in Persia at the time, and by many sources he is a Persian. Instead, Anti-Iranians and Pro-Islam and whatnot editors are trying to change this identity to 'Muslim', just because Arabs ruled Persia at the time, but he was infact not even a Muslim! his religion was Zoroastrianism, all these have been discussed in the talk page, instead of accepting or rejecting this, edit wars are taking place, on both this and other articles mentioned in User_talk:ManiF#Iranian_watchdog.. things are starting to get out of hand. I'd appreciate if you could keep an eye out or do something about it. --Kash14:34, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Cool Cat, I saw you deleted the references to Kurds on Batman,_Turkey. I'm not very knowledgable on the subject, but according to the BBC [1] Batman does have a predominantly Kurdish population. I think that should be mentioned somehow in the article.--Hippalus16:55, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, I see. Ill do something about it. -- Catchi? 17:02, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Better? [2] ? -- Catchi? 17:07, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Better, but still a bit strange as the previous sentence does tell us about a census... So I changed it again [3]. what do you think?--Hippalus17:26, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I see. Much better, thanks. -- Catchi? 17:29, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Is this really ok? He tags articles at random with the category. See the category (although I recently removed turkish provinces) it is still over loaded with stuff not remotely relevant to kurdistan such as a restourant in germany. -- Catchi? 17:48, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
This is clearly unreasonable (although I couldn't find references to the restaurant). I don't know quite what we can do about this. The consensus clearly is to keep the category (if I remember correctly from the CfD), but we are still without a concrete definition of what it should include. Perhaps we could devise some kind of list on the talk page of appropriate entries? - FrancisTyers18:46, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Let me input what I think about Kurdistan and how it should appear on wikipedia
Firstly Kurdistan (land of the kurds/lands kurds own) is a proposed country with undefined/changing borders and hence is inaproporate.
I really feel if we are going to have a kurdistan category at all, its borders should have some official definition otherwise we will have more User:Muhamed cases.
There is a kurdistan in Iraq (it technicaly does not exist yet as the consitiution of iraq needs ratification)
There is a politicaly unrelated one in Iran.
These two should be treated in two diferent categories as they are two different entities.
This is just someones pov even if it is sourced, local governments have millitary and political control and do not recognise a kurdistan.
We had a {{Kurdistan}} and a similar template is {{France}}. I have recently moved it to {{Kurds}}. Kurdistan was treated like a country before I interfered.
We even have {{Kurdistan-stub}} (has the kurdish flag just like {{France-stub}}). Kurdistan is treated like a country yet again.
If kurdistan is a geo cultural region its articles should only talk about kurdish culture.
There is little to no mention of kurdish culture on current articles in the kurdistan serries.
Mostly articles only contain repeative information copy pasted from wikipedia articles regarding how much kurds are opressed. And articles mostly/only talk about how much kurds are opressed (weather they are opressed or not is not ours to decide)
Articles also contain information on unsuccesfull kurdish rebelions (and portrays these as nations).
So what do you think of my points? -- Catchi? 19:58, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Tekrar merhaba Cool Cat, Turkce Wikipedia'da tr:Zazaca ve tr:Zazalar makaleleri edit edilememektedir. Buna bu konuda yardimci olabilir misin? Cunku anladigim kadari ile belli bir siyasi grup, Zazalar ile ilgili kaynak gostermeden kendi siyasal goruslerini yazmislar ve aciklama gostermeden makaleyi kilitlemisler. Zaten hic aciklama yapilmadan kilitlenmesi ve kaynak gosterilmeden yazi yazilmasi Wikipedia kurallarina aykiri. Saglicakla kal. --Daraheni06:18, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hic aciklama yapilmadan kilitlenmesi ve kaynak gosterilmeden yazi yazilmasi wikipedianin kulturune aykiri, ama bazen gerekli olabiliyor. Kotu niyetle kitlendigine inanmiyorum. Tr.wikipedia'nin kurrallarini tr.wikipedia belirler.
Sayfa kitlemek en.wikipedia'da vandalism veya revert war ile ugrasmak icin kullanilir. Tr.wikipedia nin kuralarini tam bilmiyorum ama buna benzer bir nedenden dolayi olabilir. Tr.wikipedia bu tur makalelere semiprotect gibi bir sey uygulasa daha iyi olabilir.
ok fair enough, i suppose its not really a big thing but i do prefer pgkbot providing just the differnce link because with the double link yours posts every time it can make my screen harder to follow simply because i may have to scroll back further. i also like pgkbots greylist although i realise we can switch that on without the need to turn everything on.
(i know it operates on chanel 2 but theres just no conversation there) Benon23:14, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Errr... Thats a feature, one is the dif link one is the revert link. I have improved the blacklist/greylist function of my bot now although I havent applied the code (I want to test it for a change). I also like pgkbots greylist :P -- Catchi? 22:58, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your support in my request for adminship. I'm delighted that the RfA succeeded with a final consensus of 52/17/7, and receiving comments including having 'excellent potential to become a great moderator', and I am now an administrator. It did however only just pass, and I shall do my very best to rectify any of my errors, including the general belief that I should do more article work. If you have any concerns, or if you ever feel that I may be able to help you, please feel free to leave a message on my talk page. Again, thank you!
O_o; it takes 5 secs to register! We want good vandal fighters like you there. Besides we have a filtered RC feed as well. Its not just for the chat. -- Catchi? 21:44, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Register first. Join the request channel and the topic directs you to a wiki page. Vandals are watching now and may try to imposter you. :) -- Catchi? 22:30, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Just came across your comments regarding the deletion of "Genetic origins of the Kurds" and it's refreshing that someone else can also clearly see that this obsession with race and genetics is nothing but old school racism draped in scientific jargon. I thought I was the only one around here who was disturbed by this bizarre attitude. Humans are not animals, and yet this sick and narrow worldview that the Nazis and other genocidal maniacs subscribed to still persists in this day and age - only now it's acceptable since the scientific community is so accepting of it. These are the sort of people who love to discuss "mixing" and "interbreeding" on and on (again, treating humans as animals - and if they're non-European, all the better). But wait, didn't the Nazis rant and rave the very same way?
I am growing tired of this kind of edit behaviour and am considering arbitration. What do you think? I do not believe we (you/me/others) need to clean up this kind of mess as wikipedians should have the learning curve to at least attempt writing neutraly... -- Catchi? 04:42, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
The edits are annoying because of the copyvio element. But I'm not sure how many times they've done this in the past, I suppose if you could show a pattern of this kind of editing you'd have a case for an RfAr and I'd probably be neutral. It's kind of annoying possibly having your work removed because some guys not bothered to check copyright status! - FrancisTyers09:22, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, many of the stubs they create are copy paste from other sites. These are bio stubs of supposivley notable people often whose only notability is being kurdish or so the site claims.
My other concern is pov editing. Portraying UK air force evil and comparing it to saddam husein is bad taste and is certainly not what we are trying to do here on wikipedia.
I am annoyed by their behaviour as an observer, you are dealing with it first hand... I admire your hard work to say the least.
I'll copyscape their contributions but since they are mostly bare stubs this will be tedious work... Least I can do for you. :) -- Catchi? 09:59, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Rather than an RfAr, it might be worth doing an RfC first - I'd certainly come in on your side then. Have you tried to talk to them about this (the copyvio issue) already? - FrancisTyers14:50, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I personaly believe rfcs are pointless, but because yu ask I will do that. I have not talked to mohamed guy about copyright vilations because he doesnt know english, my communcations with him ended rather insultive (on his part). -- Catchi? 15:54, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
I've noticed the insertion of your faied rfa's recently. Are you okay..? I know you're dissapointed, but keep your head up. I'm sure things will turn around eventually. -ZeroTalk16:13, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Heh, I asked jimbo what he thinks. I am going to pursue this, kinda. I'll determine if I should seek adminship based on jimbos comments. -- Catchi? 19:46, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
I hope your appeal for your rfa preregisites goes through as well. I also would like to see you find the answers you are looking for, and always, I'm glad to have you as an fellow wikipedian. Please don't think lower of yourself just because you lack administrator status. You're still an excellent contributor and an valid part of the project. -ZeroTalk20:01, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your assistance in the rationale that gotten rid of this stub cat.
I was wondering if you could assist me on several articles related to kurds. I'll summarise the general picture.
There are several rebelions portrayed as independent (and failed) nations. At least one of these "nations" lasted only 2 months... An example is kingdom of Kurdistan. There are lots of problematic edits such as this one: [4]
Category:Kurdistan is being used to tag random provinces. Basicaly people are drawing the borders of kurdistan using categories. Also existing sub categories appear to be useless. Three of the five sub categories have virtualy a handfull (less than 5) articles
Articles like Turkish Kurdistan and Syrian Kurdistan are highly problematic. If you look at the articles youll see kurdistan is not treated like a geographic region or like a cultural region but for info regarding an independence movement and/or how much kurds are opressed and why they should have a nation of their own.
I have pov on the matter thats why I need objective input.
Hi Cool Cat - to be honest I probably don't know enough about the situation there to feel comfortable trying to sort those articles out - I'd probably go blundering in and treading on toes all over the place. It would definitely be worthwhile listing the problems on WP:AN - there are likely to be admins who know enough about Kurdistan that they'd be able to deal with the situation far better than I can. I just know that - like Macedonia - the nature of the name depends very much on who you are talking to. Grutness...wha?23:12, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I understand, but as a sanity check I'd like to know what you think on the following points:
Macedonia is an existing country, kurdistan is not. The borders are determined by who you are talking to.
