User talk:Alex Bakharev: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 06:26, 14 August 2007

Archives:

regex suggestion on newartbot/good

Hi there. I was just suggesting another regex for the new article bot:

-100 /\{\{db[|-}]/

... would catch the standard CSD templates; however, I did notice that none of them were <nowiki> protected, which could be a problem on pages that meta-reference the tags (ex, "the {{db}} template is used to mark pages for speedy deletion"). I dunno if you accounted for this in your code or not, but I figured I'd offer it up as a helpful suggestion based on what I was able to see :D. Anyway, cheers. --slakr 23:18, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your bot

I like the bad search list that it does, as it provides me with a ton of pages that are good speedy deletion canidates. Would it be possible for the bot to only show the pages that exist, instead of red links for pages that were deleted? Thanks! Nwwaew (Talk Page) (Contribs) (E-mail me) 02:18, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I like it also, but it has stopped. This must have to do with you being on a wikibreak until the 19th?--Kranar drogin 10:44, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Pavel Litvinov.jpg

Could any free image of this person be found or created or is it completely irreplaceable? GDonato (talk) 14:57, 7 July 2007 (UTC) This also applies to Image:Tretyak.gif GDonato (talk) 15:00, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for July 9th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 28	9 July 2007	About the Signpost

Seven administrators request promotion to bureaucrat status	Board election series: Elections closed, results pending
Wikimedia Foundation hires consultant, general counsel	Newspaper obituary plagiarizes Japanese Wikipedia
WikiWorld comic: "Ann Coulter"	News and notes: FA stats, top information site, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:22, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Mikhailtal.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Mikhailtal.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 12:22, 16 July 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Abu badali ^(talk) 12:22, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Energy portal: new energy articles

Hi Alex. It's been suggested that it would be good to add a bot-updated list of new energy-related articles on the energy portal. As a 'bot expert', would you be able to help out with this? Perhaps you would like to reply on the portal talk page? Gralo 18:03, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for July 16th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 29	16 July 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Filling in with a new feature
Möller, Walsh retain seats; Brioschi elected	British agency cites Wikipedia in denying F1 trademark
Two new bureaucrats promoted	Wikipedian bloggers launch "article rescue" effort
Book review: The Cult of the Amateur	WikiWorld comic: "Charles Lane"
Wikipedia in the news	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 19:47, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bot Builder Award

		The Wikipedia Bot Builder Award
		I award you the "Bot Builder Award" for your awesome bot that is SOOOO helpful for finding good and bad new articles. Your bot was missed during your wikibreak. Thank you! Royalbroil 19:04, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In regards to my correction

Alex, listen! Some of the info about the Ukrainian soccer is wrong. I'm just trying to straight up some of those things. It's not just a random corrections.

You merely reverted my corrections for Ukrainian Cup. I understand why this may seem as trolling or as such, but if you'd take a closer look you will notice that I was just trying to fix some of the misleading information.

Sorry, I was probably wrong here. As a rule of thumb try to provide references if you change factual info, that way less misunderstanding would arrive Alex Bakharev 10:53, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Podilsko-Voskresenska Line

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party is now active, and your input is requested. Further information is available at the Mediation location, Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Podilsko-Voskresenska Line.

Kind regards,
Anthøny (talk) 10:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above mediation is in the full swing. You listed yourself as one of the participants, I was wondering if you have anything to contribute to the discussion? Thanks. --Hillock65 12:37, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Taganka (song)

Hello, Alex! The article Taganka (song) has been deleted, could you restore it in my personal space User:Vald/Taganka (song).

Many thanks in advance! - Vald 03:27, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done Alex Bakharev 03:30, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for July 23rd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 30	23 July 2007	About the Signpost

WikiWorld comic: "World domination"	News and notes: "The Wikipedia Story", visa ruling, milestones
Wikipedia in the news	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:54, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kyiv vs Kiev

Kyiv, not Kiev!

