User talk:Petri Krohn

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Hello Petri Krohn, welcome to Wikipedia!

I noticed your edits to Battle of New Orleans (2005) and the new page Free-fire zone, thanks for your contributions. You look like you know what you're up to, but just in case, you might like some of these links and tips:

• Take a look at the Simplified Ruleset.
• Read the Tutorial, How to edit a page and the Manual of Style.
• Find out how to revert, move and merge pages.
• Sign your posts on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~).
• Add yourself to the New user log and a regional notice board
• Ask questions at the Village pump or Help desk.
• Use the Show preview button
• Provide an Edit summary
• Add the correct image copyright tag to any images you upload
• Take a look at Consensus of standards
• Create a User page
• Be bold
• Ignore all rules

If you feel a change is needed, feel free to make it yourself! Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone (yourself included) can edit any article by following the Edit this page link. Wikipedia convention is to be bold and not be afraid of making mistakes. If you're not sure how editing works, have a look at How to edit a page, or try out the Sandbox to test your editing skills.

If, for some reason, you are unable to fix a problem yourself, feel free to ask someone else to do it. Wikipedia has a vibrant community of contributors who have a wide range of skills and specialties, and many of them would be glad to help. As well as the wiki community pages there are IRC Channels, where you are more than welcome to ask for assistance.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me on my talk page. Thanks and happy editing, Alf ^melmac 01:50, 11 September 2005 (UTC).

Wikipedians in Finland

I added [[Category:Wikipedians in Finland]] to your user page, if you prefer it without, please feel free to remove it. Alf ^melmac

Image:Navy-KatrinaNationalGuardTruck.jpg

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. (SEWilco 20:27, 12 September 2005 (UTC))

I think he might have better phrased that to say; "Only use the talk pages for talking about images or articles, please" and "I have removed your comments as there were cluttering up the page with stuff that shouldn't be there". Alf ^melmac 21:30, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Main battle tanks

Hello, Petri! Thanks for helping with improving the article battleship. A few pointers, though:

When listing "See also"-links, you're supposed to link to the actual title of the articles. Main Battle Tank is just a redirect to tank, not an article on it's own. If you read the article, you'll see that the military concept of the MBT is covered within that article. You only use the format [[actual name|alternative name]] when describing something in article prose.

Peter ^Isotalo 17:47, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

See Talk:Tank#Main Battle Tank vs. Battleship -- Petri Krohn 19:43, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

As you can see, your stance is garnering very little support because it's based on some misconceptions on what the overall objective of any encyclopedia. It's the topic of the article that should dictate content, not the other way around. As for battleship, I urge you to read Wikipedia:Manual of Style#"See also" and "Related topics" sections and look at just about any other article to see that this is not what these sections are for.

Peter ^Isotalo 12:07, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Petri, please stop adding "See also"-links that are redirects to other articles. Use the actual article titles if you want to link somewhere or simply don't link at all.

Peter ^Isotalo 21:14, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Lincoln Cathedral

Hi I think the picture would be better described as from the West, as the photographer is to the West of the Cathedral. --John 11:10, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Watershed

Hello. Just curious, why did you add the portage link to the watershed article? Thanks. Kiaparowits 18:06, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Kiitos kaunis.

Kiitos tosiaankin. Olen ajoittain harkinnut että joku joka hallitsee kaikki lelut ja vimpaimet, tekisi minulle oikein tyylikkään käyttäjäsivun, mutta se on aina viivähtänyt vetkutteluun. Ehkä joskus sitten kun on jotain tärkeämpää mitä vetkutella sen sijasta. -- Cimon avaro; on a pogostick. 12:19, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

"Post Soviet times" in article Winter War

Your subtitle "Post Soviet times" and rewroting "to remove POV" was not very good edit. Sadly, your own edit was very POV and irrelevant in article of Winter War. There is already an article of Karelia question and in Finnish wiki it is peer-reviewed and rather good: fi:Karjala-kysymys.

Teit muokkauksen, jolla yritit poistaa POVia. Tässä vain ei ollut mitään POVia: "After the war, the Karjalan liitto started to work for the Karelia question." Ennemminkin lisäyksesi oli vahvasti värittynyt "[question] has clogged many Internet discussion groups and forums (including Wikipedia)." Palautin tekstin siitä, että Karjalan liitto alkoi työskennellä Karjala-kysymyksen hyväksi. Karjalan luovutus talvisodassa johti Karjalan liiton perustamiseen, jonka tavoitteisiin on sen omien sanojensa mukaan aina sisältynyt Karjalan palautus. Kommentoin eli piilotin pov-tekstisi, koska se ei oikein liity talvisotaan vaan enemmänkin artikkeliin Karjala-kysymys. Ja sittenkin vain korjattuna, koska se sisälsi virheellistä tietoa (korjasin sen). Kahkonen 12:29, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Moved discussion to the article talk page. -- Petri Krohn 23:21, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

peter minuit

Please add a source for the storm you added to 1620-1639 Atlantic hurricane seasons. — jdorje (talk) 06:46, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

The source is the Peter Minuit article itself. -- Petri Krohn 06:47, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Here is another source: [1] -- Petri Krohn 06:51, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Åbo Kungliga Akademi

Greetings! I noticed that you share an interest with the article concerning the above institution. 1. Sorry, for not knowing how to use "move". 2. Please, let's finally discuss the matter in the discussion page of the article "Academy of Åbo" where I've started a thread already a few days ago (and not had any comments from you or anyone). Clarifer 15:42, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Red links

Hi Petri, Please don't add links to non exstant topics. Make the page first then link to it. Thanks --DV8 2XL 02:00, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Huemul Project

1. What do you mean by <<the Argnetinian secret research project on nuclear fission in 1949.>>?
2. You took off the nuclear fusion category from the Huemul Project article stating that it is not physics.
3. Now do you mean Huemul was fission, rather than fusion, and fission is not physics?
4. Shouldn't the date be an interval rather than a single year?

Please, clarify and/or correct Jclerman 19:50, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Responce

1. I suppose the projecty was secret. Do you disagree?

No.

1. I did not remove this or any other category from the Huemul Project article. I removed the link to Huemul Project from the See also section in the article Nuclear fusion. You are welcome to reintroduce it, but I would not advice puting it on the first place.

Please re-introduce it, and do it in the place you deem correct. I'm not going to change it.

1. The Huemul Project did not or could not have achived fusion nor fission. The article is interesting from the historical point of view but has little value from the pure physics point of view.

That is IYHO, not in the humble opinion of others who are reviewing the physics and political background of the project in the international literature.

I understand that the Nuclear fusion article is about physics, not about history.

History, especially in relationship with nuclear research, is in the humble understanding of others, important as not to repeat similar mistakes, e.g., re proliferation.

1. I corrected the year 1948 to 1949 in the Nahuel Huapi National Park article. I do not know how long the Huemul facility oprated, so I can not add an end year.

The project was terminated in 1952. The online links to the articles in Physics Today refer to it.

• MORE about the project:

It was intended to produce fusion and you have been referring to it as fission in many articles. As you should remember in which ones, please change it back to the appropriate term.

Jclerman 01:19, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

User:Guigue/sandbox

I think it is time to move User:Guigue/sandbox to Huemul Project.

Petri Krohn 00:38, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Only the authors can make such decision. The article will be a composite by several contributors. Frequent vandalism in the article page required we work in a sandbox. Jclerman 01:03, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Your edits to Gay bathhouse

Please stop italicising the long quotes in this article. Quotes do not need to be--indeed, should not be--italicized. Blockquotes are formatted so that they stand out from the rest of the text anyway. Italics are used for specific purposes; this is not one of them. Exploding Boy 16:56, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

zero-point energy

Please do not place merge tags on random pages unless you can articulate clear reasons why said articles should be merged. As they appear to be on distinct topics, I see no reason to merge them. 00:26, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Moved discussion to Talk:Zero-point energy. Petri Krohn 00:58, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Gravitoelectromagnetism

it's been discussed multiple times and the only objector was User:Nixer who got his way only because he was stubborn. User:Hillman (a.k.a. Chris Hillman, well known physicist) had asked for that changed long ago (it was on the Todo: list) and i did it for him which started a move/revert war with Nixer. i made my explanation in the Talk page, you should have read it. please talk to people before reverting something like this (a reform). Rbj 23:48, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I am a mathematician by training, not a physicist. GEM (gravitoelectromagnetism) is mainstream; gravitomagnetism is part of gravitoelectromagnetism. Its a sexy part, which partially explains why the term gravitomagnetism is more commonly encountered in the literature than the term gravitoelectromagnetism, but any physicist in this area would recognize that gravitomagnetism is part of GEM and that GEM is mainstream physics. (See the review articles I cited.) OTH, there are many cranky notions out there to the effect that electromagnetism (as in Maxwell and Faraday) and gravitation are the same thing, and these and related notions like anti-gravity and gravity shielding are definitely not mainstream. I had hoped to clarify all this in terms laypersons could understand, but now I have decided instead to disengage from WP article space (too much time spend on arguing with cranks). ---CH 04:17, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Alco HH series

I have removed your subheading since I don't see that the specifications of that particular locomotive and no others deserve a separate section. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:27, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

This is important and encyclopedic. The ALCO HH series is central in the development of diesel-electric technology, an area that is otherwise very poorly covered in Wikipedia. I added several links to the Alco HH series article from other related articles.

If you feel that it is wrong to have a subtitle on technology in the 600 section (when other models do not have equal detail on technology), then it is better to move "Diesel-electric power transmission" into its own section. I considered this, but it would break the current structure of the article.

On a general point, I think this article, (like many other railways articles) may be turning into a vanity article with too much detail on individual locomotives. Nothing bad with that, but if it prevents bringing up really relevant information, then it is a bad thing. Petri Krohn 08:47, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

(Moving discussion to Talk:ALCO HH series Petri Krohn 08:47, 3 April 2006 (UTC) )

Vorkuta

Thanks for the help. The comparison with the slogan at the Nazi camps is entirely frivolous as explained at talk. Regards, --Irpen 04:17, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Nazi POV?! I beg your pardon? It's nice Irpen made you join the revert war, perhaps I'll be able to make you join the talk page as well, as this is what Irpen and other revert warriors should do as well. //Halibutt 14:32, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

All right, I will not call you names in exchange. But be sure to read WP:CIVIL the next time you call someone a Nazi. //Halibutt 19:14, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Halibutt, stop spreading lies. Other users had been at talk all along. And please add the accusiation of lieing to your userpage. The list is incomplete. --Irpen 19:21, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Marine biology

Please note that I did not remove Rachel Carson from the list of famous biologiest, as I only moved the registration to the correct alphabetic position. ---Arnejohs 08:43, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Civil disturbances and military action in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina

Why did you revert these links? Without an explanation, I'm not sure of your reasoning. Tijuana Brass^¡Épa!-E@ 02:43, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Why did you remove them in the first place? -- Petri Krohn 02:48, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

It's listed in the edit summary — WP:NOT a collection of links; I removed ones that didn't fit WP:EL. Now, your turn. Tijuana Brass^¡Épa!-E@ 06:54, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Apologies

I'm terribly sorry about accidentally reverting your picture caption edit at Ayn Rand. It was sandwiched between vandalism and I was in a rush and didn't notice the legitimate and helpful edit. Thank you for your work on the page. --Wilanthule 21:58, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

:-) -- Petri Krohn 22:00, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Bypassing redirects

It looks like consensus recently emerged in January not to do this. I apologize, as I wasn't aware of this. —Viriditas | Talk 04:00, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

In this case, no harm done :-) -- Petri Krohn 12:21, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Consensus? Where? It was my understanding that redirects are to be avoided when linking to a page. Powers 23:28, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

(Moved discussion to Talk:Water planet -- Petri Krohn 08:52, 29 April 2006 (UTC))

Huh, are you a troll?