The parties in discussion say Kurdistan is just a geographic region (it is the only geographic region with an ethnicity present in its name I think). However articles talk about the regions economy, history, displays a flag, failed independence attempts... Topic is completely restricted to kurds.
I dont mind an article talking about kurds. We have Kurdish people for that. I am not certain whats approporate for Kurdistan. Take a look at the not so contraversial Scandinavia and compare it with Kurdistan.
Acording to people writing the article kurdistan is divided to 4 parts. I don't think they are explaining a geographic region.
Kurdish Autonomous Region is been turned into a state as Iraq is now a 3 state federal nation now. However this hasnt been ratified hence this is just a proposal
There was a defacto goverment in the region since the first gulf war
such a thing should have a seperate article as being an iraqi state, not as part of being kurdistan and not being restricted to kurds.
I'd definitely agree on the first part - Kurdistan and Macedonia are different from that viewpoint, although they do have similaritties in that Iraq has named an area as Kurdistan, yet many people claim that the "real" Kurdistan also overlaps into neighbouring countries, each of which are understandably not in favour of that situation. As far as the second point is concerned, there does seem to be a definite concatenation of talking about Kurdistan as a geographical entity and as a people (as such the only real comparison I can think of is Israel, but that opens another can of worms). I'm uneasy with the four articles you list in the last part - since these regional names do not exist (with the exception of the Iraqi state), I would question their worth as articles. I would have no objection, say, to Kurdish people in Turkey, but the title Turkish Kurdistan strikes me as POV. The Kurdistan article is the one which I really have too little expertise to comment on. As an ill-defined region, it seems to be a logical hing to talk about, and certainly the term Kurdistan is used frequently enough to warrant an article. But it easily creeps into greyer areas. Grutness...wha?01:02, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorted the mess, several sections were coppied (either from wikipeida or to wikipedia). ON one occasion (communications of turkey) the data was from cia world factbook, a PD source. This guy is getting on my nerves, I will sort him out soon. -- Catchi? 19:37, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Hello Cool Cat. It's really a nice user page you have here - hope I manage to leave my message without leaving a mess. I noticed that you are doing an effort to removed references to Kurdishness in articles about Southeastern Turkey. I must say I tend to disagree with you, but my purpose for writing you here is not to embark on a long debate where we probably both in forehand know the arguments of the other.
You seem to be a well-experienced and serious Wikipedian. So my question is whether there has been taken any compregensive decisions for Wikipedia policy on offically non-recognized minorities - as the Kurds in Turkey. There are so many articles related to the area of Turkey, that some, including myself, refer to as Kurdistan, that I believe a comprehensive policy should be developed. Has there been such discussions? If not, where is the place to raise such a discussion? I believe it will be better to discuss and reach some overall agreement instead of continous edit wars on articles such as Batman, Hakkari etc. Bertilvidet20:36, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, I am not against "kurdishness". I also do not remove referances to kurdishness.
As you might know Kurdistan is a proposed country. Refering to Hakkari and Batman belonging to a proposed county is problematic and a breach of NPOV.
Refering to provinces in soultheastern Turkey as "Kurdistan" is something done often by Kurdish nationalists who seek an independent kurdistan. Which is fine for them but would not be ok on wikipedia.
Kurdistan literaly means "land of the kurds" or "lands owned by kurds" or "lands belonging to kurds" and is factualy inacurate as the place is owned by Turkey.
This is like refering to Canada being the 51st US state. While many people may agree (especialy up north in the US) this would be bad practice as Canada is an independent nation.
Non-recognized minorities are treated like recognised majorities. They have their own articles such as Kurdish people or Kurdish culture. Only independent states (Such as Turkey and France) and defacto states (partialy) (such as TaiwanKKTC) are treated like nations.
My primary concern is Kurdistan being treated as a country. Recently there has been a movement to portray a non existant Kurdish state and I work against this.
My second concern is copyrights. A lot of pages refering to kurds is coppied from the web breaching copyrights of numerous people.
Thank you for the heads up. Feel free to as nothing is stoping you but I thought you were ignoring me.
What did I do by the way? I am rather busy writing my anti-vandal bot and we have a decent mess in korean wikipedia. Hence am making minimal wikipedia contribution.
Coolcat, you are hardly being convincing, I would have thought that you would try harder... I am giving you a last chance to come clean, I swear I will open an arbitration cases if you don't, and this time around the evidences won't manage you. Fad(ix)01:17, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
??? You are confusing me.... -- Catchi? 02:47, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
At least inform me the nature of the dispute.... -- Catchi? 02:47, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Coolcat, you are so predictable, in a world where it isen't you, you would still have known it given that the dispute was just above your answer in my talk page and that the center of the dispute was around an article in which an alias appeared soon after you left. You have used this same innocent behavior in the past, but this time it won't work I am afraid, if I were you I would start documenting in the upcoming arbitration cases that I will submit in the upcoming days, to explain how come an innocent user who could barely write English(faking his English that is) would creat chronology tables by using your code paterns, coloring his tables exactly like you do, and the green crap on the right for cited ones, using the same expressions etc, and many other examples. Fad(ix)02:57, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I do not pay attention to other peoples talk pages much unless I care about them. Tonikaku your attitude is quite annoying. For whatever the reason (I am not certain why) you are threatening me with arbitration.
Since you have predetermined what to do, nothing I say will matter. So go ahead with whatever you have in mind.
About my "coding patterns", I am among the people who make a decent contribution to a variery of topics on some occasions "my coding patterns" have shaped structure of pages interwiki. It is perfectly normal for you to frequently observe "my conding patterns". For example User:Jimbo Wales and some subpages contain "my coding paterns".
He has some issues beyond my edits. Personally, I do not have any desire to deal with him. I can easily work on another article. It is funny that he belives that he "owns" the article. He negates not on the information, but from his choice of words he takes it on an interestingly personal level. If he thinks you are on his side, all the edits o.k. or vice versa. I have added information that can be classified on both sides of the arguments. He began to flip out, when I moved from top of the page (agrees with his perspective) to bottom (disagrees his perspective). He even tried to (and did) change textbook information. Funny Guy.--Karabekir22:10, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I personaly dont like his general conduct. He has crossed the fine line of sanity as far as I care. Please do not be discouraged by his conduct. Wikipedia:Ownership of articles is an official policy fadix will have to honor.
I have no idea whats going on the article all I know is someone (fadix) is threatening me out of the blue.
Coolcat, I pitty you for still trying to deny the obvious, I will be also trying to request a checkuser in Turkish wikipedia, I just hope for you that you tok the precautions to use an open proxy there too, I really hope for you. Fad(ix)02:03, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm... I do not see a constructive intent in this comment. Do you even know what an Open Proxy is? -- Catchi? 21:37, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
I have been quite busy myself and have just now gotten a chance to log onto wikipedia. I am pretty clueless with this channel thing, which means maybe im not experienced enough to even lift this off the ground. Your thoughts?
To say the least he owes me an apology, but look what he is doing. I know I am not someone else and it should be pretty easy to prove it.
Anyways, my tables are used on many other language wikis as well as here on en. It is more popular than I care to check (Counter Vandalism Unit exists on German wiki for instance and this is small trivia I was told). His evidence is primarily based on karabekir as well as others using my tables.
I do not know if I should risk arbitration unnecesarily While I can build a strong case for his ownership of the article he is on as well as for incivility, I am not certain if it is worth to give people an excuse for people to oppose my rfas (no offense to anyone).
An evidence to his incivility would be on his userpage: I PLACED THE REST OF MY TEXT ON THE RIGHT SIDE LEAVING THE REST BLANK AS A PROTEST TO USERPAGES IDIOTIC AND NATIONALISTIC TEMPLATES THAT HAVE NO PLACE IN WIKIPEDIA.
He did revert my spelling corrections in the past with the edit summary "POV Pushing" or something along the line.
He has made very few edits to other articles aside from Armenian Genocide, and those were often sister or related articles.
The thing is we cannot annonymously claim fair use. I am fine with a fair use claim if given which archive or book these images are orriginaly from. If they have been coppied illegaly (take a look at Talk:Armenian_Genocide/Archive_7#Photographs to see what I mean) from archives or websites they must be deleted.
For example: www.armenian-genocide.org copyright notice suggests:
"COPYING-AND-PASTING" OF ANY MATERIALS POSTED ON ANI'S WEB SITE TO YOUR WEB SITE, INCLUDING THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE MAPS, TEXTS, IMAGES, PHOTOS, DESIGNS, OR ANY PORTION OF ANY MAP, TEXTS, IMAGES, PHOTOS, DESIGNS, OR ANY OTHER INFORMATION CONSTITUTING ANY PART OF ANI'S WEB SITE, IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED (See Publishing below for further information).[5]
Hi Cool Cat, I appreciate your opinion on this article (and I appreciate that you're approaching me about it on my talk page), and to tell you the truth, I kind of agree with you about the article. However, the bar is set pretty high for consensus to delete an article, there needs to be roughly 80% consensus. This AfD has approximately 50% consensus to delete (give or take a few). As a vote closer, I have to say this is not enough of a consensus to delete the article. However, I applied a {{npov}} to the article to remove the POV from the article (ie, remove the racism). Since there's not enough consensus to delete the article, I suggest you try and work the article so it is more NPOV. If you have any other concerns, please let me know. --Deathphoenixʕ17:17, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm "sort of around", I'm away on spring break [=)] with my laptop, but I'm without Photoshop and Illustrator [=(]. I think I can git-r-done when I get back home Sunday. — TheKMantalk22:04, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK Coolcat, lets say I am trying to assume good faith
Are you claiming that all those layouts that I was reffering to and that you have created are now widely used here in Wikipedia, not only in English Wikipedia but even Turkish? Is that what you are claiming? Fad(ix)23:45, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thats exactly whats happening, you may also see my code on de.wiki ja.wiki, fr.wiki. You might be using a modified version of one of my designs on your userpage, who knows. Thats the beulty of contributing to a range of topics and templates
For instance try this: Check the history of English template (mind the date being sep 10 2005) and Turkish template (mind that its created by tr:User:Oytun Yalçın 25 february 2006). You will see that the English template was created long before the Turkish one. However I have modified the english one as well as turkish one recently so as to make the code more readable.