Alex, what is the problem with changing the old, unused Russian name to the current Ukrainian name?

Horlo

My main problem is that Kiev is unilateral change of the article that many people worked on that confuses western readers who might simply not know that Kiev and Kyiv is the same city. Another problem is that Kiev is much more widespread usage (in fact my spellchecker (built up in Firefox) is trying to change Kyiv to Kiev. The same way I would oppose unilateral changes from Moscow to Moskva or from Saint-Petersburg to Sankt-Peterburg or whatever. As I said my opinion means little just persuade multiplicity of the authors of the article to change its title is all what is required. On the other hand revert warring would not help you. In fact I have filed WP:AN/3RR report against you Alex Bakharev 01:48, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alex,

If you ask most western readers whether it is Kyiv of Kiev, most would ask you "what are you talking about". To them it is a non-issue. There is no problem with a re-direct from Kiev to Kyiv, as I bet most people wouldn't really care. They want to know what is going on there now, and won't get offended that

The problem that Kiev is more widespread, especially in your spellchecker, is not a valid argument at all. 100 years ago, most people considered ethnicity a valid reason to force you to sit in the back of a bus. Just because many people do it doesn't mean it's right. Please combine this with the first point, that most people don't really care either way, they've just been sold this name for some reason.

Speaking of which, what is your reason for being so passionate about a Ukrainian city?

I am not particular passionate about that city; I am passionate about the rules and consensus Alex Bakharev 06:36, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Valentin Lossev

I just noticed you put the article up for deletion. Earlier, I listed the IP that was deleting the tags and other material at WP:AIV. I'm fairly sure that the IP is identical with the creator of that article, user:Valcan. It's probably not all that important, but I wanted an admin to evaluate the situation. Should the IP delisted at AIV? —AldeBaer 08:52, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind, has been taken care of. —AldeBaer 09:15, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Kiev

Alex, something rather strange is going on at Kiev. There are too many different IPs from different locations for this sudden burst of Kyiv-pushing to make sense. There is either some great coincidence, some kind of co-ordination is happening or some kind of spoofing is going on. I don't know what to make of it. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 14:02, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi Protect the article for a start, I already reverted two anons within minutes - Most likely sockpuppetry.--Kuban Cossack 18:31, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also fully lock the Kyiv redirect from editing. --Kuban Cossack 17:06, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response

I've responded on AN/I.--Jersey Devil 10:07, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Turkic Kaganate

Dear Alex, on 5 July 2007 I opened a page "Turkic Kaganate" (initial entry) which is prominently absent from the WP, which is a nonsense, because among the empires it ranks among the largest and definitely prominent. Would you please help me to locate who and how deleted this seed page, now it reverts to Göktürks, which refers to the leading tribe of the Kaganate, but not to the political, international, structural, historical etc subjects of the state. It seems that some editors do not deem certain subjects worthy of mentioning. This also creates linking problems, when the subject is the Kaganate, and not its people. How, for example, you can address the split of the Kaganate into Western and Eastern fractions? The Göktürks did not split, but the Kaganate did. Thank you, Barefact 10:52, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you have created Western Turkic Kaganate article. Neither of your mainspace edits was deleted since October 2006. The Turkic Kaganate redirect was created by Ghirlandajo it was not written over any text Alex Bakharev 11:19, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It looks that Internedko created Western Turkic Kaganate 1 October 2006 as a stub, and it did not advance much since then, though there was enough infighting about its contents and even existence. I created a stub Turkic Kaganate on 5 July 2007 (initial entry), because it plays such an important historical role from Caspian Sea to Mongolia, and is directly linked to by a number of articles, and even more articles are linked indirectly via Göktürks. Please advise me on where that redirect by Ghirlandajo is located. Barefact 05:44, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good to be back

Alex,

How are you? My vacation was grand. I had a lot of time to read up on wikipedia policy concerning conflict resolution.

