Jump to content

User:IJA/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5→Archive 10


AfD nomination of Afghanistan–Kosovo relations

Hi! A user has nominated Afghanistan–Kosovo relations for deletion. Please feel free to explain your opinions. Go and see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Afghanistan–Kosovo relations. (Also there are 16 AfD nominations at the same page which includes Canada, Japan and several others). Thank you for your time! --Turkish Flame ☎ 06:43, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Userboxes

You have at leat one userbox which violates Wikipedia:Userboxes and Wikipedia:User page#What may I not have on my user page?. Would you please consider either seriously toning down or preferably removing User:Ijanderson977/UKIP is Crap? Fram (talk) 10:47, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Userbox again

I deleted one of your more derisive userboxes relating to the Macedonia naming dispute. Per WP:USERPAGE, having material in your userspace which is overtly divisive or unneccessarily polemical is not in the spirit of a collaborative work environment. Please do not create such userboxes in the future. Thank you. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:17, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
Per What you may not have on your userpage, number 4, you may not have "Extensive personal opinions on matters unrelated to Wikipedia" or number 8, "Polemical statements unrelated to Wikipedia". There is a line which was crossed by your userbox. Statements such as "So-and-so is a resident of Whateveristan" are quite OK, or even "So-and-so is a supporter of the Whateveristan Worker's Party" would be fine too. Statements such as "So-and-so is a resident of Whateveristan, and he thinks that residents of the neighboring country of Whocaresia are wankers" are definately NOT ok. The issue is that you should not put information on your userpage that is likely to alienate or attack other users merely for coincidence of their residency situation. Such statements do NOT engender a spirit of cooperative encyclopedia building... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:58, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Abdullah Al Eshal

This new Egyptian position was revealed by Abdullah Al Eshal, supposedly a former Deputy FM of Egypt and now the top advisor to Mubarak. Am I the only one to think that it is fishy that "Abdullah Al Eshal" returns 7 results from Google all Albanian and on this matter (an alternative spelling "Abdullah el-Esha'al" returns 6 results again only on this issue)?--Avala (talk) 21:28, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah but you searched without "" which means already on 2nd page you have Abdullah al Hanafi or Abdullah al-Rumiyah or even just Abdullah which is completely unrelated. Under "" it gives 8 results today.--Avala (talk) 12:30, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
I don't know if it is based on Albanian reports though. I don't think that this story is fake, I just think that this man doesn't really represent Egypt. Some countries have loonies in top positions (though this one seems to be a former official). For an example Russia - their top MOD and Army officials make shocking statements all the time, yet they never get sacked. Not even threatening Poland with a nuclear attack will make anyone even blink in Kremlin. It doesn't mean they approve it, it just means that their administration is not even close to being tight as, for an example, the US administration.--Avala (talk) 14:08, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Hard to tell indeed. 27 years in office and Mubarak doesn't even have a decent website. There is some http://www.presidency.gov.eg/ but it doesn't work.--Avala (talk) 16:37, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

New Zealand

The party that leads the current Government of New Zealand lost the election to the very pro-US party. Do you think they might change their current policy that their recognition of countries is the welcoming letter to the UN?--Avala (talk) 13:38, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Btw take a look at International reaction to the United States presidential election, 2008 to see how those Africans can react on world issues when they want to lol.--Avala (talk) 20:50, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Do you have a link for that Gordon Brown - NZ exchange? I am interested to see what they said so if you have it please send it on my tp. I know that their FM (while he still was one) in Slovenia during the NZ-EU summit signaled that NZ recognises Govts not countries and that at that point they didn't recognise Thailand (I think) Govt so it would mean that they would have to derecognise Thailand as a country if they had a policy to recognise officially so they don't do it. It's all bunch of bs and only because they can do it. Their physical location allows them to have such a policy. This is their recognition of Montenegro - [1] - basically "Congratulations, you are in the UN now". Even though the situation with Montenegro was clear NZ didn't write to them until they were in the UN. And Helen Clark could now easily become the new SG of the UN if Russians indeed veto BanKi Moon. Whether you like her position on Kosovo or not she knows how NOT to aggravate other countries. She is quite balanced but again she is not afraid to speak unlike the current SG who has a funny nickname in the UN - "Mr. Invisible". Well the issue of catholicism on the rise in Kosovo is dubious. If there are a few hundred Catholic converts it doesn't change the fact that the other 2 million are Muslim. And we all know what Ratzinger things about Islam. I think Vatican is really working hard to unite Christians, they are even trying to do it with Anglicans. But Orthodox are obviously stubborn, they wont even meet a pope and recognising Kosovo would give them a strong excuse for the future. As you can see in that Secretariat statement they continue the talk on how they wont recognize Kosovo with something no one asked them about and that is relations with Orthodox churches.--Avala (talk) 15:04, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Looking between the lines (and more and more often it comes very straight, these days even from Brussels) it seems in a very short time we will see the division of Kosovo.--Avala (talk) 16:03, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

St Lucia will recognise Kosovo???