I also applied a similar code to {{Oh My Goddess}}, a japanese anime unrelated to Turkish Military. This may be coppied to Ja wiki over a matter of few months. This does not mean I have japanese socks but rather people like what I created.
The template design isn't uneque to me. See {{NATO}} for an example of a much more complicated template with a similar code.
Thanks for your reply, now, this is my last question and I will not be bothering asking it again and will leave you alone with it. Are you Nafiz who contribute in Turkish Wikipedia? Fad(ix)03:10, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Coolcat, it was my last question... it confirms what I thought. Nafiz wrote one of those layouts in October 2004, 4 months before you were even registered in English Wikipedia, in one of the other Turkish articles(which I can show you if you want), he programmed and tested the other layout and did not copied it directly. So either he invented them, either you invented them and you are him. Coolcat in Turkish Wikipedia never contributed in articles relating to the Kurds and Armenians while Nafiz contribute in the exact same articles. Then again, like I said, I won't ask you any further questions, those last points I wanted to make clear and wanted further answers. Regards. Fad(ix)02:59, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You are listed at a participant of WikiProject Anime and manga. A recent change in how participants are listed — using a category — will result in your inadvertent removal from the project. If you wish to continue your participantion, please check the the project page for details on how to add yourself back to the project. --TheFarix00:22, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Why are participants threatened? Can't we focus on writing anime articles rather than forcing a structure on participants' userpage?
Also, what category? I dont see such a category on my userpage...
There was some complaining about maintaining the participant list and if there was a way to automate it. I suggested using a category and before I knew it someone created and changed the userbox to include the new category. I would have preferred more discussion fist, but since the category has been it's been created, I'm just following through. The category listing participants is Category:WikiProject Anime and manga participants.
No one has any intention of kicking anyone else out of the project. However, not everybody uses the userbox on their userpage. So I thought it best to notify those individuals about the changes and how to add themselves back to the list. I figured that was better then editing their userpage, which may not go over well with them. --TheFarix (Talk) 12:21, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I see. Why didnt you say that in the first place :) I am still in the game then ^_^' -- Catchi? 20:00, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.
Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator.
You should have been caught by the adminlist feature, I've manually added you in for now until I can figure out whats going on. -- Tawker22:33, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Heh, I am no admin. :P -- Catchi? 22:34, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
My archives are sorted by month. All posts on march are stored on one page. I do not add all posts at once, but I add gradualy.
Notice the + next to archive link on top of my userpage. By clicking that I add to my archive.
The structure may look a bit complicated but it is really simple to use. I can import that structure here if you like. You would have two archives instead of 5 for two months. They would not directly apear on your talk page so as not to clutter. (over time some people have a page of archives listed on their talk page)
I redid my archive system similar but not a copyvio of yours :) - its a lot cleaner now, one per month so 12 a year. So much cleaner -- Tawker07:30, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have asked you to steal my style if you like. No copyright infrigments are involved. :P -- Catchi? 11:40, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity what were your bandwidth costs monthly to run the bot, I've had a grand total of under 100MB used by anything Wikipedia related including my anti vandal bot and my two IRC bots, keeping the bot up has been basically one cron process that does it for me, I would have thought writing the bot takes more work. Feel free to ignore this if you want but you have me curious, how bad is bandwidth in your area! -- Tawker02:54, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'll gladly answer. I used to have a 256Kbits/sec line, I had to upgrade to 512Kbits/sec in order to have my bot run efficently as my bot used to disconnect because of the lack of bandwith. I am currently paying 87.83YTL a month [6]. The current exchange rate is 1$ ~ 1.347YTL (Local curency) [7]. Hence I pay roughly $65.21/month.
The bot I wrote had numerous bugs, I eventualy perfected it to its current form. For example a MSSQL server will use roughly 28 megs of ram just for the database (600+ lines) no matter how simple it is, God knows how much more for MySQL. My bots entier memory usage is 17megs. It takes constant effort to code such a thing. The original bot was no more than 10-20 lines. Its currently a 1000 line mirc script which if you ask anyone is a decent amout of code for mirc. The bot is also highly modular its not static 1000 lines.
It takes constant fixing to satisfy the needs of the masses. My bot does not just run on en. People often complain about simple stuff such as a missing colon. Or they ask for a new function. Fr.wikipedians asked for the tiny page function.
Also rarely the bot fails to ping timeout. I am not certain why this happens but I blame my pathetic ISP
Wow, thats a fair bit bigger than I thought it was. Bandwidth sure is a bit of a rip off, I pay $70 for a 10mbit fiber feed here. How many wiki's are you running bot services for! As for the bot pinging out, I'm doing it too and this is direct to a tier 1 backbone so I think its an network core issue. -- Tawker04:34, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yea but it takes my bot several hours to realise its not connected. Well it used to happen. My bot runs for 14 wikis, I intend to make it more. One thing I hate about the country I am in is the bandwidth and its costs... I kinda miss my 10mb line at MSU. -- Catchi? 11:46, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Pkk.gif. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stan04:27, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No one knows who created the PKK's flag and/or logo. If any copyrighting exist at all (as organisation is "terrorist" and hence " illegal hence cant even press charges), PKK should own them. So I sourced and tagged image accordingly.
May I ask if you could shorten the warning mesage, I and many others know the procedure, really.
The theory is that each user should only ever see the message once; as it says, "If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too.". After all, every image whose description you don't fix up is more work that you're making for other people. Stan17:04, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but in reality I do not have a way to keep track of all images I uploaded. I wasn't in the know of the image tagging on my earlier days on wiki. You know how it goes...
If you have the time, can you please review every image I uploaded (as you are perhaps using a bot) and find the images I forgot to tag. There shouldn't be many.
As the next sentence in the message's paragraph says, "You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box." In any case, I'm not going to bother posting any more notices to you, you've had plenty of warning now. And no, I'm not using a bot, I'm sinking hundreds of hours doing this manually - but Gmaxwell's slash-and-burn bots are looking better all the time, it would be a lot less work just to summarily delete all the incorrectly-handled images. Stan03:18, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The whitelist currently employed by the CVU is now implemented in Tawkerbot2. If you're on that whitelist, then you shouldn't have any problems. :) joshbuddytalk06:43, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I obviously am not. I know a whitelist existed in the original code because I wrote it. Anyways I am discussing with Tawker. -- Catchi? 11:39, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Tawkerbot2 is an original creation. You didn't write it. It is not an IRC bot per se, but rather a vandalism detector. The IRC component (which I assume you had something to do with it) merely communicated with Tawkerbot2. joshbuddytalk16:20, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The bot relies on the IRC component to operate which I wrote. Without the irc component it wouldnt work at all. If I recall correctly tawkerbot on irc is a modified version of pgkbot which is a modified version of my code. Why the heck are you answering for Tawker, the person who modified the code? -- Catchi? 16:31, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Its not going to occur. Please review the process taken by Fadix and yourself. None of the qualms appealed have indicated an attempt at dispute resolution, and therefore, this rfar will be rejected. I've removed the bogus link. Please don't put it back. -ZeroTalk20:13, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You have no idea how many times I atemted to discuss thnsg with him. Please do not dictate my talk page. -- Catchi? 20:34, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
I was aware of lots of loose talk on WP:AN/I and I looked through your "discussion" extensively in diffs. Such accusations are not the way to resolve disputes. Do you want this rfar to happen..? -ZeroTalk11:23, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What is the policy for {{Star Trek character}} in regards to rank? Some characters are promoted/demoted during the course of a series; is the most recent rank or highest rank listed? I think most recent probably makes the most sense. I was just wondering after seeing the articles on Miles O'Brien, Tom Paris, and Tuvok. — Ilyanep(Talk)01:05, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, Care to help? I am overwriting Template:ST character with Template:Star Trek character. I am displaying the most recent rank as in the latest rank the person appeared with or is cited to carry the rank (Hoshi Sato's rank is exceptionaly problematic).
I am extremely unhappy and think will stay that way until I regain control of #wikipedia-en-vandalism and make my bot to function again without interuptions or risk of interuptions due to "channel policy". Staring at the second monitor is enough to infuriate me.
As before, I'm glad to help; I'm on a wikibreak of sorts so I promise nothing ... and I still have to peruse the remaining rank articles! ;)
My current efforts have focused on adding and copyediting details for recently converted articles (e.g. lower case; upper case for proper nouns only) and ranks for various characters: I believe it important that the infobox not merely exhibit their most recent rank, but other major ones depicted on screen (see Geordi La Forge for example) which visitors may be familiar with. This won't be an issue for some characters (e.g., Data, Picard).