I am therefore requesting a poll on the name Kyiv/kiev. However, as you so rightly pointed out, this page is for the western audience, and therefore I believe that only native English speakers should be allowed to vote.

When do you think the poll should start?

Horlo 14:37, 28 July 2007 (UTC)Horlo[reply]

The poll starts then it is convenient for you. Open a new section in the Talk:Kiev and put a reference to it in the WP:RM, it also maybe useful to add a reference in WP:RfC Alex Bakharev 03:41, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A question (not urgent)

Hi, I just asked you a question at User talk:AlexNewArtBot/AlbumLog. It's neither terribly serious nor urgent, I'd just like to learn more and more about what is going on here at Wikipedia. Best wishes, <K F> 19:37, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request to move Kyiv

Hello,

I have set up a request to move the page Kiev to Kyiv.

I have outlined four key reasons for doing so in the discussion section of the page.

Looking through the archives, I saw that you had contributed to this page earlier. I would like to hear what you have to say on this topic.

This is the standard invite that I sent out to anybody whom I found on the archives. Please pass it on.

Thanks,

Horlo 03:06, 30 July 2007 (UTC)Horlo[reply]

Re:Parole

Hi Alex. I remember about the parole, but I reverted the article only once. This was my edit: [1], and this was my revert to it: [2] As you can see, I made only 1 rv, as my first edit was not an rv to any previous version. --Grandmaster 05:47, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, by the same token User:Hajji Piruz should also be considered to be in violation of his parole for making these two edits: [3] [4] However, it is not a violation either, as the first one was an edit, and second one an actual revert. Grandmaster 06:53, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About Corduene

Hi,

I just wanted to clarify that the relationship is confirmed by numerous sources, including the following:

Encyclopedia Columbia says: Kurds are Commonly identified with the ancient Corduene.
If these two tracts are rightly placed, Cordyene must also be sought on the left bank of the Tigris. The word is no doubt the ancient representative of the modern Kurdistan, and means a country in which Kurds dwelt.[5], Source: George Rawlinson, The Seven Great Monarchies Of The Ancient Eastern World, Vol 7.
The Kurds must certainly be connected with the Karduchi mentioned in Xenophon and the Gordyaei mentioned in other Greek and Latin authors, with the Kordukh or Kortschaikh of the Armenians and the land of Gardu of the Aramaic and Syriac writers.Source: G.R. Driver, Studies in Kurdish History, Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies, University of London, 1922, pp.491-511, see p.493

Heja Helweda 17:09, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Dear Alex Bakharev:

I was reading your discussion board, and I noticed that there was not even one thank you, for your commitment to Wikipedia. This is outrageous. Ergo, on behalf of the Wikipedia thank you. Thank you for your commitment, your intellect, and your eternal vigilance in upholding Wikipedia standards. Now I realize that when you blocked me it was not personal, but when you did unblock me it was personal. God bless you. Firmitas 19:34, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Alex Bakharev 21:54, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, i'm back

Hello, my blocking ended, and thank you for that. I uploaded another medal on your user page. M.V.E.i. 10:24, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 30th, 2007.

Apologies for the late delivery this week; my plans to handle this while on vacation went awry. Ral315

Apologies for bad joke of a truthful nature.