Judging by your yesterday's redirect spree, I assumed you came here mainly to disrupt. Now I tend to make allowances for your not being sufficiently acquainted with how WP works. You should know that forks are not allowed here. Just like Tommiks who created the fork, you failed to explain what Chigirin campaigns and WWI have in common. I can't see new stuff that you contributed on the subject, apart from introducing incomprehensible mess with redirects. Those whose edits are limited to disrupting redirects, may be qualified as trolls and banned from editing Wikipedia. If you continue your disruptive campaigning, I'll have to ask other editors to comment on your behaviour. Take care, Ghirla ^-трёп- 10:52, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

I may suggest a similar arena for your activity. Why not delete links to Russo-Swedish War the way you delete links to Russo-Turkish War and merge all the articles on individual Russo-Swedish wars into a gigantic hodge-podge fork on the model of History of Russo-Turkish wars, spruce it up with POV statements and incomprehensible tables and then accuse your opponents of "anti-Swedish POV"? Please be consistent in your editing policy. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 11:49, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Comment on AFD

comment deleting the Rushton's ordering of the human races article will leave the all the material intact in the J. Philippe Rushton article, and I suggest cannot therefore be characterized as censorship (should this be what you are implying), but will instead collect all the views pro and con in one article, where readers can evaluate this notable theory. - Best Regards, Pete.Hurd 20:02, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Heraldry Portal?

Hey. I've proposed the creation of an heraldic portal. If you think that such a thing would be helpful, you can voice your support HERE and hopefully we can get the heraldry category items organized better. Thanks for all your hard work on heraldic topics.--Eva ^db 13:26, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Death of Hiltler

The original said that she was alive when she was dead. I thought that was a bad idea...Rich Farmbrough 18:14 13 May 2006 (UTC).

Please annote pertinent'S' with reasons and reasoning

Hi! Please be careful to document such 'Ugly' things for the sake of the rest of, (and due respect for) 'us' and our free time!

re: [User talk:Petri Krohn] placed Mergetags: ({{mergefrom|Old Saxony}}) 12:14, 20 March 2006

Best wishes, FrankB 22:43, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

You might

Look at San Stefano Treaty and other articles related to Russian Empire, many of them contain Imperial Russian bias. --Molobo 14:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Ingrian map

There is some discussion at fi:Keskustelu_käyttäjästä:Inzulac#Inkerin_kartta that might interest you. -- Jniemenmaa 07:09, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Collegiate church in Tum

I hope this picture will explain all doubts about which stone has been used to build Collegiate church in Tum --Tlumaczek 12:14, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

"slanderous"?

Why is it slanderous? PMA 23:28, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Bob_McEwen

I agree with what you've said here and especially enjoyed your "Did You Know?" section. Thanks for the laugh! — GT 07:20, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Merge of Great Northern War and Great Northern War and Norway

Copied from Williamborg talk page: I reverted your copy-paste edits on the Great Northern War. If you want to merge this article with Great Northern War and Norway dicuss it first. -- Petri Krohn 03:33, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Intrigued that you elected to revert without either looking at the discussion page or pausing to discuss there.

Cheers - Williamborg 03:53, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Landlocked Russia

Hi there! I've restored your work in progress and placed it in User:Petri Krohn/sandbox. I hope this helps! --HappyCamper 15:22, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Operation barbarossa

I am not sure why you are linking the reinforcement of the Moscow armies with the Battle of Khalkin-Gol article. The Manchurian battle took place in 1939 and has no real connection to the defense of Moscow in Dec 1941. Whether the units involved were the same divisions or not, it seems to me that it merely leads the reader to a dead-end that is not particularly relevant. Is there some reason I am not seeing for including this in the article? DMorpheus 16:52, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

My edit summary could have been improved. The grammar *was* really bad and that's what most of the changes were. Somem of it was obvious poor translation or non-native english. However, I also removed some nonsense and speculation. Check the diffs if you are concerned. regards, DMorpheus 17:52, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Castle Village floor plan.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Castle Village floor plan.gif. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 00:06, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Sigismund III Vasa

Hiya, thanks for the note. And yes, I was worried about that too. My project involved trying to choose a consistent name for the monarch on hundreds of articles, so I was going through with an automated tool and trying to "eyeball" the changes it was suggesting on each article. I tried to be sensitive to the Swedish issue and redirect/disambiguate carefully on those articles, but it looks like I may have missed a couple spots. There were just soooo many different ways that this monarch was referred to! Please feel free to adjust those as you see fit, or pass along the article titles to me and I'll go in and fix them myself. I apologize for any confusion. --Elonka 16:13, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

re Virtuoso Universal Server

Wow, thanks for the shoutout, I'm glad it all worked... I'm a new admin and I was worried that I was bollixing it up worse... whew. Herostratus 05:41, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Your article, SS Rajputana, was selected for DYK!

On July 13, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SS Rajputana, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! ++Lar: t/c 01:59, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

"Anti-German deletionist"

I am not "anti-German". I live in Germany and am married to a German. You need to read Wikipedia:No original research and understand why your personal hypothesis has no place in a Wikipedia article. User:Angr 14:36, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Terrorist disambig

I'm afraid I can't remember as it was so long ago, but it was unprotected four months ago, so I'm not clear about the reason for your query. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 00:22, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Gustaf Nordenskiöld the villian?

1. I am not anonymous User:69.39.6.253.
2. Your text seems to imply that Gustaf Nordenskiöld was guilty of some kind of unethical conduct. Saying "recognized as valuable" only means that his possitive actions outweight the negative. It does not rehabilitate him from the earlier, most likely unfounded critisism. Unless you can provide modern scientific sources critical of Nordenskiöld, I find your wording a form of slander.

I started a thread at Talk:Mesa Verde National Park. -- Petri Krohn 23:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

And I responded there. Slander? -- remember, Wiki requires no original research and information here originates from other sources. Lots of historical information is critical of Nordenskiöld, and lots of modern archaeologists are critical of the methods and outlook of pioneer archaeologists. He may be a "hero" to some -- but should be presented fairly evenhandedly here. I believe his article is the best place to discuss his historic actions and reputation, and that a summary is best for the Park article. Best wishes, despite your accusation. WBardwin 23:28, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Vanity Link

Why did I remove it? Please see this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Brighton&curid=696314&diff=69640005&oldid=69629833#External_link_to_.22www.heureka.clara.net.2Fsussex.2Fbrighton.htm.22 for why. The author of the site being linked to is the person who is adding these external links. Furthermore, they are using sockpuppets to create an illusion of popularity about these links and are being very aggressive on talk pages. Gsd2000 22:20, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Sisu XA-180 Lebanon.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Sisu XA-180 Lebanon.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 18:13, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Simca articles

Petri, thank you for your interest in Simca- and Ford France-related articles! I would like to invite you to contribute to them, which I see you have already started. Seeing that you are from Finland, I believe you could help the Wikipedia users find out more about the Simcas and other Chrysler Europe cars assembled in Finland, as well as gain access to information contained in the really rich automotive sources in Finnish! I am looking forward to your contributions, Bravada, talk - 17:05, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Boston Tea Party

Howdy, I noticed that you and I seem to post in one or two articles dealing with progressive issues in political science/sociology. There's currently a debate beginning in Boston Tea Party as to whether the article should include the category [2]. It meets definitions set in the articles Terrorism and Definition of terrorism, however, there are several self-proclaimed patriots who watch BTP who refuse to recognise the fact. The simple criteria for terrorism generally seem to be intimidation or destruction of property in order to change public policy or public opinion while a state of war has not yet been declared. Some users would rather use recent acts of terrorism as a yardstick, rather than using a firm definition, and hence lose their ability to discuss matters calmly. Would you be able to pop in to the Talk page and join in the discussion? Thanks much, samwaltz 05:12, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Gothic Survival

Hi there Petre. Currently the Gothic Survival page redirects to European medieval architecture in North America. I'm not sure it should, really it should be an article in it's own right to describe the continuity of some Gothic building traditions that extended, in some cases well into the C17 in such places as Oxford. See Curl, James Stevens. A Dictionary of Architecture and Landscape Architecture (Second ed.). Oxford University Press. p. 880. ISBN 0198606788. {{cite book}}: |format= requires |url= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameters: |accessyear=, |origmonth=, |accessmonth=, |month=, |chapterurl=, and |coauthors= (help); Unknown parameter |origdate= ignored (|orig-date= suggested) (help). I intend to change it after receiving comments - can you cite any sources that might be useful for me in disambiguating the term to European medieval architecture in North America? ie. Is it called the Gothic Survival in the US?--Mcginnly | Natter 12:48, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

List of HSC ferry routes

Good call. I created the original list as a split from Catamaran where it no longer belonged and you have taken it to the stage it needs to be. Will you be defining in the talk page how a route qualifies as "High Speed"? Fiddle Faddle 09:03, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

History of CIA-sponsored regime change

Hey. Just out of curiosity, before I go to AfD, what part of "redundant to material elsewhere, POV fork, useless as a redirect" did you actually disagree with? 13:01, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

World War II

It can be said that Soviet troops liberated E. Europe (from the Nazis) before the end of the war but explain how they did that in the aftermath when E. Europe was still under their occupation. You seem to have an extreme pro-Soviet POV. Your claim that Americans prevented Communists in W. Europe from getting power is an overstatement. That was done more by European voters and governments than by Americans.--Kelstonian 15:23, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi. I don't think you have too much to worry about. There are plenty of people who will make sure that the Soviets get a fair go, just as there are those who will look after other countries, such as Germany and the United States. However, you are correct to point out if you think there is a problem. This will also be noted by other contributors. Most of us like an even handed approach, and don't like propaganda. So if someone else such as the Kelstonian thinks you have an "extreme pro-Soviet POV", then that is only his view, and not necessarily the view of others. Wallie 18:46, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Petri, you're not de-POVing the article. You're pushing your POV that what the Soviet Union was for E. Europe, USA was for W. Europe. Your POV isn't supported by facts and that's why you repeatedly resort to falsehoods like your claim that Americans prevented Communists from attempting to get power in W. Europe. W. European countries were mostly democracies and far more independent and stronger than the Soviet allies or satellites, whatever you want to call them. Trying to equate Soviet and American influence in Eastern and Western Europe, respectively, isn't de-POVing or increasing neutrality. It's simply pushing a POV not supported by facts.--Kelstonian 02:01, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Grand Portage

Hello PK. I have made an effort to combine our respective contributions to the introduction to this article. Let me know if this is acceptable. If revisions are proposed let's discuss them at Talk:Grand Portage National Monument. Thank you. Kablammo 01:58, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Siege of Port Arthur

I have posted a revised version of the Siege of Port Arthur to User:MChew/Siege of Port Arthur, which I believe addresses your copyvio concerns. I would be grateful if you could take a look and comment. MChew

DYK

On 12 September, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Chicago 1885 cholera epidemic myth, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

On 14 September, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article William Weston Patton, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Talk:Jacob De la Gardie

Responding to your comment on my talkpage: No, my removal of text from Talk:Jacob De la Gardie was entirely intentional and it was explained in the edit summary ("we don't need this in duplicate, it is already in the section lower down on the page"). The text I removed was a duplicate of what is in the section below. The editor who wrote it is the now infamous Kven editor who fills articles with unhistorical nonsense.