As well, I tweaked the template earlier to account for postings. I'm including only those postings depicted on-screen ... take a glance at Riker (without prior postings). Perhaps we can reduce the font size within the infobox/template (80%) so that it will accommodate for all the detail more efficiently? Thanks! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 19:53, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Showing all ranks may be problematic with characters that promoted from ensign to captain or even admiral. Just talking about their promotions should be fine since we have an article that shows promotions: List of Starfleet officers. (article needs some work for insignia)
One problematic rank is of the rank of Hoshi Sato. She left starfleet with the rank Lutenant Commander though we do not have a verifiable insignia for that.
Great. I don't think including multiple (major) ranks will be problematic: reducing the font size a wee-bit (even to 75%) will help. I guess I have difficulties in including only one rank when, amidst incessant reruns, the various characters spent significant chunks of time at other grades ... save Harry Kim. :)
Thanks for the resizing. Remember: I'm not advocating for including every rank, only those portrayed on-screen and within the usual timeframe of the appropriate production (i.e., excluding flashbacks, alternate stuff, and one-offs). I mean, everyone of the TNG main officers started out (presumably) as Ensigns, but I'm only listing the ranks portrayed by characters during and after that run and seen. That's why some may be simple, but some like La Forge will have more entries. Make sense? E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 20:51, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I still think its excesive but I dont really have a reason to object. However, how about displaying what you want on the article I just cited (List of Starfleet officers)? Or how about both? -- Catchi? 21:08, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks again; is there any way to reduce the font (to equal sixe) of the left column text? In any event, I think we'll be OK. The most cumbersome ones to date have actually been either La Forge (#) or Worf (who also served on a Klingon vessel during the course of the Klingon Civil War) ... and these look OK, right? If it's unworkable, I'll defer and restore to the 'current' rank.
As for specifics regarding the other list of officers, I'll provide additional details soon. I was thinking about an alphabetical (surname) listing/table with rank changes/episodes and postings to boot. Make sense? I'll work on something ... but can't just yet. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 21:20, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm... Individual characters already have that. I want List of Starfleet officers to display the rank insignias and perhaps episodes and postings etc... Seems like you'll have your hands full with that. :)
I am more concerned with movie ranks for TOS chars.
I'm unsure what the first statement means: some articles have that information, but some do not (at least clearly). Also (a minor point), some pix indicate(d) one rank, while their 'current' rank is another.
I don't think the TOS ranks will be any more problematic than TNG – Spock for instance: Lt. Cmdr., Cmdr., Capt., Ambassador (Admiral unseen, if at all) ... Ent, Ent-A, Romulus (unauthorised)
I know I'll have my hands full, that's why I can't get to it just yet! :) I'll start off with TNG main officer ranks (based on the other list) and work from there. And from then, perhaps, I'll nix the extra ranks in the infobox. In any event, thanks for your work and help. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 21:34, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh Like Uhura having two types of insignias which would take a decent amount of space. Current rank is generaly set by movies. After all almost the entier crew dies in an average movie :P
Actually, Uhura might be fairly easy (ahem?): throughout her tenure, she was depicted/noted as a Lt., Lt. Cmdr., and Cmdr. Even if the first is ambiguous, Lt. can be a general catch-all (in absence of anything authoritative). E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 21:50, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again! Take a peek at the new (and burgeoning) List of Starfleet officers. The formatting isn't perfect and requires work (e.g., I want to consolidate like information in discrete table cells), but I'm starting to go blind. However, you get the idea. Thoughts?
Also in retrospect, I may also consider and defer to your desire to include only one rank in the infobox/template (so as not to overload the infobox, but not just yet, OK?); however, should we exhibit the officer's last rank and or the one during which they had the most on-screen time as and likely is more memorable to visitors (e.g., Cmdr. Riker or Capt. Riker?) Thanks! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 23:01, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I do not mind either way. I am just debating if it is really worth it. It wouldnt overload the infobox as long as it doesnt break it. :)
List of Starfleet officers will need new rows. I am considering a row for "rank insignia" and a row for "episode of promotion"
Great. Rows or columns? :) I think the latter. Perhaps "Episode of promotion" should be "Notes" instead? I'm still disatisfied with the table format/appearance (I've another one in mind, but must part soon) ... I wanted to exhibit something for your review. Merci! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 23:20, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have reverted your page move of Kira Nerys to Nerys Kira. Please explain on the article's talk page why you feel this is necessary and attempt to get some consensus before moving this page again. Thanks. 23skidoo02:42, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me all names on wikipedia follow the western order, in other words First name (given name) then Last name. I explained myself adequately in move summary. What more is there that needs to be explained? -- Catchi? 10:17, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
Yeah an japanese names are always the other way around but we have them in right order here on wikipedia. See Kikuko Inoue for example. -- Catchi? 10:45, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
Well, it's disagreeable to skidoo23 and likely others for legitimate reasons. Perhaps we should put this to a vote on that talk page and/or propose it at WP:RM? That will validate either perspective. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 10:47, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Why do we need to vote on everything. I clearly know when adressed by her full name she is always adressed as "Kira Nerys". All japanese names follow the same pattern but in practice japanese names are given in western order in order to evade confusion. An ignorant visitor would think that Nerys' given name is "Kira" which is not true. Only intimate people dare to call her by her first name Nerys. Thats exactly how it is in japanese culture. -- Catchi? 10:53, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
While informative, we're not talking about Japanese names here. The Bajoran name dichotomy is nothing that an effecive article lead cannot rectify. Basically, the move flies in the face of the common naming convention and is disagreeable. And, amidst contention, a vote will only validate your position which – while I empathise with – I don't necessarily agree with in this instance and suspect most others will not either. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 11:02, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Why do I care... Do as you like. Meanwhile Ill be working on List of Starfleet officers by rank you may want to take a look and tell me what you think. -- Catchi? 11:42, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback. I've reformatted the table to more clearly delineate relevant data points; thus, it should now be easier to follow. Thoughts? Thanks! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 14:41, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
E. Pluribus Anthony pretty well sums up my objections and the objections of others so there's no need for me to parrot him, while CBurnett also states a further case on the Kira Nerys talk page. Cheers. 23skidoo15:54, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Still I think the right otder is Nerys Kira regardless after all thats how we got all japanese names on wikipedia. All of them folow this pattern. I am not the kind that jolts through the universe enforcing guidelines so I want you guys to agree with this. Her name is not Kira, her name is Nerys. Now her last name is Kira. Why do not we follow the pattern?
All japanese websites refer to anyone japanese with lastname then first name. In japanese culture people are generaly referanced by their last name if fact it would be disrespectfull to call someone by the first name unless one is intimite. Why does this matter, well, we have something similar in Bajoran culture apperantly. Many on screen referances explain us her given name is Nerys so Why cant we follow first namelast name format? -- Catchi? 18:57, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
According to the Star Trek WikiProject main page, we follow strict rules of canon. Find one canonical reference that indicates that Kira Nerys was ever referred to as Nerys Kira (or Laren Ro, or Ital Odo for that matter) and we'll look at it. You won't find one. I in fact refer you to the TNG episode "Ensign Ro" in which it is clearly stated in canonical dialogue that it is incorrect to use the traditional "western" form of names. 23skidoo20:07, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You see wikipedia is not yet run by the federation and Bajorans can file a complaint to the Jimbo and let him consider. :) The thing is this has nothing to do with cannon but more about how wikipedia names always appear. We are folowing cannon, I am not giving him a third name or modifying spelling etc.. It is how the names apear on wikipedia, same goes for all Japanese names. No Japanese is ever called by the First name and then Last name (ever) by the Japanese. I am using the Japanese as an excelent example of western dominance in naming on En.wikipedia. -- Catchi? 20:33, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
But the Japanese articles are generally not fictional names. If you go and change "Kira Nerys" to "Nerys Kira" when there is not one single officially licensed TV episode, book, comic book, reference work, website, or anything else that uses this spelling, a few things will happen. First, it will be endlessly reverted because someone will see it (correctly IMO) as an error. Second, it will create many redirects and under the MOS we're supposed to avoid redirects whenever possible. That means a ton of piping will be necessary; and if you go around changing all the word orders in all the articles you'll end up with the same situation as I mentioned in my first point -- someone will just fix them all. One of the purposes of the Star Trek WikiProject is to set rules and guidelines for handling articles based on this fictional universe; one reason why it was established is because of a growing movement to remove all pop culture and/or fiction-related articles from Wikipedia (referring here to individual episode articles, articles on characters, concepts, etc.) Similar Wikiprojects exist for Wizard of Oz, Doctor Who, Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, etc. And in the case of Star Trek it is considered correct to use the name Kira Nerys. If you want to try and find a consensus to change it at the WikiProject, feel free and good luck. 23skidoo20:46, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Why are you wishing me luck? -- Catchi? 21:24, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
Cool Cat,
Thanks for fixing the flint bio box. I have reverted to the previous until we can resize the image. I like your changes but the Image is too large. I have tried unsuccessfully. Is there a way of doing this? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks FrankWilliams00:15, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just use the Size parameter. Example: |Size = 200px
I'll do this one for you, but in the future please ask before taking action. I am here only to help. :)
Hi there, I notice you tagged a number of images for speedy deletion with the reason "Now useless". However, "Now useless" is not currently one of our criteria for speedy deletion, so I am -- Catchi? 14:28, 20 March 2006 (UTC)removing the speedy deletion tags.