Dear Alex BAKHAREV Saw you on the Dahn page, and it brought back a memory of a very early post, for which I owe you an apology. It is the one post I did out of a sense of mischievous fun, fully knowing it would be edited out. My family lived in Ringwood almost from its foundation (emigrated 1836). I saw it transformed from a beautiful rural townlet into what was defined in 1966 as the ugliest town in Australia for its 16 petrol retail outlets, and know intimately the history of the area (it had the finest native orchids in southern Victoria down to the early 1900s and Melbournians often took train rides out in springtime to see the spectacle). So I popped in my comment about that sale of that area, which is now a commercial zone. I remember the sale, and the anger of old families, who knew the original donee, and were much upset at this alienation of land given for their recreation and use to private enterprise. Of course, it cannot be documented, like so much in history. I knew that, being unsourced, it would be quickly removed. It was, as it were, a little spur to a 'new chum', whose gifts and intelligence will assuredly enrich the country we now share, to learn some more about the intimate history of the area wher eyou live, and nothing more than that. I suppose an apology is due for the small bother. До связи Счастливо Nishidani 12:09, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 31	30 July 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Another experiment and Wikimania
Report on Citizendium	Response: News from Citizendium
User resigns admin status amid allegations of sock puppetry	WikiWorld comic: "Mr. Bean"
Wikipedia in the news	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 23:35, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hello Alex. I was just wondering if you know anything about the copyright status of the Great Soviet Encyclopedia material from http://www.cultinfo.ru/. Can we upload their images to Wikipedia? Thanks, Kober^Talk 07:50, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Great Soviet Encyclopedia is not different from the other Soviet publications. Assuming Russian copyright laws should be used then material specifically produced for Encyclopedia by its employees (or published without naming the author) are public domain if they were first published before 1 Jan 1954. It means that the latest edition of the GSE is copyrighted, the previous one is copyrighted from the letter K and the edition Last-2 is public domain. If a material was not specifically produced for the encyclopedia and the author is known (e.g. Encyclopedia published a reproduction of a famous painting) then the image is public domain only if the author should die before 1 Jan 1954. I am not sure what edition cultinfo used but I suspected it is the latest edition. If so then it is copyrighted most probably (unless we can prove the image from cultinfo is a reproduction of an older image) Alex Bakharev 08:11, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation. According to ru:Большая советская энциклопедия, the cultinfo version is the 3rd (and the latest) edition. It contains plenty of great photos, but since their copyright status is unclear, I’d better refrain from using them on wiki. Spasibo, Kober^Talk 08:34, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please resign

Hello Alex Bakharev, by removing the facts of Soviet terror in Estonia during 1940 from the subject of controversy in the article Bronze Soldier of Tallinn that has been laid out according to WP NPOV policies by citing the opposing viewpoints. By removing the facts of a viewpoint that had been referenced and sourced in the article and elsewhere on WP, including but not only as the events were reported by Time Magazine. You have involved yourself on WP with a political agenda currently common to the Putin's government of Russia that reportedly attempts to whitewash the Soviet history. Therefore please resign as an administrator on WP ASAP, as one shouldn't be acting according to a political bias. Thereafter, please do not vandalize articles on WP by removing facts that have been sourced and referenced, please do not edit WP based on a political opinion. In the future please attempt to find a common ground first by involving yourself in a discussion in case you see anything questionable in any controversial articles. Thanks!--Termer 05:58, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you read WP:RS you will realize that 1940 publication in a foreign magazine having no reliable way to communicate with the sources of info is not a reference that allows to refer to an info as a fact (and it is not relevant enough to have a long discussion). Regarding my recall, please follow User:Alex Bakharev/Recall Alex Bakharev 07:03, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for sharing your opinion. Please do not question your fellow editors intelligence by pointing out the WP:RS that is based on common sense. The fact itself is common knowledge for anybody familiar with the subject,. The "foreign magazine", depends on the viewpoint I guess, is there to confirm the fact. Agreed on: there is no need to have a long discussion, since there is no need to prove to anybody that the earth is spherical not flat. Exactly like there is no need to prove to anybody that people got shot for political reasons including the voting matters by the soviets after they had taken over the Baltic countries. Please resign as an administrator, since you have clearly shown support to the political agenda of the current Russian government while editing WP. Thanks-Termer 09:48, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for "bulging in", but I don't see that Alex has misused his administrative powers in any way, therefore I see no reason to ask him to resign. This is normal wiki-dispute, he has not used administrative tools to "win". While I share your opinion, Termer, about the Time article, I recommend that you treat this as a normal content dispute, not as administrator abusing his powers. Also, an apology would be nice, but that is my personal opinion. Sander Säde 11:24, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've never suggested that Alex has misused his administrative powers. But it seem I have a different understanding: the way an administrator should behave while jumping into a controversial subject that is in the middle of an edit warring. I'd leave the decision still up to Alex. In case you Alex would like to continue heating up edit wars according to personal political bias, please resign. In case you'd like in the future to support finding a common ground, I 'd have no problem with an administrator like that. Thats it from me regarding the issue, I'm not going to return to this, only if other incidents occur. thanks--Termer 16:28, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I beg to differ; you asked him to resign his Administrator right on the English Wikipedia - that is about as serious (and direct) accusation of Administrator-abuse you can get. Perhaps taking a moment to think before you post is in order - trust me, it does a lot of good. Anthøny 17:46, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Dhoom4/Colayer Follow-up