To give you some background, the text I removed was posted by 213.139.188.26 (talk · contribs) in response to something I had posted at User talk:Mikkalai. The user also posted the exact same text at User talk:Mikkalai below my comment. At Talk:Jacob De la Gardie the comment was addressed to me but completely lacked the context of the original comment. In order to restore the context, I moved my comment together with the response of 213.139.188.26 (talk · contribs) to Talk:Jacob De la Gardie, where it belonged topically, and responded to it there. The result was that the identical comment by 213.139.188.26 appeared in two places on the page. My removal of one copy of the same comment was just fixing that. As noted in the edit summary. Uppland 23:23, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Harassment warning

Stop pestering Uppland or you will face a block from editing. He is perfectly entitled to remove your quarrelsomeness from his page. Don't edit war over what people choose to keep or remove on their pages. Note also that it is inappropriate and offensive to "warn" established users by means of templates intended for anonymous vandals; please use human language for communication. Thank you. Bishonen | talk 02:38, 24 September 2006 (UTC).

Checking the time stamps in your contributions list, I understand that you probably didn't see my warning before reverting me on Uppland's page, so I'm not going to block you for it. Don't edit his page again, and don't behave in this inconsiderate way towards any other users either. Seriously, what exactly is it you hope you achieve by annoying a fellow editor who has acted appropriately and responded courteously to you throughout? Bishonen | talk 03:04, 24 September 2006 (UTC).

Psl Väinämöinen

It is quite a difference between battleships and coastal defence ships, and I know that the finns did not call her a Taistelulaiva (Battle ship), but Panssarilaiva (Armoured ship). Per definition, she is classed as a costal defence ship...as are the Swedish, Norwegian and German counterparts. —MoRsΞ 13:12, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Coastal defence ship is a highly POV British classification. Will it be OK with you if the text reads "Armoured ship". -- Petri Krohn 13:19, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes that is ok with me. —MoRsΞ 13:27, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Georgia-Russia spying dispute

Why did you create the redirect "Russian military headquarters in Tbilisi"? I do not see the connection between that phrase and the page it redirects to. I have reverted your edit to Georgia-Russia spying dispute. DRK 02:52, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I created the redirect Russian military headquarters in Tbilisi two days before the article on the Georgia-Russia spying dispute was even created. I am hoping that someone would expand it into an article (or redirect it to Russian military forces in the Caucasus), and explain what these troops are doing there. The link now redirects to Transcaucasian Front, the section on Russian Transcaucasus Group of Forces covers the post-soviet forces. -- Petri Krohn 03:07, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

"Russia" disambiguation

Hi. I've reverted some of your additions of other uses templates to articles with "Russia" in the name. Disambiguation is only necessary where the name of the article may actually represent something else. But, for example, the exact name "White Russia" doesn't refer to any of the other things listed at Russia (disambiguation). Alternate names probably belong in the introductory paragraph, while see also links belong at the end (if they are not linked in the article).

Sorry if I sound pedantic, but I think disambiguation links should be minimized because they detract from the impact of the start of an article. They are a necessary evil, to be used only in the case where true confusion is likely. —Michael Z. 2006-10-06 04:10 Z

Russia/Russian Federation

AWB fixes Why don't you want me to fix this with AWB? Are you planning on splitting Russia into two articles? How? Why? I don't see anything on Talk:Russia about it... -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 16:26, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

1. Because Russian Federation should be tagged with {{R with possibilities}}. I have not done this today, because it might be event better to move Russia to Russian Federation. See my comments on Portal:Russia/New article announcements.

2. In article Leonid Reiman you not only changed the link, but also edited the visable text to Russia. See also Russia (disambiguation). -- Petri Krohn 18:51, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

1. Okay, but that doesn't change the fact that there are several hundred articles with redirects in them. If you don't put actual content into Russian Federation, it's pointless to stop fixing the redirects. There is no way that Russia is going to be moved to Russian Federation, as that contradicts the naming conventions and would be a huge hassle for people behind the scenes.
2. That was the point. The President of Russia is the same thing as the President of the Russian Federation. There is no reason to have either the text or the link say "the Russian Federatoin" in place of "Russia," anymore than we should change every instance of "San Marino" to "Most Serene Republic of San Marino." -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 19:31, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

AWB fixes again It's clear from your discussion and naming conventions that Russia is not going to be moved to Russian Federation, so I'm avoiding several hundred redirects. It is not without any reason; it is to make Wikipedia more user-friendly. "Clean up" and the rest of the edit summary is automatically-generated text from WP:AWB. I have no idea what this means: "It seems to me that it is hardly anything more than misguided ethnic POV pushing." -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 17:50, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

(I see that Koavf has already responded here, so I'm copying my comment over): Petri -- Koavf's changes appear to be correct. He is changing Russian Federation -- which is simply a redirect -- to Russia. This has nothing to do with POV; it's a simple clerical change. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 17:57, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Possibilities You tagged Russian Federation. You'll never get the page moved, and almost certainly won't get it split, but go for it if you want. Please don't revert back to redirects, though, as that is not helpful for the end user. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 18:02, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Other Russias I understand that "Russia" can refer to things other than the current state of the Russian Federation, which is why I would never change the former to the latter. "Russian Federation" is always inclusive of "Russia," though, and changing the names in this way is always accurate, if sometimes less precise. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 18:28, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Justin -- Petri (and now others) have advised you that this is a complicated area which needs further discussion. How about if we take this off your AWB list until the complexities are resolved? -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 18:34, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Russia and ethnicity "Russia" is used as the short-form name of the state the Russian Federation, which is why all pages relating to the R.F. are at "X of Russia" (e.g. President of Russia.) Vladimir Putin is the president of Russians, Ukrainians, Turkmen, Tatars, Mongolians, etc., he is not the president of an ethnic group. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 18:51, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Please don't call Russia "nonsense". This is not acceptable. Such edits will be reverted on sight. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 07:04, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Since you find it neccessary to promote this POV on so many articles, I have to warn you that your assumption about "Russia referring to a single ethnicity and language" does not hold water. If it is not properly sourced, it will be qualified as original research. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 08:23, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

• A good point! Russia and Russians can be both a single ethnicity and language and multi-ethnic country/nation/entity. One more point to disambiguate. -- Petri Krohn 13:18, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

DYK

On October 18, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cooperative Village, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 01:51, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

COPYRIGHT / GFDL

You have absolutely no right to request a photo be deleted for having attribution as a condition, please show me ONE precedent where this has ever happened before making such demands. It is perfectly acceptable to allow free use of your copyright photo on this site while asking to be attributed. There is a specific tag for that if you care to click on the photo and see. --RaffiKojian 03:15, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I see what happened... no worries! --RaffiKojian 18:12, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Runic Calendar

Hi! I just wanted to let you know that I'm temporarily deleting some text you added to Runic calendar because I couldn't quite understand your meaning. Since there was no reference given, I thought I'd ask you if you might be able to clarify. It sounds very interesting! Do you have a source you could direct me to? Maybe there should be an article about the Aun cycle?

Even though the synodic month has about 29 days, according to the calendar, the full moon would ever only fall on 19 of them. The situation changed after the Aun cycle of about 300 years, when the calendar had to be adjusted by one day.

Bencoland 00:33, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Taylor series

I did a partial revert of your changes to the Taylor series article. Your changes introduced some mistakes. A Taylor series is not a sum of derivatives, it is a sum of terms with each term being a derivative times a power over a factorial. Also, not all trignometric functions are globally analytic, like the tangent function. Also, you introduced a subtle mistake by implying that partial sums are always a good approximation to an infinitely differentiable function. That is true only for analytic functions, and only then just in a range. You can reply here if you have any comments. Thanks. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 04:24, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

I reverted your change to analytic function too. An analytic function equals its Taylor series only in a neighbourhood, not everywhere. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 04:27, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

I replied at Talk:Taylor series too. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 05:10, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Isola Bella

Hi Petri. Two of your pictures (Image:Select Sketches - Menai Bridge 1.jpg and Image:Select Sketches - Menai Bridge 2.jpg) have links on their description pages to Isola Bella. I have just turned Isola Bella into a disambiguation page between Isola Bella (Lago Maggiore) and Isola Bella (Sicily). Your link was previously pointing at the Sicilian island; however I have not updated it, since I was not sure which of the two islands was really intended. (The one on Lago Maggiore is the better known.) Best wishes, —Ian Spackman 12:31, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Saxony

Petri, there has already been plenty of discussion. Everyone except you agrees that the article about the modern state should be at Saxony, as it was before you moved it. Your original move was done without consultation and without consensus. That's fine per WP:BOLD so long as no one objects, but now that people have objected, you should accept that the consensus is against you. If you want to move the page back to Free State of Saxony, please use the process at WP:RM. —Angr 16:12, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Since you are choosing to ignore consensus on this issue, I have no choice but to protect both pages against moves. If you want to change the name of the pages, please use WP:RM, as your original move has proved not to be uncontroversial. —Angr 16:29, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

More possible Finnish POV-pushing

Hi Petri and thanks for your continuous efforts to keeping the article Treaty of Fredrikshamn in order. I'd like to ask your opinion about this edit. Is it unsupported Finnish nationalism POV or is it OK?

This is not said because I am particularly against Finland, Finnish people or anything else Finnish. I just want articles to be up to standard and not full of unsupported POV.

Thanks for any response, Fred-Chess 19:23, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Rendering of character with ümlaut

(Moved here from Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive)

Something has happened to the way pages with characters with umlauts are rendered. The Scandinavian characters Å, Ä, and Ö are included in the ISO/IEC 8859-1 or Latin-1 characted set, and should be represented as normal 8 bit characters. The characters are now replaced by unicode values. An example is Väinämöinen_(ship)#V.C3.A4in.C3.A4m.C3.B6inen.27s_operational_history. Note the difference in the ways the name of the ship Väinämöinen is presented. It seems to me that this is a result of a change in the software sometime this or last week.

The change has negative effects:

1. Links to anchors get a weird form.
2. On IE the characters are rendered in a different font, making them look like bold in subtitles. (Note the ü in the subtitle above; it is not bold though it may look like it.)

When the text is edited, the characters still look normal: åäö... -- Petri Krohn 05:59, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia has been UTF-8 based with links using UTF-8 values for some time so that shouldn't be related to any recent changes. Looking at the source of that page i can't find anything unusual about the characters in that subtitle nor do they render oddly in IE for me. Plugwash 08:08, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Links to anchors that you manually add can be typed normally. For instance, #Rendering of character with ümlaut works: it's autoconverted to point to "#Rendering_of_character_with_.C3.BCmlaut". It's illegal to put anything other than a subset of ASCII into anchor names at present, and we can't even use normal percent encoding, so we made up something using periods. Wikimedia sites haven't used any encoding other than UTF-8 in text for at least a year now, I believe. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 06:13, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

The subtitle text appears four times in the HTML source text

• Twice in the <a ... > anchor

1. name=".C3.BCmlaut"
2. id=".C3.BCmlaut"

• Twice in the <h2> header

1. <span class="mw-headline">ümlaut</span>
2. title="Edit section: ümlaut"

There is no reason why the <h2> header text should be anything but 8-bit ISO/IEC 8859-1. Using UTF-8 is of course a good reason :-)

Anyway, something has changed since yesterday, the Ü in the subtitle no longer looks bold. Today, the source for the ü is ü". I am not quite sure what it was yesterday, as I may have just looked at the 2 first ones, and missed the <h2> text.