If you feel the images are redundant copies, in the same image file format and same or lower resolution, of something else on Wikipedia, please tag them with {{Isd|name of other image without Image: prefix}}. If you feel that the images are not useful on Wikipedia, please list them on WP:IFD. Possible reasons for this would be that the images are unencyclopedic or orphaned. Thanks! Stifle01:06, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I dont have time. Notice they are orphans and I uploaded tens of better coppies. They can waiste wikipedias hardrives for all I care. I have cleaned up the images and uploaded them to commons or uploaded better coppies. Never the less its all beter now and those images will not ever be used. -- Catchi? 01:22, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
I suggest you delete the images. -- Catchi? 01:25, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
I don't have any valid reason to unless I can see what image on Wikipedia (not Commons) that they are redundant to. Stifle01:31, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You are hesitating to delete unused images.... commons:Starfleet ranks and insignia shows all starfleet rank insignias on commons, some are red (as they are unfree images at the moment). I speedied tens of images I moved. I do not have the time to tag them one by one. Also take a look at Starfleet ranks and insignia. -- Catchi? 01:35, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
See this diff for the old image for deletion and replacement image. This is the best I can do. -- Catchi? 01:42, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
If you are just going to chant policy like that you should definately not be processing speedies. The point of spedies is to evade redundent burocracy which you seem to request me to get indulge with. -- Catchi? 01:42, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure that you understand the speedy deletion process. The point of speedy deletions is to avoid putting articles or images through time-consuming process when there is already a consensus that this category of content should be deleted, for example articles about bands that don't assert the band's notability. There is no consensus that images which are useless should be speedily deleted, unless they fulfill some other, more strict, criterion for speedy deletion. Examples include images uploaded under a fair use claim which are not used in any article and so tagged for seven days. Public domain or free license images do not qualify unless they are redundant to a higher- or equal-quality image of the same thing in the same format elsewhere on Wikipedia, and that image is specified. For example, the following cannot be speedily deleted:
Images that have now been uploaded on Commons
Images that have been reuploaded under a different license (unless the original image was fair use and the new one has a free license)
Images that have been reuploaded under a different format
Actually, scratch that. Given the diff that you specified, I can now proceed to verify the redundancy and speedily delete the old images. Thanks for your help. Stifle13:41, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Look at the sources he has cited for his bann of the Kurdish flag in Iran. They are random webpages. They have nothing to do with the topic. I have made warnings onthe topic. 69.196.139.25002:02, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I included a diff[12] to your Rfc in an ongoing ArbCom case that we unfortunately had to file against Aucaman; so just be aware of that please.Zmmz22:21, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for letting me know. -- Catchi? 22:54, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi CoolCat, I just saw that RfC page you put up for Aucaman et al. This doesn't really look like a formally valid user-conduct RfC. Could you please check the formal rules again and reformat accordingly, so that it will actually be useful in attracting people to comment? I'd suggest you shouldn't advertise it in the meantime. Thanks! Lukas(T.|@)14:02, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm... so rfc structure has changed over all this time. I'll take a look and fix it.
I make it a personal policy not to advertise to parties. The only people I notified are the ones already involved with the case.
I see you notified Zmmz and somebody else, but not even the parties actually criticized, i.e. Aucaman et al.? That, IIRC, is one of the most basic requirements and has to be documented in the RfC before it can be counted valid. - By the way, you may wonder why I've become active so quickly in this, but I've been acting as a kind of semi-advocate in Aucaman's other affairs lately. Lukas(T.|@)14:27, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm.. I see. I'll advertise to them as well. -- Catchi? 14:51, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Anything else I should do? Feel free to assist. :) -- Catchi? 14:55, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Hmm, sorry, no offense, but ... rather than assisting, I'm probably going to shoot it down. Honestly, I don't think the RfC in this form is going to go anywhere. Give me half an hour, I'll add a note explaining why I think it won't work, and suggest you drop it for the moment and try in a different form. Lukas(T.|@)15:06, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Are you suggesting personal attacks and pov pushing are acceptable? I depleted every method avalible to me. I ask for asitance on the noticeboard I asked people on IRC. I let them be for months in hopes someone would interfere. I was going to directly jump to arbitration but Francis requested I go for RfC first.
Shooting an rfc I filed for obviously problematic behaviour is puzzling behaviour after making me work so much. I am currently confused as well as frustrated by your statement.
Sorry, wait till you see my reasons. This is not about their behaviour not being problematic, but there are formal problems which I think can't be healed within the present process. Lukas(T.|@)15:24, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, here I am again. Well, sorry, as you've seen, I did it. As for how to proceed further, I'd say you leave Aucaman alone; he's now at Arbcom anyway and your case seems at least to heavily overlap with that one. You could of course still submit evidence there. Muhamed, if he's really as extreme as you paint him, should simply be blockable by admin decision alone (repeated, persistent personal attacks are blockable, I think.) As for Diyako and Heja, I can imagine that an RfC might be a good idea; I don't know them well, but what I saw of Diyako during the Newroz/Norouz comedy was highly problematic. Lukas(T.|@)16:28, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I am not annoyed. I just hate to see Anti Air flying around ;). I can take your advice and leave Aucaman out. (simple enough). However I have repetively plead for assitance for Muhamed and no one interfered (even filed an ANB). So unless there is a fast way to get rid of him an RfC is the only option. -- Catchi? 16:36, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I have no problem with that. I'd just recommend that a single RfC should be about a single, well-defined set of incidents. Maybe you could split it up. Lukas(T.|@)16:41, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sure but as you may recall gathering evidence is a painful process. I didnt cite too many as practialy almost any diff they have can be used as evidence. Hence I invite you againto assist. I do not mind if you break the RfC into 3. I just dont want to veture into this all alone. -- Catchi? 16:45, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Just a note: I wonder why you are still so upset about that restaurant incident? That was entirely reasonable; the article wasn't really about the restaurant as such, but about a political event that took place there, and which happened to involve some prominent Kurdish politicians. (see Mykonos restaurant assassinations). It was moved, but still has got that category. Lukas(T.|@)16:45, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I wasnt upset. The article was originaly talking about a non notable restourant. All that was relavant was "supposively" two kurds were murdered there. So it was an easy delete as it was pointless. During the Afd Article was renamed and expanded to explain historic event rather than the restourant. The expansion was indirectly my doing.
I was upset that article to be tagged with the Kurdistan category. As you might know Kurdistan is a contraversial region of a proposed kurdish country with borders determined by whoever is drawing. Berlin is not even in the middle east hence no where near Kurdistan unless borders reach to berlin germany.
Yeah, but at the time Muhamed cat'ed it, it was clear enough what the article was intended to be about. It was a poorly written article, to be sure, but that wasn't his fault, its relevance to the "Kurdistan" category was obvious to anybody familiar with the subject. So, I really don't see how you would class his edit as disruptive or anything. At the most, you might argue that "Kurdish history" or somesuch would have been a better choice than "Kurdistan", but that's still just a minor, perfectly AGF-able mistake of judgment, not disruption. Lukas(T.|@)17:02, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Think it this way, this is like tagging Kennedy Assasination with Category:Asia. Kurdistan supposed to be a proposed country or region and is contraversial. The user tags random provinces in turkey, iran, Syria, Turkey with kurdistan category as well as a restourant in Berlin germany. If I tag Paris as a part of greater germany I would be blocked for breaching WP:POINT, I dont see why this user is allowed to do what he is doing. because of him and people like him the categories related to kurds are imposible to navigate as you are likely to find categories and subcategories with a handful articles.
Check his past contribution: [13]. And/or just review the edit summaries: [14].
"Random provinces"? - Could there be a tiny little chance that they were not random but had one little unimportant thing in common - that of being considered part of Kurdistan by some? ;-) I mean, you might not like to consider them part of Kurdistan, but some people clearly do. I'm ready to agree that some of his activity is problematic, but the wish of having a category "Kurdistan" covering these things is certainly not prima facia illegitimate, and I don't think you'll gain much support RfC'ing with that argument. Lukas(T.|@)17:23, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Look. This person only tags random articles (doesnt have to be provinces and on occasions the word kurd is not even mentioned in the article) with category Kurdistan with an edit summary talking about removing bosmongol propoganda by adding the category. That is all he does aside from trolling my rfa and voting on afds etc. There is nothing else I can cite because thats everything he has done.
We do not tag France under category Germany just because some neo-nazis consider it as a part of greater germany. Nor do we tag Canada as a US state even though many people consider that (no offense to anyone, just an analogy). So why is it that Kurdistan is treated any diferently? You do see my point I suppose.
(Heavens, how many colons are these? :-) - I guess we'd better leave it at an agree-to-disagree about the Kurdistan bit for now - but that doesn't mean I wouldn't be willing to support other aspects of your RfC. Take care, Lukas(T.|@)17:48, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As you requested I have filed an RfC and not an RfAr. -- Catchi? 13:34, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Hey man, do you want me to join as have tried to resolve this dispute? Because if you lump together all four I'm not sure If I can do that, I can only provide an outside view that agrees with most of it - I really have no experience of dealing with Aucaman. I'm not really sure of the benefit of lumping Muhamed in with Diyako and Heja either... I mean his case is clearcut. He really needs to be permbanned and thats that. Let me know how you think it is best to proceed. - FrancisTyers15:47, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey there
I do not know much about Aucaman. I am primarily bugged by his creation of articles such as Turkish Kurdistan. I also observed his less than admirable tone as I watch practicaly every article related to kurds. Maybe an RFC against him isn't necesary since there is an RfAr... but too late for that now.
Muhamed is also a clear cut. Someone who can't understand english should not be making edits here aside from interwiki links.