I've been working with User:Dhoom4 to help bring his article to a non copyvio state and into something which may be appropriate for Wikipedia. Can you please check this out, since you were one of the blocking admins, thanks. User:Dhoom4/Colayer Tiggerjay 06:02, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO, the article is in the shape good enough to move it the main space, what I did. Alex Bakharev 07:05, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very much appreciated. Thank you. I am excited that an average editor (who is completely disassociated with this company) is able to assist someone like Dhoom4 into creating an acceptable article which is not too ad like. Thanks again. Tiggerjay 05:05, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dacy69

Hi, can you tell me if this is a violation of Dacy69's parole. I mean he did use the talkpage, but most of the time the explanation was one sentence long. He never participated in the discussion of the articles, reverted, left his one sentence explanation and was never seen again. I find this kind of behavior very disruptive.

Sahl ibn Sunbat reverts, edit summary: (rv - pls. engage in talkpage)

Talk assumes bad faith and accuses ArmeniaArmenia of being a sock, says that current version accommodates both versions. He never edited the article before, neither did he participated in the talkpage.

House of Hasan Jalalyan reverts, edit summary: (rv - dont delete sourced info)

Talk "And put your arguments here so we will be able to discuss". Never edited the article before, neither has he participated in the discussion.

List of Azerbaijani films 1898-1919 reverts, edit summary: (rv)

Talk "Discussion about the name of Azerbaijan does not belong here: Never edited the article before, neither has he participated in the discussion.

Movses Kaghankatvatsi reverts, edit summary: "(rv - see discussion. we should use in article like that neutral source)"

Talk "MarshalBagramyan, your last edit has refrence to non-neutral source while you have reverted neutral source.". Never edited the article before, neither has he participated in the discussion.

Khojaly Massacre revertes, edit summary: "(rv - see talkpage)"

Talk ":Statement is full POV we dont have personal interpretation here." Never edited the article before, neither has he participated in the discussion.

Thank you for the time. VartanM 07:13, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest I do not know. IMHO he did not violate his parole, but if somebody on the opposite side was blocked for similar behavior, then we should be fair Alex Bakharev 07:40, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, nobody else was blocked, or behaved the way he did. VartanM 07:49, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check my lengthy discussion on many pages where I contributed and check also some other users who left short comments. As for me - I left short comments where I deem it is obvious and don't need explanation or someone else made similar points. --Dacy69 16:54, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, AlexBakharev, I was blocked for much less than what Dacy69 is doing. Here, [6], I was blocked for making 2 reverts on one article and one rever on another, after 2-3 weeks of not doing any reverts at all. I had technically stayed under 3RR, but apparently that wasn't enough. Here, [7], User:Grandmaster was blocked, even though he technically stayed within the limits of the revert parole. He was still blocked for reverting across multiple pages without giving adequate explanations--i.e. edit warring.