The issue may have something to do with the rendering of ;Uuml and ;Auml on some browsers. On IE they sometimes use a different font from Ü and Ä, making their appearence bold. It may of course also be a temporary problem in my browser. -- Petri Krohn 06:53, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

P.S. "ümlaut" is naturally what you see when viewing the HTML source text in a 8-bit text editor. I guess it would look like ü on an UTF-8 text editor. -- Petri Krohn 07:07, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Something has changed once again, I see bold today. --Petri Krohn 14:09, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

"Siberian" Wikipedia

Hello! Recently, you cast a vote against closure of the "Siberian" Wikipedia, presumably basing it on the supposed existence of the "Siberian language" with millions of speakers. Perhaps the issue was misunderstood. There is no Siberian language or Siberian nation, apart from the native Turkic and other peoples who lived there long before Russian colonists arrived in the 16th century. The matter in question is an artificial "language" created based on several archaic Russian dialects in 2005 by a Mr. Zolotarev and a few of his friends, inclusion of which fairly blatantly violates the No Original Research policy of Wikipedia. Siberian Slavs speak Russian and list themselves on censuses as Russians, Ukrainians, and Belarusans - this you can verify for yourself. I invite you to return to participate in the discussion and reconsider your vote, and appreciate constructive debate on the topic. Cossack 00:01, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I have voted on the issue (against closure). -- Petri Krohn 23:34, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

WP:MCQ

Petri, thanks for fixing this. Best regards ×Meegs 12:30, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Taylor and Francis

"Plural or Singular"

• I notice that the T&F Group is.
• However, T&F publish.
• Is there a mistake--or do I not know British grammar?

Yours, etc.,

Fair use, replaceability and the Commons

The issues you're talking about relate to the fact that the images on the Commons must be usable in the Wikipedias for all languages, regardless of licensing. Since (my understanding) copyright law on most of the Continent does not allow fair-use exceptions for images of three-dimensional creative works like architecture and fashion, even if you have taken it yourself, you see a lot less of that on the European-language Wikis than you do here.

For example, we're allowed to use book covers. They're not. I have an account on the French Wikipedia, and I did some work on Le diable s'habille en Prada, the French version of The Devil Wears Prada, which I had started here.

I had a picture of the French cover, which I thought was very nice. But before I put it up, I had noticed the absence of other covers in articles on popular books, so I asked an editor there who was thoughtfully cleaning up my French. He said, yes, we're not allowed to do it under European law. And indeed, the French Wikipedia's fair use page does say, indeed, that the Berne Convention is more restrictive: "Le Fair Use de la Convention de Berne est MOINS étendu que le Fair Use du droit américain!"

So that may be why they got deleted from the Commons. But the replaceability guidelines I'm working on are strictly for the English Wikipedia. Daniel Case 05:16, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Are you saying, that even though these images were not allowed on Commons, they would be accepted as GFDL on the English Wikipedia? Is this because there is genuinely a difference on derivative work on Commons and En? Or is this because there is less copyright paranoia on En?

Anyway, this still leaves us material that cannot be free content, even on the English Wikipedia, and therefore should fall under non-replaceability. --Petri Krohn 05:31, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

The Commons page on derivative works seems to be pertinent reading here. The idea is that the Commons will have no images which will conceivably carry a third-party copyright.

As far as photographs of statues and sculptures goes, they are derivative works even on the English wikipedia. Fortunately we have a fair use tag especially for photos that are just the artwork and used to illustrate articles about said artwork (see one on my watchlist, The Sphere, which used to have a photo I had taken of the sculpture as it currently is until it got deleted in a previous copyright witch hunt). It cannot, I was told, be GFDLed. Daniel Case 05:44, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Photos

Moi! I've been adding some contributions on Finnish architects/architecture. I'd like to add a couple of pictures - ones I've taken, but would like to "give away" to Wikipedia, so to say. But I can't manage to upload them. This may be an outrageous request, but seeing as you do upload pictures, could I send them to you (in JPG format) to upload? Feel free to say "Sorry No!" --TTKK 11:08, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Petri for the advice to persist! And thanks Ghirlandajo for your very kind offer. I finally managed to work out where I was going wrong; and have now uploaded my first few pictures; I will soon start adding pictures to the articles I've written on various Finnish architects. --TTKK 14:51, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Prince John Obolensky

Could you check whether the guy is notable? I presume his Russian name is Ivan Obolensky. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 14:28, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes. He is Ivan Mihailovich Obolenski, Governor-General of Finland. (Article was missing.) -- Petri Krohn 16:04, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Glider manufacturers

Thanks for adding HUT. Is this the same as Eiri-Avion O/Y which is already listed, albeit without an article. The HUT aricle contains no reference to glider manufactue incidentally. JMcC 00:06, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

HUT is Helsinki University of Technology, an University, Eiri-Avion O/Y is an Osakeyhtiö (Oy) a Limited liability company. See also PIK for Polyteknikkojen Ilmailukerho. -- Petri Krohn 00:15, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

I created an article for Polyteknikkojen Ilmailukerho and linked it to HUT. It needs expanding but its a start. JMcC 22:07, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs I District, Turku V District, Turku II District, Turku Mariehamn Ray Eames Cranbrook Educational Community Nummi Koroinen IV District, Turku Treaty of Tartu Ottoman (furniture) Halinen Eric Trolle Cranbrook Academy of Art Erkki Tuomioja IX District, Turku Paavo Talvela Aleksi Randell Heimosodat

Cleanup Edwin Linkomies Wireless network Total Identity Merge Pacific Proving Grounds Strata title List of major freeway systems Add Sources MSDN Academic Alliance First language Jöns Budde Wikify Subscriber Identity Module Wilhelm Bleek Botball Expand Realpolitik Nikolai Bukharin Suceava

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 16:26, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Alexander Litvinenko

Okay, I saw you edited the article and added back the United Nuclear info. To me personally, it looks like we're "advertising" for the company. Is there a source that we can find that actually discusses the possible ways he was actually poisoned? My only concern is about the link, not the actual words. Nishkid64 00:26, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Judging from G-hits and the relevance of G-hits to the subject, I failed to find anything that truly asserts the notability of Nikolay Kovalev. Also, the article on Boris Berezovsky makes no mention of the Liberal Russia party. However, it may be notable, but I'm not entirely sure. Also, the party has been in existence for a mere 4 years, and I don't know if it has enough notability in Russia yet. Anyway, see [3]. Nishkid64 23:57, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

He is the former head of FSB: Nikolay Kovalev, a 47-year-old colonel general, has become the seventh director of the FSB since 1991. [4]

World War II

Im agreeing many of those edits arent good. Theres some truth in the Poland Germany border though so I might bring back my version of that.Opiner 09:58, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Reference on Alexander Litvinenko

I was looking over the article, and I wanted to check over the reference that says Litvinenko made allegations saying Putin was a pedophile. Apparently, it was a broken link so we were using a cache to obtain the link. "In July 2006, an article written by Litvinenko alleged that Putin was a pedophile.[21] He compared Putin to rapist and serial killer Andrei Chikatilo." I wanted to verify the comparison to Chikatilo, and so I clicked the link. Apparently, it's not working for me, so I wanted to see if it's working for you, and also if you know of a different source for this link. I remember somewhere that you mentioned you found a link on the pedophilia claims. Anyway, thanks. Nishkid64 18:11, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Hmm...I found the link, but I can only access it from Google. When I use that big URL, it doesn't open the page. Also, I couldn't find any allegations Litvinenko made referencing Putin to Chikatilo. I did this search and I did find some pages, but none of them related Litvinenko to Chikatilo and Putin. I'm removing the Chikatilo comments. Nishkid64 18:18, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Nevermind. It was the following Russian source that related Putin to Chikatilo. Sorry for bothering you! Nishkid64 18:20, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

:de:Nukleare Sicherheit

What ever happened to the article on nuclear safety on the german Wikipedia? (de:Nukleare Sicherheit) I have now redirected it to de:Sicherheitskultur. -- Petri Krohn 07:04, 3 December 2006 (UTC).

It was noticed that it was important, however somebody listed it for deletion in the early stage of the translation, i made some effort to keep the article, still, The article is deleted. reg. Mion 22:05, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Re:Did I jump the gun?

If he is purposely throwing the POV of the article to change it to his own personal opinion, then he can be blocked. He did delete other people's contributions, as well. I don't think "Reports in the Times, otherwise replete with errors for instance that Litvinenko in charge of anti-terrorist activities, note that while Polonium is subject to strict controls, in theory at least, it could have been purchased commercially in France, Russia or the US." can really be sourced. The user was just trying to avert any suspicions of Russian government involvement (In particular, he kept pointing out Litvinenko's connection to Berezovsky). Also, Petri, I know that you have been edit warring with 72.183.125.111 for the past few days. According to your conception of blocking policy, I can technically block you (you did past 3RR most likely, and so did 72.183.125.111). Nishkid64 22:09, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

The first part replete with errors is unencyclopedic. There is however nothing technically wrong with the rest. ...purchased commercially in France, Russia or the US can certainly be sourced, if it is not included in the Times article.¨This is certainly not vandalism.

As to the reverts. Total number of reverts is over 3v but they have alternatively been for adding, deleting or changing content. -- Petri Krohn 22:19, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Alright, I guess that wasn't too bad. I don't know, but I just interpreted his edits as bad faith. I mean, it's not like he had 1 or 2 edits. He had almost 10 or so, and he spent hours picking away at the article and adding all of his allegations (wherever he got them). Also, besides the default {{vandalblock}} template, I did not say he was vandalizing the page. Nishkid64 22:29, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Battle of the Bay of Viipuri

I created the page about the Battle of the Bay of Viipuri. I considered both alternatives for the name. I investigated, checked Google and compared notes and similar cases. I probably should have started with "the", to begin with. That represents the more proper English language. What do you base your view on ? I was only changing my own text, In case that was you concern. After some time I may go ahead and revert.

Use of talk pages

Petri - I thought we might have a conversation outside of the two talk pages at issue: Talk:Iraq Study Group Report and Talk:Iraq Study Group. In particular, Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines states:

• The purpose of a Wikipedia talk page is to provide space for editors to discuss changes to its associated article or project page.
• Talk pages are not for general conversation. Keep discussions on the topic of how to improve the associated article. Irrelevant discussions are subject to removal
• Talk pages are not a forum for editors to argue their own different points of view about controversial issues.

I have reduced your posting at Talk:Iraq Study Group Report to what complies (marginally, in my opinion, but not worth arguing further over) with the above guidelines. I don't want to censor you, but introducing completely bogus (humorous) "secret" information as a way of getting the attention of other editors does not set a good precedent; I think the creativity of editors should be focused on articles and not on trying to getting chuckles - or just attention.

I'm also deleting - again - the posting at Talk:Iraq Study Group, since the two articles are clearly linked, and someone interested in the subject is going to look at the talk pages of both. John Broughton | Talk 20:07, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Report link

The US Institute of Peace says: "If you'd like to link to the Iraq Study Group report from your Web site, please use the following link: http://www.usip.org/isg/iraq_study_group_report/report/1206/index.html". They said please. -- Kendrick7^talk 08:26, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Americans are polite; they always say "please". --Petri Krohn 08:37, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Ball grid array

Hi Petri! You have recently edited the Ball grid array article and linked grid pattern. I hope you don't mind me unlinking it again, as grid pattern talks about cities and streets, nothing to do with BGA. --Romanski 12:03, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I was hoping we would have an article "grid pattern", with links to Centered square number. Maybe there is an article somewhere, and it should redirect to it. --Petri Krohn 12:10, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Michael Mehta books

Don't get me wrong - that text belongs somewhere else, and we will have to move it. I just couldn't think of where off the top of my head, and didn't want to make a snap decision. Simesa 13:53, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Featured Picture

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Mesa-Verde---Cliff-Palace-in 1891 - edit1.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Raven4x4x 06:06, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations, and thanks for nominating it. Raven4x4x 06:06, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

POTD

Hello Petri,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Mesa-Verde---Cliff-Palace-in 1891 - edit1.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on April 2, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-04-02. howcheng {chat} 07:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

finery forge

WE seem to be engaging in competitive editing over the words 'ironmaking' and 'steelmaking'. There is a significant differnece between bar iron (wrought iron) and steel. Steel can be made in a German Forge, if the process was stopped at the right stage, but it was never made in a Walloon Forge in England. Accordingly, statement should be that the finery forge is an obsolete way of making iron. If you disagree, please explain why on the discussion page of the article (where I am copying this). Peterkingiron 00:38, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Tourist information on Loho.