Tagging random articles (such as a restoruant in Berlin, Geramany) with a contraversial category Kurdistan or voting on afds etc without undertsanding the rationale (due to language barrier).
A dispute resolution would require heavy use of translation as user does not know english (or any language at a native level).
I frankly think he should stick to german wikipedia, just like how I don't contribute to russian wikipedia. So I don't think a dispute resolution for him is possible.
The other two parties (Diyako and Heja) frequently make contraversial/biased edits. They are no longer newbies and they do not show any evidence of a learning curve or improvement. You had to recently clean up thier mess on Kingdom of Kurdistan for example as comparing the british gov and saddam is bad taste (in my view at least).
I did not file the RfC to get people perm banned though. I hope to gather comunity support against their behaviour which may or may not result with bans. I am not sure what can you do to resolve the dispute. Diyako's recent behaviour on the Newruz (or whatever the holiday is called) article is quite problematic. I provided for some diffs to that end on the rfc page.
For me all 4 people cause simmilar problems on articles related to Kurds.
It would be greatly appreciated if you participated and left a comment there as you have at least had experience with some of the people involved there. Some users unfortunately (like Lukas) are trying to turn this into an indictment of sorts against nearly all Iranian editors. Much obliged.--Zereshk05:59, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the fact is it hasnt even been one week since I recreated those articles. You went ahead for mass deletion without even discussing it. Frankly I find that rude. -- Catchi? 22:45, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Interesting point. I will remeber this incident and I can assure you the memories are not pleasant. I see this as a continunation of the censor of fiction and pop culture on wikipedia. -- Catchi? 02:37, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Are you willing to reactivate as an active mentor for user:JarlaxleArtemis? Linuxbeak has indicated he is too busy with other matters. I also left a note for User:JSpudeman the other designated mentor. JarlaxleArtemis has been causing problems, and has been extremely sluggish about completing his requirements. Without an active mentor he will have to be blocked. -Will Beback23:17, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I guess I can although he really didn't need any supervision when I was active. -- Catchi? 02:35, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
No offense, but JA needed more supervision than he received, IMO. He may have been on his good behavior initially but it didn't last. Starting back in December he blew off the unbanning requirements, in particular apologizing to those he'd attacked and undoing the damage he'd caused, but no one followed up and he simply deleted the notice from his talk page. He's reverted to the behaviors which led his two ArbCom cases: ignoring policies and guidelines, edit warring to defy MOS, misusing image tags, and being uncivil towards other editors. He would've been on a one-year ArbCom ban if his vicious and widespread attacks hadn't gotten him banned "permanently". He came back because Linuxbeak is such a nice guy, and because he promised to do a number of things. JA is still on parole and is now violating it. He lied outright on his user page this week, asserting that he never created doppelganger accounts even though a few days later he found the passwords for most of them. I've asked him to stop editing voluntarily until he completes his unbanning requirements, and I finally told him I'd block him if he did not attend to it. He's promised (for the nth time) that he knows all of the rules and will follow them. Without active, involved mentorship this editor can't keep editing here. I'll work with you to make sure that JA lives up to the standards of the community. Thanks, -Will Beback08:55, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I wasnt aware of that. You see when people have problems with him they should notify the mentors. Sure, I'll gladly work with you. -- Catchi? 22:09, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
I have reverted your edit on batman page for god knows how many times now. I recommend you have a read of WP:NPOV. I'd hate to spend the time fileing another rfc.
I am under the impresion you are here to expand and improve wikipedia. You need to be able to work with others rather than senselessly revert them screeming "That is POV".
I have argued on the talk page for every edit I have contributed. If you please argue your case, we will be able to understand your reasoning and thus have better chances for corporating rather than just reverting. Please see the relevant talk page. Bertilvidet09:19, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
An edit summary explains what I was doing. I have explained myself clearly. Even on the talk page. -- Catchi? 21:49, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Similar to syrian Kurdistan article. Should be treated the same. What do you tink? -- Catchi? 22:03, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
On face value, yes. I've seen that article and wondered the same myself. However, in issues I know little about I prefer to wait and see what more knowledgeable editors have to say first. The closing comments of mine you have quoted, for example, were made when I'd had the chance to review the entire debate and were meant to summarise what had happened. Thanks for the heads up though. --kingboyk22:05, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There is also an Iranian Kurdistan. All thsese articles were started by same people in very little time. -- Catchi? 22:10, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Probably best to deal with them all at the same time then. You could be bold and just redirect, but a joint AFD would probably be better as I think it's best to take potentially controversial issues to the community. You can tag that page with the subst'd AFD tag, save it, and then edit the AFD link to point to the AFD you just started. Then just add a mention to the AFD article that you're actually placing 2 (or more) articles for the community's consideration not just the one. --kingboyk22:15, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I understand you arent knowlegable on the topic, but what do you think of Category:Kurdistan? What article would belong to this category? -- Catchi? 22:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
This is the message I get "This user has not specified a valid e-mail address, or has chosen not to receive e-mail from other users." --ManiF01:11, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Try again. Sorry there was a minor issue I had to fix. -- Catchi? 01:16, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
I want to make the article more like List of Oh My Goddess episodes a comparasion chart. Would you support that? -- Catchi? 20:15, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
I would support a comparison table if I thought we had authoritative sources on these classes, but as far as I know we do not. The classes listed on this page are pretty much all classes where a starship was mentioned once in dialogue (and we've later told belong to a certain classes) or a starship appeared once in a listing on a monitor for x number of frames. As far as I know we don't have authoritative sources on them, so it ends up with people constantly "correcting" the statistics one way or the other depending on some fan non-canon source. AlistairMcMillan01:39, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There are piblished wikipedia "encyclopedias" that have comparasion charts as well as technical drawings. I do not know if this is cannon but if it is it can be very useful in creating a comparasion chart. -- Catchi? 20:31, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
[15] this is another chart. Again I am not certain if it is cannon but it does look like those technical drawings we see on various star trek publications. -- Catchi? 20:51, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
Sorry I was being a little disingenuous. There are no authoritative sources for statistics on the different starships in Star Trek. If you look at the various talk pages on the starships or the different classes, you'll see that we don't even have statistics for the ships that appeared every week. Talk:USS Enterprise (NCC-1701-D)
Fine how about using the technical manuals you mentioned on the talk page of Enterprise D for the comparasion? I reliase there may be inconsistencies but we can have two columns, one for DS9 and one for TNG -- Catchi? 23:52, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
Great. Then another column for the Star Trek Encyclopedia for when it contradicts the Technical Manuals. Another column for actual series dialogue when it contradicts the Manuals and the Encyclopedia. And another column for production staff who designed the ships, for when they contradicted the Manuals, the Encyclopedia, and the series dialogue. You see where this is going, right? And this is just the Galaxy class. If you don't believe me, then take some time to read through sites like ex-astris-scientia.org. Please believe me there are no consistent sets of specs for the starships in Star Trek. AlistairMcMillan23:58, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes an excelently informative article comparing the technical manuals and roughly copares the ship. If you do not want to assist I can understand that but I think we have material to cover. We can leave out fannon, no problem and stick to cannon and semi cannon sources. Starfleet ranks and insignia is a greater mess if you think about it, but look at the article. -- Catchi? 00:08, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
You are not listening to me. There are no authoritative sources for statistics on even the ships that we saw regularly. The few sources we have for these statistics all contradict each other. Then you have the ships that only appeared in a single episode or were only mentioned in passing in dialogue... there is nothing useful that can be said about them that doesn't stray into fanon or speculation. AlistairMcMillan01:30, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You are right I am not listening. Do you know where can I aquire data on Star Trek Tech Manuals online? -- Catchi? 22:32, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
Are you asking where can you get the manuals? eBay and Amazon both have them. If you insist on going ahead with this, can you please start your efforts at a temp page somewhere. So that once you discover for yourself that the statistics are not available, it is easy for someone to tidy up afterward. AlistairMcMillan23:08, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Who Updates the template. I made a suggestion like 6 hours ago, and nothing has happened. In a day or so it will be irrelevant (2006 Commonwealth Games). --HamedogTalk|@12:37, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure how that page is processed. -- Catchi? 20:19, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
Glad that was cleared, next time I suggest you try opening hailing frequencies before firing all phasers. -- Catchi? 01:06, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
Here a proposition for you, as I have shown in my evidence page, a merging test is the best way to track socks(but not vandals with no specific interests)), how hard would it be to write such a program? I have some ideas on the type of tests the program should do. With this kind of test introduced in checkuser, it will be much more difficult for a user to hide behind socks. It could answer with a correlation value and a probabilistic % that this is due to chance with a comparative sample. Fad(ix)01:14, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Checkuser and this are completely two diferent procedures.
Checkuser is someone determining if two aliases are the same based on IP as well as logs. Every edit made comes with a number of unique signatures establishing who made the edit. It is possible to fool a number of them but people who checkuser are fairly through with this. Generaly persistant socks such as User:MARMOT don't require checkuser to be blocked anyways. Only very few users have this kind of access. I am not even entrusted with admin privilages so I cant quite assist you with this one just yet.
I asked User:Interiot for something like that quite a while ago. His hands are generally full and he may need a reminder. This is a delicate process though. You do not want to use arbitrary percentages accusing random people. It is possible to have false positives for two unrelated people of which one contributes weekdeays and another weekends. I do not know how hard the programming would be but for Interiot it would be a walk in the park.