Dacy mainly visits articles to revert (when User:Grandmaster has exhausted his reverts), and provides bogus, one-line explanations to technically remain within the limits of parole. Take a look at his contribution history, [8], and you will see the pattern. He has been blocked for this kind of behaviour before, [9], last time for 72 hours, so clearly it hasn't worked for him. Unless he is blocked for longer period, his behaviour will continue.--TigranTheGreat 16:55, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was blocked for edit warring on one particular page. Don't give inaccurate information. Again - my contribution does not limit to articles visited by Grandmaster since many pages we both edit related to Azerbaijan. It will be good to check contribution pattern of yours, MarshallBagramyan, VartanM + and also some socks which recently appeared.--Dacy69 19:55, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alex, I urge you to pay attention to this discussion - again my rv will be reported but discussion langauge and essence is not tolerable - [10]--Dacy69 21:33, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dacy69, if someone else misbehaves, it doesn't give you the right to do the same.VartanM 21:40, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where I used similar language? In what line my behavior even remotely resembles that?--Dacy69 14:08, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see nothing wrong with Dacy’s editing. He did not violate anything. I would actually suggest that admins checked editing of User:MarshallBagramyan, VartanM, User:Hetoum I, User:Meowy and a number of others, including an army of socks that revert Khachen and Sahl ibn-Sunbat. I provided plenty of info in my evidence to the arbcom. In particular, I would appreciate if admins could deal with persistent removal by Marshal of information about the origins of Hasan-Jalal: [11], [12], [13] Grandmaster 06:38, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While blaming User:Dacy69, User:VartanM is currently involved in revert warring at Khachen and Sahl ibn-Sunbat - [14]. On Khachen especially , he made reverts removing entire content of the article with plenty of references [15]. On Talk:Khachen and Talk:Sahl ibn-Sunbat, he is following pretty much what was started by User:Anatolmethanol, a sockpuppet of User:Fadix, i.e. denying sourced material with a line reference and just insisting on own opinion without facts. I don't know how long this is going to continue, along with the recent wave of sockpuppetry on almost all pages related to Azerbaijan. This form of aggressive editing and lack of restriction on User:VartanM and sockpuppetry encouragement for cases like User:Fadix is damaging Wikipedia NPOV. Atabek 16:07, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for August 6th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 32	6 August 2007	About the Signpost

Committee makes statement on U.S. chapter	About: The Wikipedia Plays
Review: The Wikipedia Plays	WikiWorld comic: "Terry Gross"
News and notes: Similpedia, milestones	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:21, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Out of just plain insane curiosity

…why isn't your Russian page something like Алекс Бахарев? :) — $PЯINGεrαgђ 02:59, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because I am trying to keep the same Username over different Wikimedia projects. Alex Bakharev 03:29, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

political wikipedia userpage categories

You wrote: "we do not have categories like Category:Republican wikipedians or Category:Wikipedians supporting abortion or Category:Communist wikipedians." You are thoroughly mistaken. Please see Category:Wikipedians by political ideology. `'Míkka 18:15, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is real horror. Should I put all those crap to CFD? Alex Bakharev 20:56, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes! Bishonen | talk 22:57, 9 August 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I have Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_August_10#Category:AllWikipedian_by_by_political_ideology_categories nominated all of them for deletion. Please join the discussion Alex Bakharev 13:13, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

English translation of the Valuyev Circular

Hi, Alex. I stumbled through translating the Valuyev Circular into English, at s:Valuyev Circular. I'm sure it could use a proof-reading, if you have a bit of extra time. Regards. —Michael Z. 2007-08-10 14:22 Z

Category:Green Wikipedians

I'm wondering where the CFD page is. I clicked on the link, and saw nothing there related to the category. GreenJoe 16:50, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User Irpen