Wikipedia is not a travel guide. The version you restoreed was full of such useless information, not suitable for an encyclopaedia, and contained spamlinks to realtors trying to sell real estate in the area. I have removed all the tourist guide information, again. Do not restore it, please. Proto::► 00:52, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

User Judae1

I noticed you've been following me around a bit. Thank you for taking an interest, and I appreciate some of your edits.

Just wanted to introduce myself. Be well. Juda Juda S. Engelmayer 00:08, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Edward Lucas

Petri, please see my comments on Talk:Edward Lucas (journalist). Why are you so interested in singling out these particular articles? It's clear from your earlier edits that you have some sort of issue with what Lucas has written. This does not make these particular articles notable. I suggest you have a look at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, in particular the section on biased or malicious content. -- ChrisO 00:21, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I have no issue with Lucas, other than that he reverted my edits on the acticle Edward Lucas (journalist). I do not think subjects of articles should edit their articles, even if they view something in the article as negative. What they should do is post their objections on talk pages. Deleting material from the article is in my opinion an indication of bad faith not done with the interests of Wikipedia in mind.

I do not think the two The Economist articles I refered to are in any way "malicious content". Writing articles, even criticizing wikipedia, is in no way "negative"; in fact this is what journalists do. I also agree with his criticism.

The two articles are what I believe are the most notable parts of his journalistic career. The ICDISS article was mentioned in Wikipedia. The Estonia article was the focus of international attention. I do not know if he has written anything else notable. I do know that no other Wikipedia editor has seen it important enough to include in the article. Also, if I went looking through his journalistic history, just to defend my edits, would seem like stalking. Besides, I do not know if he is notable enough to warrant my time. (His family tree looks interesting though.)

The fact that you joined him in opposing me made me a bit suspicious. In addition to your user name, similar to Cristina Odone, you seem to live in or near London and share the interest in religion and Eastern Europe. -- Petri Krohn 01:19, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I think we're getting closer to the issue now. It's your personal contention that the two articles are "the most notable parts of his journalistic career". I'm afraid that counts as original research. Do you have any independent sources to support your claim? If you don't, then it can't be included in the article - original research is specifically disallowed (see Wikipedia:No original research). -- ChrisO 09:02, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

John Peet article - dear Petri Krohn, thanks. If you think that John Peet article should not be deleted, then let it stay - I would have no objection to that. I have no idea who John Peet is - but I thought that an article that describes an obscure personality in terms like "talented" and "creative" is hardly worth an encyclopedic entry. In fact if a traditional encyclopedia was filled with entries like that it would be deemed utterly worthless. I am sure there are journalists who may deserve an entry because their work is so known - or notorious. There are even Economist personages, like Edward Lucas, the notorious Russophobe (here the factor of notability or rather notoriety, is obvious: no one would ask for the entry's deletion Roobit

Oscar Frithiof Nordquist

My pleasure. As for who the actual Nordquist is, your guess is probably better than mine (I just researched a bit on the internet and came up with it). The same authority is associated with the Ladoga Seal, and it makes sense since Ladoga was still partly within the borders of Finland at the time. You're in Helsinki? I spent a great deal of time over there during my college years and miss my regular visits. TheQuandry 06:26, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Mirage 5

I've noticed you've been changing the Dassault Mirage 5 links from Dassault Mirage III to Dassault Mirage 5. I'm sure you realize the Dassault Mirage 5 page is a redirect to Dassault Mirage III. As such, I assume you are preparing an article on the 5 for posting soon. However, it's usually best to wait until after one has posted the article to change the redirects, as someone else may change them back if they don't know your plans. - BillCJ 04:13, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I understand your reasons, and would support splitting off the 5. Just be careful of double redirects. - BillCJ 04:38, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I've added {split section} tags to the Dassault Mirage III article. You can comment on the Talk Page there. Thanks. - BillCJ 21:36, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Kven-user

The Kven-user is actually not hardbanned. He may still edit as long as he doesn't edit articles related to Kvens, edits in an aggressive way, or uses sockpuppets. See Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Kven#Remedies. Regards Fred-Chess 11:10, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Redirect

Hi, Petri! May I ask you to please not create redirects such as this one? I understand the reasoning and intentions behind it, but it just so happens that I am in the middle of sorting links/backlinks/redirects to all Russian districts, and having a redirect like this confuses and impedes the workflow. If you absolutely need a blue link in place of a district link, let me know, I'll make a minimal stub instead. Thank you for understanding, and please let me know if you have questions.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 13:25, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Just as an FYI, I have made a stub at Priozersky District (note capitalization). Please let me know if you have further concerns. Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:17, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

RDB Deletes

Please do not revert the deletions related to Red Diaper Baby. I deleted them in order to prevent lawsuits against Wikipedia Foundation. Thanks. 69.19.14.35 17:20, 5 January 2007 (UTC)Benighted

If you genuinely have the interests of Wikipedia in mind, please register an account. (...or at least edit from a fixed IP, so that you can be contacted and your edits can be traced.)

Anonymous deletions of content, without propper explanation on the talk page, are always considered VANDALISM. -- Petri Krohn 17:35, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I have moved the discussion to Talk:Red diaper baby#Vandalism or "protecting Wikipedia from lawsuits"?. --Petri Krohn 17:51, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Your edit to Leet

Your recent edit to Leet (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 17:56, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

See User talk:AntiVandalBot#Use of the word "f***" on Wikipedia. -- Petri Krohn 18:20, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Your edit to Alexander Litvinenko poisoning

Why restore the link to Vyacheslav Sokolenko's page when there is no page to him? BernardZ 03:51, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

What are you doing on my page

What the hell are you doing on my page and who the do you think you are. You removed the fact that the finns were in the waffen ss. If you mess with my page i will mess with your page Rollaround 08:35, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I was wrong; he was not a sock puppet of the Kven user but of User:SuperDeng. -- Petri Krohn 13:50, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Please become acquainted with the Wikipedia policies, especially regarding NPOV and citing sources

Sadly, I had to revert your edit to Occupation of Latvia 1940-1945‎. A neutrality dispute can only be based on neutral, valid sources, opposing some ideas expressed in an article. And not on someone's 'original research', as it is called here. If you had seen the talk page concerned, you probably would have noticed, that there has been no real content dispute, but mere Soviet POV pushing by 2 or 3 Russian guys. I had the right to remove those tags again, since consensus has rendered the title perfectly valid, and secondly, no-one has explained, what might be 'noncompliant' in the article. If you want to dispute anything, please give some valid information on the talk page. Thank you. Constanz - Talk 09:48, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to Occupation of Latvia 1940-1945, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Constanz (talk • contribs) 14:51, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by administrators or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you. Constanz - Talk 13:40, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Finnish railroad network

I'll try to make two pictures, one of the situation 1917, and another what it is today. --Whiskey 08:30, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

LoHo

Hi, I wanted to discuss the links to LoHo in various articles. Whether the LoHo article should be deleted or not, they do not belong in articles for the following reasons:

• "LoHo" is not a neighborhood name. It's an alternate term proposed by a realty firm and not widely used by anyone outside its namesake firm.
• Even if "LoHo" was a neighborhood name, there is no such thing as "LoHo section of the Lower East Side". LoHo was coined as an alternate term for LES, not to describe a microhood contained within LES.

In fact, the person who coined the term says as much: "It's soft marketing," Mr. Goldman said the other day. "It's branding for my name. But I'm not looking to rename the Lower East Side; I want it to be an 'also known as.' " (from NY Times)

Considering the above quote, there's no reason why the term should be used to describe a location and it should be removed from articles independent of its article status because it's simply wrong. Please don't revert my changes again unless you can show that:

• LoHo is a section within LES, or otherwise a term that's not redundant with LES,
• LoHo is a commonly used term by reputable sources and/or the general public to describe the area.

Considering Goldman concedes that he's still trying to popularize the name and that it is synonymous with the Lower East Side, I don't think you'll show either of the above to be true. Thanks. 24.215.233.72 12:41, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

If you do not think LoHo differs from the Lower East Side, please take the article to WP:AFD, so the two articles can be merged. Please no not remove references to the article as long as it stays.

An anonymous user had been replacing links to Lower East Side with hidden links to LOHO. That was wrong and you were right to revert him. -- Petri Krohn 12:49, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I am the artist formerly known as 24.215.233.72. While I disagreed with you on Afd as a remedy for the LoHo links, I've started one (and created an account in the process): Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LoHo. I would appreciate any comment you care to make. Thank you. Mosmof 22:28, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

It's not what I think - the person who coined the term is quoted in a reputable source saying they are one and the same, and that it's a branding term, not an actual neighborhood name.

Whether the LoHo article stays or not, it is incorrect given the definition given by Goldman himself. If the LoHo article is deleted, the term will still stay in the article, right? That tells me the links in articles should be handled independently from a potential Afd.

Anyway, I've reverted your reverts before I read your response, but I'll hold off on making RVs for now. 24.215.233.72 13:00, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

LoHo's Anonymous Hacker

Any debate on whether LoHo should be referred to as such, or whether it is in fact referred to as such, should be held with actual stakeholders and not anonymous people with some kind of vendetta. Thank you for stopping the deletion. Juda S. Engelmayer 02:38, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Ivan Obolensky

• Nice work. I'm the one who created the original stub - I think.

I discovered him through Victor E. Marsden, who wrote about him.

Do you have any references/books/ in Finish about them?

Marsden died on October 28, 1920. But he's only popularly known for the Protocols of Zion.

What can you tell me about Ivan's name "John"?

Is Obolensky a hero in Finish history? Or was he a complete Russian Tsarist?

How about Marsden - is he at all know in Finnish history? Was he opposed to Finnish independence?

Anything you know on these issues, I'd like to know.

Yours truly, --Ludvikus 00:24, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I know absolutely nothing. Nor do I have any references. I just connected every piece of information available on the Internet and in Wikipedia. His name was already included in the template {{Governors of Grand Duchy of Finland}}. The only real source was the article fi:Ivan Obolenski on the Finnish Wikipedia - which is even shorter than this. It does not list references either.

You can also thank Ghirla for bringing this to my attention. He was not sure if "Prince John Obolensky" ever even existed. -- Petri Krohn 01:26, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Yikes!