I know how checkuser work, I just thought that it would be good if this kind of method is incorporated, and % are not really arbitrary, it depends on the type of rules you set, comparing with a heterogenous sample. Study of the heterogenouty or homogenouty of the continuity between two different users might be enought, this coupled with word search on the contribution summaries or the articles title with a correlation or regression test from the center, more proximal the other users contribution in the same article or articles containing the same word to the user, higher the confidence rate. It would be easy to fake checkuser, but not such a test. -—Preceding unsigned comment added by Fadix (talk • contribs)
Trust me I debated this to death with a number of people. Giving numbers is bad practice as people would start banning other people based on percentages which does not necesarily mean they are sockpuppets. People often edit wikipedia after work and due to workhours and/or timezones lots of people will appear as sockpuppets. An american and a chineese can edit the same article for months with a sockpuppet patern. I do feel such a tool is necesary but I am skeptical how usefull it would be. -- Catchi? 20:30, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
Bluebot made the above edit, removing the GA Tag, dispite the article holding that status. Can you see any reason why this has occured? --HamedogTalk|@09:38, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Cool Cat, it seems that we have several common points of interest concerning contemporary Turkey and minority issues is in Turkey. It is also clear that we have differing approaches, at least to the quite sensitive Kurdish question. IMHO our differing approaches should be considered as a strength in order to write well-balanced articles on the issues. If we admit our differences, I am certain that we can write really good NPOV articles. This requires, however, a mutual respect for the other's view, willingness to discussions, refrain from personal attacks and mutually assuming good faith. Lots of work is indeed to improve Turkey-related articles. I suggest that we collaborate about this important task. You are hereby invited. Bertilvidet11:56, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have no problem respecting other peoples views. It appears large masses do not honor the same concept which is a problem. Your concerns regarding civility is mutual, in any debate I expect nothing less from you. I also do not want to see any other example of vote stacking, there is no good faith in creating an artificial conensus.
I suggest we deal with a few problematic users first. I do not want them to interfere with our colaborations on such a sensative set of articles.
Having said all that you must realise where I am standing. I have nothing against the Kurds in general, however I object the portraying of them as if they own the place. Fortunately/unfortunately they don't and even Iraqi Kurds report to Bagdad.
Some Kurds do campaign for an independent state and wikipedia has a palce for them at their own article: Kurdish nationalism. Elsewhere it becomes prolematic. (note that this article does not exist)
The region they campaign for also has its own article: Kurdistan. I do not like such a thing being treated as a geographic region in lead and later treated like a proposed nation.
I also suggest keeping a {{POV}} tag on more contraversial articles such as Kurdistan until article becomes a Featured article and hence demonstrate NPOV to its fullest extent.
Is there a problem with that so far? -- Catchi? 14:04, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
I appreciate your praise of mutual respect and civility, and in continuation of this my edits and opinions are not determined by what you want.
I dont understand what you mean by "I suggest we deal with a few problematic users first". Who are they, how are they problematic? We cannot prevent other users from interfering in our collaboration, indeed it is the nature of Wikipedia that anyone can edit and question whatever we write.
As long as a large number of people define them as Kurds, and refer to the place they live as Kurdistan or Turkish Kurdistan (which indicate an accept of the Turkish state) it is my conviction that this term deserves an article here - of course an article that outlines the political and geographical facts. I respect that you disagree on this, and will collaborate in improving the coverage whatever the outcome will be.
The {{POV}} tag should be used with cautiousness. If there are legitimate concerns about the neutrality it is fair to use the tag. In that case, I will however, prefer that the critical points are entered into the article so that it becomes balanced / NPOV. Bertilvidet15:53, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Look, some middle easterners refer to the US as the devil. We do not move it to Devil (country).
Kurdistan is an acceptable term for an article not because what kurds call the place, but because its is citable on a variety of sources as well as being a proposed country otherwise it would be a simple redirect or perhaps a disambiguation page.
However, Turkish Kurdistan is not as acceptable. After all only Kurds (and perhaps only some) referance the place as such and while rest of the nation and planet refer to the place as soultheastern anatolia. Turkey has 7 geographic regions recognised by the goverment as well as the international community hence no one can object. We can use those rather than a contraversial name such as 'Turkish Kurdistan' which means 'Turkish lands owned by the Kurds' as per dictionary definiton. This is a breaches npov. Also why do we have to use the word Kurdistan?
It is however notable enough to be a redirect, just not notable enough to be the article. We do not want two articles explaining the same place. That is why redirects exist and that is why they were created. I do not believe I am being unreasonable here.
The point of {{POV}} is to get community attention. It might sometimes be best for unrelated parties to detect bias we may not necesarily see. Let me elaborate using fiction,
For an average Romulan citizen, Klingons are a brutal and irrational race of savage people who smell bad.
For the Klingons they are a brave race of warriors following Khalesses teachings superior to every other race.
NPOV would be neither of course but a 3rd party would be better in choosing the NPOV way rather than a Romulan or Klingon citizen. {{POV}} does not mean the article is to be ignored but it just means article is biased and needs attention. A third party can only know about the dispute if it is advertised. This may take days or even a month. This is how contraversial topics are processed on wikipedia and sometimes a {{POV}} tag is intentionaly left such as on PKK.
Hi Cool Cat, I do understand why some editors prefer the more compact version of the statement, but I see the sensibility of the issue. I can live with either version, as long as the (claimed, if you like) predominance of Kurds is mentioned. Apart from that, I'm fine.--Hippalus15:32, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
An afterthought: as there seems to be a consensus that Southeastern Anatolia does have a predominantly Kurdish population, I think I prefer the version without the explicite statement that this is a claim by the BBC - the current revision, that is. Why? Because that statement is misleading. It isn't just one controversial claim by the BBC. Those articles of the BBC and the Guardian, and Globalsomethingdotorg, accept those data as established facts. I don't know if they are right in doing so, but if those facts need to be contested, they should be contested first on the talk page of Kurds in Turkey or Kurdistan. If the consensus there changes, those changes can be reflected on articles like Batman, Turkey. I don't think pages with little traffic like Batman, Turkey or even Talk:Batman, Turkey are the right arena for such discussions. What do you think?--Hippalus13:17, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't remove the inline reference to the municipal website. Even though it is a double reference, it is valid here, as it the source of the population figure. Cheers,--Hippalus15:24, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Why not use ref? Ill apply this. -- Catchi? 15:38, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Cool Cat, I had a look, and that sure ia a good solution. Now the only issue left on the article is the Kurdish one... ;-) --Hippalus16:17, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes and I do not see a reason for a discussion. We cant talk about demographics without a census. -- Catchi? 16:38, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi Cool Cat, I noticed you just reverted Batman, Turkey to the 'BBC version'. You probably didn't read my last comment on the talk page when you did that. Could you please read my comment, and consider reverting your reverts back to the 'proposal version'? I would really appreciate such a move. I know I'm asking much of you, but I believe it is important we all treat this matter in a constructive way. Are you willing to work with me on reaching a solution? Thanks a lot!--Hippalus19:08, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I do not accept a disclaimer not here but on any article. How many articles do you know that has disclaimers?
Wikipedia is not a soapbox. I can't comprimise just because Bertilvidet demands esspecialy when what he suggest is talking about ethnicity fractions without a census to base it on. His argument is a set of wesle words at best.
Hows it going? -- Catchi? 20:38, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
I'm alright thank you kind sir, how are you? — FireFox • T[20:40, 27 March 2006]
At a state of confusion, getting worn out by endless pov debates by people who compit behaviour that would get me blocked in ten seconds and the ten seconds is only because of the lag between admin and wikipedia servers. Also quite lonely since my removal from #wikipedia-en-vandalism. I begun to think essjay as an egomaniac which probably is bad judgement on my part due to the ongoing neural shock. It is really rare for a founder to be booted off of the enviorment he created. -- Catchi? 20:52, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
I was actualy curious if anyone cared my ejection from the channel. I dont want to pester angela if people hate me (a gereal fashion these days). Also I am having a difficult time on wikipedia due to a number of people and would appriciate any help. -- Catchi? 21:12, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
Engineering to FireFox, do you copy? -- Catchi? 18:29, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
There are now 3 outside views who agree with my refutation of your claims, one who accuses you of violating WP:AGF and an admin who says your verging on violating WP:CIVIL. You may wish to pull the complaint before you dig yourself in too far a hole. -Mask04:06, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
An Administrator has closed the discussion. I'd ask you to only bring up serious and verified complaints in the future. -Mask01:21, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Cool Cat, I'd really like thank you for taking the time to vote at my RfA. I withdrew due to certain controversies, but I appreciated your vote and hope to see you here in the future. Thanks again. --Khoikhoi05:16, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Dude, please stop removing the Kurdish category from pages; this category has survived the CFD attempts and categorizing areas by ethnic population is legitimate and encyclopedic. --Moby08:53, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Pov pushing is not welcome on wikipedia. Boudries of kurdistan is strictly confined at northern iraq. Anywhere else its highly contraverisal. What you are doing is like the tagging of Paris, France under Category:Germany. -- Catchi? 15:46, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Hey. Whats the deal with all these cats e.g. Kurdish cuisine does every single Kurd article deserve a category!?