Hi, I took your advice you left at my user page. However, given your interest in this matter I would appreciate if you as an administrator had a closer look at User:Irpen's actions in this regard irrespective of your relations to him. In my view these actions are disturbing: for example in an article Russians in Ukraine in order to keep the aforementioned article he forked the unrelated material to the article to justify its presence. This is not the way articles are written. They are not written around illustrations, but rather illustrations are arranged to suit the narration. I still have the hope that you car rise above your friendship with him and treat the matter in question fairly. Sincerely, --Hillock65 13:53, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This "material" was written by myself and added to an article where its presence is warranted by the article's topic. That the image is related to the current content of the article and critically complements and illustrates it, not the anti-Russian sentiment in general but a particular party whose Russophobia is discussed in the article. If Hillock thinks the whole material does not belong to the article, it is a content issue and he should discuss the content not the copyright. If the content dispute ends with the content's version reflecting his view, the image question would automatically be resolved to his favor as well. This is my view of the issue. --Irpen 07:21, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Irpen here Alex Bakharev 08:27, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not that that surprises me here, I can hardly find an instance where you didn't. If you look at the history, first this image appeared with no commentary whatsoever, then in order to keep this image splattered in the article a mere sentence has been added. Not even going into wondering why a fringe political party with mere half percentage point has such prominence in an article on Russians in Ukraine (?!), one persistently overlooks the fact that a sentence does not qualify as a critical commentary. This image's place is in an article on that political party, not in an article on artichokes or condoms, provided a sentence about the Svoboda party is added. Please see the image talk to see reference to unacceptable use of fair use images. As far as the content, I will argue that at the article talk page, but that does not negate the fact that this image's use has been clearly abused and is used by some to inflame xenophobic passions. The same could be done with Russian or Polish images. It is fundamentally wrong, I hope you can see the multiplicity of reasons why. --Hillock65 11:39, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for restoring the 3 Russian rock bands articles i've created :-). M.V.E.i. 13:22, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lol

Thanks, but I think I will be fine :) One thing you could do though, please keep an eye on him. I am away and cannot spend much time on this matter today. See also a report on WP:ANI. Gotta run. Renata 15:36, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bonaparte

Hi. I noticed you tracked down Bonaparte's last spree. Could you confirm that this is also one of his IPs? I'm sorry for putting this up here, but he appears to be moving at an alarming rate. Dahn 17:15, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And there's also this guy. Dahn 17:41, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ask a CheckUser please. Not everybody is Bonaparte. I'm an American citizen.--Brickoceanmonth 18:12, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bogdan have blocked the later and I have blocked the former. Thanks for your help Alex Bakharev 21:53, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Podilsko-Voskresenska Line

Good evening (GMT time); you are being given this message, as notification of a Motion to Close Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Podilsko-Voskresenska Line, to which you are listed as a party. The full statement on this motion can be found on this section of the Mediation Location; if you do not agree with the closure, please post your objection in that section, where a response will be placed accordingly.

Otherwise, thank you for working towards the compromise, which has now been reached and implemented into the article. This has resulted in a successful Mediation, and an end to the dispute in question. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Kind regards,
Anthøny 17:47, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article for deletion

As you know, i created the Russian culture centre in Lviv article, without knowing an article on this topic already exists as Russian Cultural Center in Lviv. I moved all the possible information that his article didnt have but mine had to his article, so now the article i created, Russian culture centre in Lviv, could be deleted. Thank you :-). M.V.E.i. 20:51, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have made the low-case one one to be a redirect. BTW this operation does not require admin buttons Alex Bakharev 21:42, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AN/I

It would seem that you've taken up an anti-me crusade, likely triggered by the situation at Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya. Don't you consider such WP:POINT-making contrary to Wikipedia policy? Digwuren 06:26, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 554: / Line 554: @@
 *I have made the low-case one one to be a redirect. BTW this operation does not require admin buttons [[User:Alex Bakharev|Alex Bakharev]] 21:42, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
+==[[WP:AN/I]]==
+It would seem that you've taken up an anti-me crusade, likely triggered by the situation at [[Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya]].  Don't you consider such [[WP:POINT]]-making contrary to Wikipedia [[WP:POLICY|policy]]? [[User:Digwuren|Digwuren]] 06:26, 14 August 2007 (UTC)