Whatever you were trying to do to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LoHo, I wish you hadn't done it. Wikipedia is not a democracy and Afd is not a vote. Please restore the formatting to the way it was. Thanks. Mosmof 11:16, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. If you think any of my comments belong in the discussion page, please feel free to move them. Mosmof 11:28, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Understood. I appreciate you taking the time to explain all this. For what it's worth, my comments weren't meant to force my opinions, but just to address points made by other editors. Mosmof 11:38, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Also, if moving the exchange between me and Judae1 would clean up the Afd and is appropriate, I have no problem with it. Mosmof 11:42, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

AfD Nomination: Carl O. Nordling

An editor has nominated the article Carl O. Nordling for deletion, under the Articles for deletion process. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the nomination (also see What Wikipedia is not and Deletion policy). Your opinions on why the topic of the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome: participate in the discussion by editing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carl O. Nordling. Add four tildes like this ˜˜˜˜ to sign your comments. You can also edit the article Carl O. Nordling during the discussion, but do not remove the "Articles for Deletion" template (the box at the top of the article), this will not end the deletion debate. Jayden54Bot 15:09, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Lies, sock accusations, and other BS by the Kven user

(Moved from Talk:Continuation War -- Petri Krohn 17:09, 23 January 2007 (UTC))

The article Continuation War was protected after an edit war on the inclusion of long section of OR by "Andropov Andrej", one of many usernames used by a multiuser contributing from IP address 213.216.199.6 [5] The article was protected, and a long discussion continued on this talk page between some regular contributors and an army of sockpuppets. (Archived here) The sock army failed to gain any support for its possition. After the issue of sock puppetry was raised, the sock master responded by voicing accusations of sock puppetry against established users here and on talk pages of some administrators. After two weeks some administrator lost his patience and took the issue to requests for checkuser, it was confermed that the user accounts were sock puppets of the banned user Art Dominique, also known as the "Kven user".

The Kven user has a good command of the English language. His arguments and accusations can be convincing to the casual reader. The content of his comments is however 100% <personal attack deleted>. See:

• User talk:Husond#Regarding the sock puppeteer Illythr (Roobit, Whiskey, 68.39.144.136, Jatrius, etc.)

Rebuttal of the false and absurd accusation of sock puppetry

The Kven user has accused several established users of sock puppetry, (first stated here). The accusation states, that Illythr, Whiskey, Roobit and Petri Krohn are the same person. The accusation is totally absurd. The users accused of being the same person have expressed very different points-of-view on contested issues. They also have long edit histories. The only reason for the accusation can be to spread FUD and lies.

• Illythr (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is a native Russian from Moldovia. He is a regular contributor to Transnistria. His first edit is from 28 January 2006. He also contributes to the Russian Wikipedia.
• Whiskey (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) from Kauhava, Finland is a physics major from the University of Helsinki. His first edit is from 9 January 2004 One of his first contributions was starting the article Occupation of Baltic Republics (a title with an anti-Russian POV). His contributions to commons also include his real name in the copyright information.
• Roobit (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Is a native Russian from Estonia. He has expressed some extremely anti-Estonian points-of view. He may be one of the 1 million citizens of Estonia and Latvia, that were deprived of their citizenship by denaturalization laws in 1992. His first edit is from 25 November 2006. His contributions to commons also include his real name in the copyright information.
• Petri Krohn (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - is me, using my real name. As far as I know, I am the only person in the world with this combination of a Finnish first name and a Low Saxon last name. My user page contains links to personal information, including my home address, telephone numbers and my entry on IMDB. I have almost 15000 edits on the English Wikipedia, my first edit is from 14 August 2005.

-- Petri Krohn 05:33, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Arbitration regarding Occupation of Latvia 1940-1945

I hereby notify you, that I started the arbitration case: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Occupation_of_Latvia_1940-1945. Constanz - Talk 10:38, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Global Warming

Hi Petri, I was reading the article on Peak Oil - which is excellent and followed the link to global warming and was very surprised that that article did not refer to peak oil even in passing.

I've added a section with some basic facts effectively inviting readers of global warming to visit peak oil to find out more. I don't know why some of the global warming evangelists are being so upetty about it, but they are giving me hassle. I noticed you were a contributor to the peak oil article, and I am leaving this to ask for some support88.110.38.52 22:17, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Jessor and Kazan

I was actually surprised that they had not been there before. I also expanded Hugo Gellert's page to reflect how much a part of it he was as well. Thanks for the comment.Juda S. Engelmayer 01:43, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Glad to see that it was moved because Kazan made it notable. I linked your page because it was quite helpful. I plan on adding to UHF and also adding an Amalgamated Housing page. It just takes time for me to gather the info, line up the references and write it. Juda S. Engelmayer 01:59, 29 January 2007 (UTC) Thank youJuda S. Engelmayer 02:25, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Amalgamated Housing Cooperative it's a start. I'll fill in more tomorrow and this week.Juda S. Engelmayer 03:30, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Images and the Manual of Style

Hello Petri Krohn! We've had a disagreement about how best to format the "Continental divide" article. I read through the Manual of Style (thanks for the link!), and didn't find anything to suggest that large images are prohibited. In fact, it seems that they are sometimes encouraged. The MoS states that thumbnails should not be used when "the image subject or image properties ... call for a specific image width in order to enhance the readability and/or layout of an article," such as "when using detailed maps, diagrams or charts." The new map seems to fit this description to a T. And in the past, other wikipedians have tended to make my graphics larger when I first put them into thumbnail boxes, so I'm confused why you've taken the opposite approach. Part of my concern with the "Continental divide" article is that placing the new map in the lower-right, very small, gives preference to the U.S.-National-Atlas image, but this older map leaves out information about endorheic basins and does not give a world-wide view (an important part of the article is the distinction between continental divides in general and "The Continental Divide" which runs north-south through North America). Also, replacing government-produced images with wikipedia-specific images is usually encouraged for its own sake. Finally, you did not clean up the original caption to my map (it's still orphaned at the top of the "Examples" section), which suggested to me that your edit was made a bit hastily. I'd love your thoughts about the page, and how it's better with a small image. (Right now the article seems pretty thin to me; the "Examples" section is in particular need of more clarity and cartographic specificity.) Citynoise 02:23, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

SS Ranchi

Hi Petri. I used your great page on SS Rajputana to create one for SS Ranchi. I'm not a maritime/naval expert - it carried my grandparents back from the Far East after they were liberated from a Japanese camp in 1945, so I might have phrased things oddly. I hope you don't mind but I copied a chunk of your text on armed cruisers. I also tried to copy the info box and fill it in with Ranchi's info, but it's gone a bit haywire. I can't see why it's not behaving properly (it was for a while, until my last edit or so). If you have the time, I'd be really grateful if you could you drop by the Ranchi page and have a look, and maybe fix my mess? Many thanks. Jasper33 08:54, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh, you are a star! Thanks so much for that Jasper33 16:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Occupation of Latvia

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Occupation of Latvia. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Occupation of Latvia/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Occupation of Latvia/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Thatcher131 01:23, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

FCW

There is now quite some problem with that new user in Finnish Civil War. He keeps reverting ALL changes to get his version back. It is not an improvement that he does not even post to the talk page anymore. Since you seemingly are used to deal with this kind of stuff, can we don something to prevent this happening? He has done it already five times and of course will continue. Recent revert [6] he removes your edit, removes reference from the bottom, removes "volunteer" from the Swedish officers part, adds "rise of socialism" to the cause of the war, and something related to Germans and "Finland's democracy during FCW". He also removes the part that some Whites were simply activists, instead of academics, major land-owners or industrialists. Not hard to guess which political party's member card he has in his pocket? I strongly would oppose any protection as this is caused by a single person who biases it, . It would make the article "unstable" just because of him and therefore grant any vandal a victory. It would be nice if we could even get the texts to the talk page and discuss the versions. Also welcome to join: Wikipedia:WikiProject Finland. --Pudeo (Talk) 10:52, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Location Maps

On the WikiProject Countries talk page, you had either explictly declared a general interest in the project, or had participated at a discussion that appears related to Location Maps for European countries.
New maps had been created by David Liuzzo, and are available for the countries of the European continent, and for countries of the European Union exist in two versions. From November 16, 2006 till January 31, 2007, a poll had tried to find a consensus for usage of 'old' or of which and where 'new' version maps. At its closing, 25 people had spoken in favor of either of the two presented usages of new versions but neither version had reached a consensus (12 and 13), and 18 had preferred old maps.
As this outcome cannot justify reverting of new maps that had become used for some countries, seconds before February 5, 2007 a survey started that will be closed at February 20, 2007 23:59:59. It should establish whether the new style maps may be applied as soon as some might become available for countries outside the European continent (or such to depend on future discussions), and also which new version should be applied for which countries.
Please note that since January 1, 2007 all new maps became updated by David Liuzzo (including a world locator, enlarged cut-out for small countries) and as of February 4, 2007 the restricted licence that had jeopardized their availability on Wikimedia Commons, became more free. The subsections on the talk page that had shown David Liuzzo's original maps, now show his most recent design.
Please read the discussion (also in other sections α, β, γ, δ, ε, ζ, η, θ) and in particular the arguments offered by the forementioned poll, while realizing some comments to have been made prior to updating the maps, and all prior to modifying the licences, before carefully reading the presentation of the currently open survey. You are invited to only then finally make up your mind and vote for only one option.
There mustnot be 'oppose' votes; if none of the options would be appreciated, you could vote for the option you might with some effort find least difficult to live with - rather like elections only allowing to vote for one of several candidates. Obviously, you are most welcome to leave a brief argumentation with your vote. Kind regards. — SomeHuman 7 Feb2007 20:30 (UTC)

Disambiguation links

I actually just found something explaining that using xyz (disambiguation) rather than just xyz means it's intended to be left as-is, but didn't realize that when I was going through the Gothic links. Sorry for the hassle there. -Bbik 08:34, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't think there were more, if I remember correctly that was the only one that I (thought I) had any clue about. I'll go through and check later, need to stop looking at the screen right now or I'll have a migraine soon. -Bbik 08:44, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Just as follow-up, I double checked and Serif was in fact the only one. -Bbik 06:08, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Reiman

Hi Petri, I have noticed you are interested in topics concerning the Russian telecommunications mafia business. I have also heard that there are some recent news about Leonid Reiman's affairs. Wouldn't you be interested in updating the article about him? Colchicum 02:48, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Bravo Zulu

Thanks for keeping an eye on the United States Naval reactor article and protecting it (and its relatives) from the Canoe U puppies. Your actions are in keeping with the highest ██████████████████████ ████████████████████████████████████ ███████████ barnstar. ➥the Epopt 01:11, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Category:Linguistic rights

This category was much needed. It was a good idea to create it and categorise there many of the relevant articles. --Michkalas 13:29, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Aino

You moved Aino (mythology) above Aino (given name) on the Aino (disambiguation) page and left an edit comment reflecting the change, but I'm confused as to why you made it. In the process of cleaning up the dab page I alphabetized the links. If there was any particular reason for the change, I'd be interested to hear it. It's not a matter of grave concern to me, so I won't change it back either way. Regards. Dekimasuよ! 05:02, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

categorisation of Finnish people

Hi Petri

I'm not sure why you took Finnish People out of the category Ethnic Groups in Europe. Do you think that Finnish people are not an ethnic group ? Do you think they are not in Europe? Category does not mean the same as related article!