--Kash23:12, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Categories ment to be navigation aids. Yes all kurdish related articles may have a category. I object the usage of Kurdistan on random provinces of choice of a random wikipedia editor who doesn't even necesarily know english (Muhamed case). -- Catchi? 06:21, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Please do not remove the link again. I am very serious about this. I will eventully prepare my case for arbitration, I just haven't gotten to it yet. -- Catchi? 18:10, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
I just noticed that you placed a misleading link (I still have yet to see proper steps and procedure pertaining to dispute resolution). I guarantee the Arbitration Committee will reject this nonsense over a heated naming convention; please don't do that kind of stuff, it's silly. -ZeroTalk18:24, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Issue isn't about a naming convention but more about Fadix as well as others dominating the article not allowing contribution from anyone but people they agree with as well as accusing them of being my sockpuppets or me being theirs.
Fadix for instance have reverted me with the edit summary of pov pushing when my edit was spelling corrections (this was long ago). My latest request was to the inclusion of the turkish referance of the incident which was whelmingly opposed but eventualy added to the article. Even something so basic had taken me weeks of "discussion". It was later removed regardless. This is unaccceptable as per WP:OWN.
Weather or not if arbitration will accpet the case or not is to be seen when I submit my case. I am waiting for the arbitration queue to heal a bit. I am also overwhelmed with the mess I am dealing with atm most notably on the three rfcs.
Since we have discussed something similar. What do you think of the tagging of random Turkish provinces with this category? Please note that there has been no offical recognition of such a claim. -- Catchi? 16:00, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi Cool Cat - to be honest, I'd rather not get any further involved in this - my argumants with regard to the stub category weren't based on any political views on my part, simply on standard stub sorting practice. I know too little about the political issues involved in the area to support either side over the other in general terms. Grutness...wha?01:39, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The main poblem is no one knows anything about it, however people are quick to keep the category. The issue has little to do with politics but is more about people drawing the borders of the proposed country by using categories. I can understand why admins evade pov arguments but there is more to this than just my pov. If I were to tag Paris France under a Category:Germany this would be a violation of WP:POINT and I would be blockded (rightfully), I'd like this category to be treated the same. -- Catchi? 06:13, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Mm. I see what you mean. I'd suggest posting about it on WP:AN - chances are you'd get two or three admins there who do know a little about it and who haven't already put themselves offside with one side of the argument via SFD. I'm just concerned that - having already weighed in on the subject there, to do the same elsewhere will make it look like I am on one clear side in this (which I'm not - I can understand both sides of the argument). Certainly something needs to be done to make sure that Wikipedia doesn't appear to be supporting Kurdish independence via stealth. ISTR something similar has happened in the past with articles relating to Macedonia and "Macedonian Greece", so there are admins with expertise on this sort of topic. Grutness...wha?06:25, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I clearly understand your standing. You dont want to appear to be taking sides but I think that is exactly why people are hesitant in interfereing with this kind of behaviour which is why it is continuing.
I mean take a look at the case of vote stacking on Turkish Kurdistan's vfd, an obvious pov fork. Why was it not treated the same as Syrian Kurdistan? The VfD ended unconclusively with the help of the 15 extra votes gathered. I suspect admins were hesitant to touch it in fear of accusations of "Anti-Kuridsh" POV.
Hi there Cool Cat, thanks for your reaction. I see you still have some issues with the temporal version. I'll try to adress them here. First of all, as far as I can see the 'proposal' version doesn't contain weasle words. If you do see them, could you point them out to me? We might change those. Secondly, your concern about the 'disclaimer-message'. I think it is inevitable we have a disclaimer here and there in a collaborative encyclopedia like this one. A lot of Wikipedia's articles actually contain disclaimers. The POV-tag is the most famous disclaimer message, probably. However, I think a 'disclaimer' in a footnote is more encyclopedic than a POV-tag. References and footnotes are a procedure used very often in science circles, and generally approved of. I think they will make this a better encyclopedia.
Okay, a last request. Have a look at the 'proposal' version for a second time. Could you please tell me whether the 'disclaimer'-footnote covers your concern on the unverifiability of the demographic statement? And if that is the case, could you consider leaving it to the readers to decide whether he accepts the statement as true or not, till we find a better compromise? Cheers,--Hippalus19:59, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey
I do not accept any dislaimer of any kind. {{POV}} ment to be a short term disclaimer. Your disclaimer ment to last till census which is slightly less than 10 years asuming that census will check ethnicity. This has nothing to do with my satisfaction or not. You cannot suggest something then talk about how baseless it is in a disclaimer.
The argument by the other party of the discussion is nothing but weasle words.
I realise you are trying hard to come up with a middle ground. Sadly I do not see a middle ground and am not willing to comprimise from my stance at the moment.
Hey there. I appreciate you took the time to understand what I'm trying to get at. Yeah, I did notice you aren't really open for middle grounds at the moment. It was worth the try looking for them though, wasn't it? Hey, my eye happened to fall on your wikimood index, and I am starting to wonder whether your present uncompromising stance on Batman, Turkey, has anything to do with circumstances elsewhere on Wikipedia. In that case, you might want to consider giving yourself some time to cool down. Maybe in a few days you'll find the energy to work on compromises and consensus again. Yours, --Hippalus22:41, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I really appriciate the time and effort you are putting into this. You do understand why I am not comprimising although it really has nothing to do with my wikimood. I contribute to a large range of topics. I am more that willing to comprimise on Fall of Constantinople for instance. On Batman, Turkey however I can't comprimise as I am not willing to accept census data w/o a census. -- Catchi? 12:20, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi Cool Cat, true, census data without a census would sure be weird. But hey, there seems to be a misunderstanding somewhere. As far as I can see, nobody claims those are census data! The 'proposal-version' even explicitely state that there are in fact no census data.
But anyways, I must express my thanks that you didn't revert the article. That is admirable conduct. Also thanks for asking a neutral third party for his view (when you mentioned your wide range of interest, I had a peek at your 'recent contributions'). I will second your request. Have a nice wiki-evening!--Hippalus16:38, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes and without census data we dont mention fractions of ethnicities elsewhere and when we do mention we explicitly state a census hadnt taken place. I havent reverted because its pointless, revert wars are disruptive. -- Catchi? 18:19, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
Any idea why the template isn't showing up? It should be on my page but its vanished, and I'm not seeing it anywhere else other than the template page. TKE18:22, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
{{wdefcon}} looks fine to me.... :/ -- Catchi? 09:28, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I don't know what happened. The template disappeared for a coupld hours yesterday around when I posted this, but it came back. It was probably because of all the commotion on the servers, lots of changes about. Anyway, thanks, nevermind. Oh and you are welcome for the translation! TKE18:54, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for letting me know. But you should know no good deed goes unpunished as per Rule #285. I shall fix your userpage. -- Catchi? 22:48, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
I removed the link to porn sites that you placed on your user page. Wikipedia may not be censored for the protection of minors, but I do not believe that you are allowed to have porn links on your user page. - Conrad Devonshire06:27, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I dont know if I should be annoyed or happy. This means two things:
People actualy read my userpage.
I offended people which annoys me.
Very well, I shall not interfere. -- Catchi? 09:19, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for letting me know, however I feel I can contribute little to the debate. Noone there is willing to listen, that includes me as well. -- Catchi? 17:50, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi there, Cool Cat, I just thought you might be interested to voice your opinion. But true, it is better not to join debates in which you are not willing to listen. The reason why I suggested moving the debate to Category talk:Kurdistan is not to give POV-pushers a better chance, but because I saw a new revert war (on the Kurdistan-tag) dawning in Batman. At least editors of all POV's will find their way to Category talk:Kurdistan, which I think is a good thing. I might not join the debate myself, though.--Hippalus22:51, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is if wikipedia policies were enforced I wouldnt be debating. No one would tolerate if I were to tag paris with a Category:Germany or Category:Germanistan. Frankly I was hoping it would be resolved w/o my pov comments at the cfd. But no. A lot of the people voted keep simply to annoy me. Not because of what they felt approporate. You might have already realised but I have a wide range of enemies and perhaps no allies on wikipedia. Even people I trust end up turning their back on me with quite lousy timing. I could whine all day, but it wouldn't do me or you any good.
To keep it short, please pardom me if I am not enthusiastic of any debate involving Kurdistan category on wikipedia.
It has nothing to do with you as if you were trying to annoy me you would come up with something better. I honestly feel you were trying to help mediate the dispute. I attempted to mediate disputes before. All of which ended as a disaster because of the stalker's interference for that I was prohibited to mediate. I just hope you aren't discouraged by this, it really isn't your fault.
Result is unbelievable. Wikipedia is under the invasion of mobs. These people, with common objectives and agenda, form nameless groups and abuse the democracy here as much as they can. Insidious people, schemes, devious methods... I won't spare as much time for this crap as I did before, still I'll try to keep an eye whenever I can. I'd like to thank you for your efforts to counter these shameless POV pushers for so long just by yourself, you are the Lone Cat.
Thanks, I don't know where you've seen the design, I made it myself(which is why it is broken probably!). That is one of two thinks preventing me from using Firefox- I'm using Maxthon now - the other thing is one of my monobook features(an auto warn button) doesn't work in Firefox. Thanks for your help! Prodegotalk23:07, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Believe or not the design resembles mine in many aspects. But that applies to a lot of pages now. Is this what you want? -- Catchi? 12:23, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
Well my first design I stole from you actualy, look in the history of User:Prodego/sidebar, and I didn't change the design too much in my new version. But, this new design I did design from scratch, and yes, I like it. Prodegotalk14:40, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Dont get me wrong nothing makes me happier when people use my designs (I am refering to the wiki-stress meter structure).
![[15]](http://www.cairns.crazychic.net/images/fleet-chart-1060.jpg){kind=link}