And its a trueism to say that the Finnish people are an Ethnic group in Finland! And although there are som Finnish people in Sweden, it does not constitute a categorisation. SO I undid your change to that article. The Swedish edit might be arguable. If you add that one back in I won't complain! However, I do think you are mistakingly thinking of "categorisation" as meaning "related articles", and that is not what it means. --Tom 19:56, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Moved to Talk:Finnish people#Categorisation of Finnish people -- Petri Krohn 21:32, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Kars treaty

Actually, I did misunderstand, that's why I deleted that section of my message. I should have thought before I responded and read your earlier message than just one line of it. I apologize in any case. :) All the best, Aivazovsky 12:17, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Finnish translations

Hello! Just to let you know that a place has been created for any Finnish --> English translation requests you would like to make at (Wikipedia:Translation/*/Lang/fi) so that it is easier for people to add, find and take care of them. Thank you for your wide range of contributions (and the Iittala article)! -Yupik 20:53, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Communist Party of Estonia

Hi, check out my comment on the talk page, regarding the delimitations of CPSU-related articles. --Soman 11:09, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Soviet occupation of Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina

Hi. Could you, please, explain your addition of {{POV-title}} tag to Soviet occupation of Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina. The article is in a kind of edit waring now, and some edits (if not most) are clearly non-neutral and outside the scope of the article. Sometimes, indeed, there are discussions about issues not at all concerned with the facts of the title. But since you did not explain, I would like to ask which of these or maybe other reasons you meant. :Dc76 18:00, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Masonic Temple (Providence)

Just so you know, I have started an RfC on the name of the article. You may want to add your two cents as to why you think the move/rename was wrong. FYI, I moved the article to Renaissance Providence Hotel because that is what the building is currently called, not to "censor" the article. To be honest, I don't see where there was any censorship involved... I left in the fact that the building was originally designed to be a Masonic hall (but never occupied by the Masons as they ran out of money before it was completed). What was censored? Blueboar 14:56, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Occupation of Latvia

This arbitration case has closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The parties identified in the decision as having acted poorly in the dispute regarding Occupation of Latvia 1940-1945 are admonished to avoid such behavior in the future. That article is placed on probation, and any editor may be banned from it, or from other reasonably related pages, by an uninvolved administrator for disruptive edits, including, but not limited to, edit warring, inciviilty, and original research. The Arbitration Committee reserves the right to appoint one or more mentors at any time, and the right to review the situation in one year, if appropriate. The parties are strongly encouraged to enter into a mediation arrangement regarding any article-content issues that may still be outstanding. If the article is not substantially improved by continued editing, the Arbitration Committee may impose editing restrictions on users whose editing is counterproductive or disruptive. This notice is given by a Clerk on behalf of the Arbitration Committee. Newyorkbrad 23:35, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Categorizing redirects

Please see Wikipedia:Redirect#Categories for redirect pages; thank you. --NE2 07:56, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Forgot to add {{R with possibilities}}. -- Petri Krohn 08:06, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I was pointing out this part: "Relevant categories should be moved to the main page where the redirect is pointing." --NE2 08:09, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

...unless they are marked with {{R with possibilities}}. -- Petri Krohn 08:13, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I didn't see that part... it was added fairly recently, so I started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Redirect#Categorizing redirects. --NE2 08:26, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Greater wrath

Hello, I saw your addition to the article Greater Wrath. Being a native finnish speaker, perhaps you can fill in the finnish equivalent of "Stora ofreden" if there is one. jkl 15:53, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Done. (fi:Isoviha) -- Petri Krohn 20:43, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Suomalaisen Waffen-SS yksikön "sotarikokset".

Yksikköä ei koskaan syytetty rikoksista missään oikeudessa eikä jäseniä tuomittu kyseisistä syistä. En tämän takia näe mitään syytä miksi lisäykselleni pitäisi lisätä lähde. En ole koskaan nähnyt että kukaan olisi avoimesti syyttänyt yksikkä sotarikoksista. --Kurt Leyman 07:45, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Kaiken Wikipedia-aineiston pitää perustua lähteisiin. "Olen kuullut" tai "en ole koskaan nähnyt" ei riitä lähteeksi. -- In English: WP:RS. -- Petri Krohn 14:10, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Bot

Hi Petri! There is a new articles search bot you might be interested in: User:AlexNewArtBot/FinlandSearchResult. Colchicum 15:26, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Prohibition in Finland

Fair enough. Didn't notice the possibilities tag, thought it was just someone trying to get a redirect for an unlikely search term through. Sorry about that. Heliomance 14:25, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Treaty of Kars

"Ethnic POV pushing / vandalism?" Those are rather strong words, don't you think? Please try to understand the situation between Armenian and Azerbaijani editors here on Wikipedia. I didn't mean to somehow insult you, if this was the case. Please accept my sincerest apology. -- Aivazovsky 21:00, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Wow, I didn't realize that you hated me so much..."read the fucking document"? That's a bit strong. I cannot revert this article for another 24 hours per a 1RR parole regarding an Armenian-Azerbaijani RfA, but you seem to almost be provoking me to respond. -- Aivazovsky 21:04, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I have responded at Talk:Treaty of Kars#Parties to the treaty. -- Petri Krohn 21:22, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Alright, I'll work this out with you on the talk page. Peter, just know that I don't want get into a dispute with you over this and know that I don't mean any harm. If you knew my edit history, you would see this to be true. We must work something out. After all, we're both descendants of Finno-Ugric peoples (I'm part Hungarian). :) Kindest regards, Aivazovsky 21:24, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Fascism and Nazism as representative forms of socialism

I am sorry to bother you, but I really need some help. There is an ongoing campaign by a few editors to portray Fascism and Nazism as representative forms of socialism. As part of this effort (a debate that stretches back to 2004), there are a tiny handful of editors who revert and redirect National Socialism to Nazism. I believe a majority of editors support redirecting National Socialism to National Socialism (disambiguation). I realize we just had a poll on the Nazism page where I thought this issue was settled, but apparently the struggle is not over. Please consider voting in the new poll, or adding a comment at: Talk:Nazism#Survey:_redirecting_National_Socialism. Also consider notifying other editors with an interest in this matter. I am doing the best I can, but need assistance. Thanks.--Cberlet 19:47, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Kars

I did some research on it and all the books that I've found list Russia and each Transcaucasian republic as seperate parties to the treaty (even though they formed part of the Soviet Union by December 1922). I apologize for sticking to a nonfact (I was not "blatantly lying" as you asserted in your discussion with Adil Baguirov). Also, Khoikhoi is not Armenian as you have implied. -- Aivazovsky 01:47, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I also want an apology from you for your rudeness towards me during this dispute. (e.g. "read the fucking document") -- Aivazovsky 01:49, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Aivazovsky was acting in bad faith from the beginning -- it's obvious that 1) if he hasn't read any of the sources BEFORE he started editing and reverting the page, then he should not have edited it at all. Meanwhile, 2) no one needs to read SECONDARY sources to "find" proof that is CLEARLY visible in the PRIMARY document itself - the Kars Treaty, which unambiguously identifies all the 5 parties to the treaty. And his bad faith is further shown by his REMOVAL of Azerbaijani and Turkish URLs (even if they only interview Armenian FM), on the ground that they are "POV", whilst at the same time PLACEMENT/RETENTION of Armenian URLs. I guess that's his understanding of NPOV. --adil 06:49, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Soviet occupation of Romania

By whom is the issue still disputed, and on what basis? Biruitorul 04:47, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

See Talk:Soviet occupation of Romania. -- Petri Krohn 04:52, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Oil prices?

I'm just curious... Why are you linking so many articles to oil prices, which redirects to the The price of oil and the economy? There is already a comprehensive section on oil prices at Petroleum#Pricing. Thanks. --Madchester 21:48, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

It seems that there may have been more backlinks before, and someone may have removed them. On the {{prod}} issue itself. If the price of oil and the economy gets deleted, then (and only then) should oil prices redirect to Petroleum#Pricing. -- Petri Krohn 21:55, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Continuation War template photo

Talk:Continuation_War#Photo ... --Pudeo (Talk) 23:00, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

M/S Sea Diamond

Just curious... what's your screen resolution, and what was the effect of my edit on your screen? — coelacan — 02:20, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Ahh, thank you. That's an effect seen in Internet Explorer which doesn't show up in my browser. Thanks for reminding me. — coelacan — 02:35, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

About that Paisley Magnet School Students, ... I'd appreciate your views on Talk:M/S_Sea_Diamond#Paisley_Magnet_School as the one who included that info to the article --Hohenberg 18:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Railway

Oh, thanks for the great contribution, Petri. Yesterday I tried to find this old picture of Petäjärvi, as I had realized that it was not copyrighted, but I couldn't recall where I had seen it. BTW, I think that it is worth mentioning the 1939 Petäjärvi civil train bombing and 1944 Elisenvaara case in this article. Colchicum 11:56, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Swedish iron industry and other matters

• Should I assume from your recent amendmetns that you intend to write an article on the Swedish iron industry? If so, please do not let me discourage you, but you should not be surprosed if I contribute to it.
• However, I am not entirely happy about Oregrounds iron (or other spelling) being permanently redirected to the city of Öregrund. I have never entirely understood the relationship between the commodity and the place. This seems to relate to the rights of market towns, presumably going back to a period when ironmasters were supposed to sell their iron in a market. I suspect that did not in practice happen, the iron being sent direct froma shipping place near the forge to Stockholm, without being landed in Örgrund. Oregrounds iron was a particular commodity with known properties that made it uniquely suitable for the cementation process of making steel. Perhaps I should convert the redirect into an article myself, but will not be surprised to find amendments made by you.
• In the finery forge article, some one had changed the spelling of oregrounds iron to Öregrund in an article title. Right or wrong, the article title spells the word 'oregrounds'. I chose that spelling when writing the article, because it is one that I found in contemporary English documents. Peterkingiron 23:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Did you know?

Did you know? was updated. On 12 April, 2007, a fact from the article Saint Petersburg–Hiitola railroad, which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 13:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

M/S Sea Diamond image

You reverted because the image "LOOKED" like WP:SPEEDY? Take it easy, it constituted fair use and no one wants to see the Birka Princess. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neoelitism (talk • contribs) 17:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

LocateMe

I'd be grateful if you'd consider the discussion at Template talk:LocateMe. Consensus appears to be against adding LocateMe to the article space, as you did on Aleksanterinkatu. Thanks. --Tagishsimon (talk)

Did you know?

On 13 April, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Crichton-Vulcan, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 11:18, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject

You may want to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Finland. Great work!! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 12:06, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Mediation!

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to Example. As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. The process of mediation is voluntary and focuses exclusively on the content issues over which there is disagreement. Please review the request page and the guide to formal mediation, and then indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you, [signature]

Continuation War

You claim in the article that the continuation war was an illegal war of aggression. I think you should elaborate on this, with proper references. I do not think that there exists even among the historians a consensus on this. --MPorciusCato 14:11, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm... Could you specify a legal war of aggression? Also your claim that no serious historian agree with opposing concept is too strict claim, f.ex. professor of history, Pentti Virrankoski, although emeritus, is clearly serious historian. Likewise, not all those who accept the legality of the war demand the return of the Karelian Isthmus or rectifying war-responsibility trial verdicts.--Whiskey 20:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

University of Dole

Did you check the discussion page before making your recent edit to the categorization of the article University of Dole? --Bejnar 18:48, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

No, but Category:Universities and colleges should not be spammed with articles of individual universities. -- Petri Krohn 18:53, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom/Soviet occupation of Romania [7]

Filed. Please confirm awareness. -- Biruitorul 16:20, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Soviet occupation of Romania. For the Mediation Committee, ^demon[omg plz] This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

This message delivered: 18:33, 23 April 2007 (UTC).

Admiralty (disambiguation)

Hi, You removed the ru interlink from this page. I've been trying to straighten out the interwikis for that page and for Admiralty. I don't know Russian, could you let me know what the two pages in Russian are, so i can make sure the links are now correct in other languages as well? Thanks, --SteveMtl 04:47, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Please, please do not restore the interwikis on Admiralty or Admiralty (disambiguation). While you say they are all correct, in fact :de:Admiralität is a link to the general term, not the British Admiralty, so it should be linked to the disambiguation page. The problem is that the bots will now go "fix" the interwikis in other languages, and it will be a mess again. The only solution i could find was to make 2 exclusive lists, one for the British Admiralty, and one for the general term, and apply to all the languages. The only ones i was not sure of were of were ru and jp.--SteveMtl 18:01, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

re:Georgian Affair

Hello Petri. Thanks for your message. I really tried to sound neutral despite the fact that I come from the Soviet-era dissident family which was heavily repressed under Stalin, and hence, I’m very much hostile to the Soviet ideology, not to mention Stalinism. Regards, Kober^Talk 12:20, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

The Bronze Horseman

It seems not to have made DYK, but thanks anyways for defending its length while I was away. --Oreo Priest 20:37, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Better still, it did make it. Thanks a ton. --Oreo Priest 21:46, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

"drive-by deletionist with POV agenda"

Please see Wikipedia:No personal attacks and try to avoid name-calling in the future. As your edit was just to create HTML comment from the removed section, therefore, in effect you only removed {{citation needed}} from my edit (see [8]). That claim about state secrecy has no references whatsoever, even discussion on talk page agrees with that. However, there was political controversy, but there are no citations about it. As it seems now, you are pushing POV agenda. DLX 06:27, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Royal Navy in Baltic

The Royal Navy sent a force into the Baltic commanded by Walter Cowan during the Russian civil war to aid the white russians and the Estonians. The Russians lost five destroyers, (three mined and two captured after being driven onto the beach and two obsolete cruisers sunk by Augustus Agar. The British lost the cruiser HMS Cassandra, two destroyers and the submarine L55. - I might get around to starting the article - but please go ahead in the meantime - Alan Foum

Bronze Soldier of Tallinn

Boy, what a day... So you mean that the stone structure has actually been demolished already? Best, --Camptown 21:58, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

The picture from inside the tent shows absolutely nothing. Every stone has been removed. -- Petri Krohn 22:00, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't you think you should wait few days before adding such category ? maybe someone pays for it hehehe :) i mean the event is still in the begining :) have a nice day Ammar (^Talk - ^{Don't Talk}) 02:00, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

So it was destroyed?? I found a picture which shows absolutely nothing. So it believe and think it must be destroyed. When I beliebe so, then that's a fact and I can write it to dictionary... blah.. nevermind..— Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.156.20.99 (talk • contribs) 21:02, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Petri. I know that you and I have not always seen eye to eye on this wiki and on another one (understatement cum wordplay) - but do you not find it funny that a user who is only with Wikipedia since a few days starts an AfD (I needed a lot of help and time when I did one of those) and does something like this: [9]? Perhaps he has been here before, if you get my drift? By the way, do not forget to sign your vote(s) on these AfDs!--Pan Gerwazy 14:03, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, I have been on Wikipedia before, and made an occasional edit. But nothing so far had provoked me to start active participation.

As for my proficiency in using simple web-based interfaces, what can I say? I am a programmer by trade.

Your link is not related to me, though. Digwuren 21:29, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Er, there are two of you, I hope? I was referring to Alexia Death - did not even dream that you could be as new as that until Petri pointed it out to me. And no, it is not simply interfaces. Sorry, Petri, for using your space over this. --Pan Gerwazy 00:02, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

That's the problem with vague accusations: you desribe long ears, and a whole bunch of donkeys feels offended. Digwuren 18:36, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

You are welcome! -- Petri Krohn 00:06, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Petri Krohn, you have repeatedly pushed your weird WP:POV on the page of Bronze Soldier of Tallinn, without properly explaining yourself, as I have documented, and you have not ceased or started explaining. Please cease or start explaining; otherwise, I will be forced to put your good faith in participating on Wikipedia under serious suspicion. Digwuren 21:29, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

There is now a section (Bronze Soldier of Tallinn#Myths) in want of references to the government's secrecy claims. Remembering that you were the one who most frequently added these claims into the main article, you might want to fill in the missing references. Digwuren 17:26, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 29 April, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article British submarine flotilla in the Baltic, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Carabinieri 23:25, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

24.193.75.169's edits

24.193.75.169's edits to Megan's Law were not necessarily vandalism (unlikely though it might be). Perhaps he was simply removing what he thought was unsourced original research. As it is, that article has only external links. Christopher Connor 13:15, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Kjell-Albin-Abrahamson.jpg

Hi Petri! Thanks for making a copyright investigation. As regards to the memorial, I think the past days' development has been quite interesting, and it was probably essential to stand guard guard during the weekend to prevent some really wicked editing attempts. --Camptown 08:23, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Tagging

Dear Petri. Thank you for paying attention to my person. However, as I didn't vandalized or ever consider to vandalize in the future, that kind of tagging could be taken as equal to personal attack and harassment. Please try to avoid that kind of practise in the future. Thank you. 80.235.55.122 06:08, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Bronze Solider

Actually, I've seen the monument about 10 years ago. I happend to know the Estonian minister of justice at the time, and when I asked him why the statue (unlike most other monuments from the Soviet time) had not yet been removed, he replied: "It would cause to much trouble". --Camptown 20:04, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

)))

Hey petri your client came to edit )))) Beatles Fab Four 07:06, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Dmitri Linter

You may wish to review Dmitri Linter where user DLX forcibly pushes his POV tagging without any justifications. Vlad fedorov 12:25, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Estonia

Regarding your question here, knowledge of the subject matter of an individual article is not a prerequisite for participating in deletion debates. Anyone with an opinion on how Wikipedia should function (and what information it should contain) is welcome to join in. Besides, neutral voices can often be helpful. --RFBailey 22:26, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi

Dear friend Petri! I encourage you to be more active agains neo-Nazis which try to rewrite the history. 85.140.243.184 19:45, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Dear Petry! Take a look at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bronze_Soldier_of_Tallinn#For_some_who_try_to_forget_and_rewrite_the_history LOVE AND PEACE 85.140.211.220 00:53, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

They try to raise their heads again. Unbelievable. Take a look.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Block_evasion_of_Beatle_Fab_Four Beatle Fab Four 22:50, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Commons:Image:Amsterdam Avenue - Columbia University - north.jpg

Hello Petri Krohn. We would like to publish this image of "View of Amsterdam Avenue looking north from Columbia University overpass, the elevated courtyard spans across Amsterdam Avenue between West 116th and 117th Streets" in a Sociology textbook. Would you please contact me at jillenge@yahoo.com for details? I would like to obtain your written permission to publish this photo. Thank you. -Jill

Yes, you can have my permission. I will send you an email. -- Petri Krohn 01:06, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Palestinian CfD

I don't think you are reading the proposal carefully. Try reading it again. Honestly, I think you misread it. BTW there is some further discussion of the issue here Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Palestine#Consistent_Palestinian_naming_standards. --Abnn 01:49, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello Petri,

As I understood it, you don't disagree with most (all?) of the CfR, but are more concerned on the super-categorisation of a specific category. If I misunderstood please ignore this, but if that is the case, perhaps you would consider changing the "oppose" to a "support"; I'm very hopeful that this passes due to the compromise and agreement on the part of both pro-Israeli and pro-Palestinian editors, not an overly common occurrence :-) , and so anything you could do in that direction would be of tremendous assistance. Cheers, Tewfik^Talk 02:26, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Belated reply

Concerning your message on my talk page, I share some of your concerns. I believe we should attempt to describe to our readers the current linguistic situation in Estonia. The percentage of Francophones in Canada is smaller than the Russian-speakers in Estonia, yet Canada is officially bi-lingual, that's what I'm thinking about. Do you think this report contains enough information to start the article about Estonization? --Ghirla^-трёп- 22:46, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:F-knoll01.jpg

Hello, Petri Krohn. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:F-knoll01.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Petri Krohn/Knoll. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 04:07, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Congress of Estonia

Petri Krohn to 3 Löwi: Your edits to Congress of Estonia have not been very helpfull. Also your edit summaries, "typical pro-Russian imperialist POV and factual errors" are not too civil. If was really pushing a POV expressing my own opinion telling the truth, I would say, that the Congress of Estonia was a rasict organization with the aim of establishing an apartheid state. If I was pushing the Russian POV, I would say that they intened to restore the fascist state and hoped to achieve ethnic cleansing. -- Petri Krohn 17:08, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Privet, Petri! Thanks for the compliment. One should be glad to remain just a 'nationalist' for you when according to edit history you seem to regularly label most Estonians as either 'racists' or 'terrorists'. --3 Löwi 04:59, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

You have added a reference to the Nuremberg Laws into the article of Congress of Estonia. This is non-factual, inappropriate, and apparently designed to serve no other purpose than to convey the Nazi connotations of the Nuremberg laws onto Estonian restoration-era citizenship policies. I consider it blatant pushing of a private WP:POV, in obvious violation of Wikipedia policy, and most unwelcome. Digwuren 07:51, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Siberia

Please see Talk:Siberia (disambiguation) `'mikka 23:43, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Traverse Gap

Thank you for your kind words. You are correct that few seem to know of the existence of this interesting and important feature. A web search yielded remarkably few results and I once was concerned that someone would claim it is not notable. I did some looking and cannot find that there ever was thought of making a canal. The regions such a canal would have served were very thinly settled until the coming of the railways in the 1870s, and rails then adequately accommodated the increased need for bulk transport which they indirectly created. The Red, Bois des Sioux, and Minnesota Rivers are very small streams and water supply could be an issue. But there is at least one historical instance where boats were taken through the gap during a wet year. Kablammo 01:03, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying me. My attempt to wikify it was also reverted. see top of page --TheFEARgod (Ч) 23:59, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Privacy

Hi! You might want to check out Government databases & extend it. Cheers! Tazmaniacs 16:51, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Three revert rule

You have been blocked for violating the three revert rule on Jüri Uluots for a period of 24 hours. To contest this block, please reply here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} along with the reason you believe the block is unjustified, or email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list. Selket ^Talk 07:05, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Petri Krohn (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

This edit war is a result of stalking by people now involved in this dispute. One editor has systematically reverted most of my edits in the last three weeks, often in only a few minutes. Yesterday he was blocked for 48 h for 3RR and stalking. I have not gone around reverting his reverts, on the contrary, I have waited for things to cool down.
In this current round of edit warring, disputed-tags have generally been respected, and the conduct has not degraded to the level of this tag war. I made my initial edits fully aware that they would be reverted in a few hours. In an effort to reach a compromise, I made several versions into the edit history, including a tagged one, with a plea in the edit summary that if and when I was reverted, my opponent would reverte to the tagged version. After being reverted three times I did not restore my now diputed edits, but only added the tag.
I have technically placed the {{totallydisputed}} tag in the article history several times, but on tree of the times I have self reverted the edit. Edits that are self-reverted should not count in 3RR.
Here are the edits as I see them: first edit, 1st restoration after revert, 2nd restoration, 1st tag, 2nd tag. The way I see it, I have reverted to the taged version only once. -- Petri Krohn 12:19, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Technicalities aside, you have been reverting disruptively on the article instead of engaging in discussion. The 3RR is an electric fence, not an entitlement. Use the blocking period to cool off, and when you come back try discussing instead of simply reverting. Trebor 12:55, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

May 2007

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Congress of Estonia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. Digwuren 12:45, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

NOTE I resent the personal attack in revert comments of Congress of Estonia. Not liking your approach to getting your POV to dominate all actually sourced ones, does NOT make me a meatpuppet. Please refine from accusations like this even in revert comments.--Alexia Death 14:19, 26 May 2007 (UTC)