Last night I dreamed that St Lucia had recognised Kosovo. Is this a portent of things to come, or do I need to get out more? :) Bazonka (talk) 13:51, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I am definitely losing the plot - eating cheese before bedtime is never a good plan. Do you have any evidence that St Lucia has vowed not to recognise? Bazonka (talk) 14:08, 17 November 2008 (UTC)


Signpost updated for November 17, 2008 and before.

Because the Signpost hasn't been sent in a while, to save space, I've condensed all seven issues that were not sent into this archive. Only the three issues from November are below.

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 42 8 November 2008 About the Signpost
From the editor 
News and notes: The Price is Right, milestones Dispatches: Halloween Main Page contest generates new article content 
Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News 
The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Volume 4, Issue 43 10 November 2008 About the Signpost
Fundraiser opens: Over $500,000 raised in first week ArbCom elections: Nominations open 
Book review: How Wikipedia Works MediaWiki search engine improved 
Four Board resolutions, including financials, approved News and notes: Vietnamese Wiki Day 
Dispatches: Historic election proves groundbreaking on the Main Page Features and admins 
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation 
Volume 4, Issue 44 17 November 2008 About the Signpost
Lawsuit briefly shuts down Wikipedia.de GFDL 1.3 released, will allow Wikimedia migration to Creative Commons license 
Wikimedia Events Roundup News and notes: Fundraiser, List Summary Service, 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 (talk) 11:03, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Fair use images

I have just reverted a number of your image additions (Sophie Marceau, Patrick McGoohan, Catherine McCormack, Angus Macfadyen) as they all used copyrighted images in non-fair use contexts. Copyrighted images, such as these cannot be used in Wikipedia unless they cannot be replaced by a "free" (non-copyrighted) image. Presumably, it is possible for someone, somehow to take a photo of Sophie Marceau and release it for free use (although this may, of course, not be easy). As a result, we cannot use the copyrighted photo of her in her article, except under very unusual situations. The image from a movie would be ok to use in an article specifically about that character in that movie because there is no way to take a "free" photo of her as that character. For further clarification, please review the info boxes found on the description pages of the photos you added. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 16:41, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Lisbon

Good call on the Lisbon treaty, I firmly believe that the choice presented next time we vote on it should be acceptance or outright withdrawal. You wouldn't believe the type of ignorance that went on over here during the run-up to the vote. I actually had some moron tell me that he was voting no because he didn't want to be conscripted into an EU army and sent to fight in Iraq. On another note, and just out of interest, why the interest in Hashim Thaqi? It doesn't say on your page that you've been to Kosovo. Davu.leon (talk) 15:28, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm Irish, from Dublin, but lived in Prishtina for about 5 months in 2006. I try to get back whenever I can. In fairness PDK are doing a good job with the roads, (even though that was a plan set up by the previous government,) but I personally feel that Thaqi is lacking a little in foresight. Some good people in his party, though - I'm told. Davu.leon (talk) 16:14, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Note

Thank you for informing me on my talkpage but this is not necessary since I have Abkhazia article on my watchlist and check it (watchlist) regularly. Best regards, Alæxis¿question? 06:14, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Great work

Nice clean-up of the Kosovo Diplomatic Missions page. I salute you for it. --alchaemia (talk) 18:29, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Page move

I moved your page to International reaction to the December 2008 Gaza Strip airstrikes, as you seem to have forgotten the "to" initially, in what I assume was a typo. Hope you do not mind. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 15:43, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

It looks like it is developing into a quality article, by the way. Scapler (talk) 15:46, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Rollback

I have 3 granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe I can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 20:08, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Good luck with the new button and happy New Years, –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 20:19, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

List of sovereign states

Good compromise and that is fine with me. I just needed the countries of the UK article there as it explains the situation far better in more detail than the home nations page. Thanks for the change. BritishWatcher (talk) 18:46, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Sister Cities: London & New York

Please see the discussion at Talk:New York City#Sister Cities London, for my rationale for including both St George's Cross and the Union Jack in the Sister Cities table, and for other editors' responses. For one thing, it's not clear whether London became New York's sister city as the largest city in England, the largest in the U.K. or both. For another, at least one anonymous editor deleted the Union Jack in favour of St George's Cross and several (paradoxically including a couple of fierce Scots nationalists) have done the opposite. I would prefer that this settle somewhere rather than see one flag periodically replace the other as new editors impose their own views.

Another lesser consideration is that I got rid of a boring redundant column listing Tokyo prefecture, Cairo governorate, Beijing district, etc. as the home regions of those cities, because it was just dull and uninformative to those who didn't already know the distinctions (as opposed to, say, Barcelona being in Catalonia or Munich in Bavaria.) I moved the few exceptions to a footnote which I would prefer not to expand or complicate with the relation of England (not a region or a district) to the UK.

I happen to have been born in London, as were both my parents, and still hold UK citizenship despite having lived in the U.S. since 1960. I identify myself variously as British, English, Anglo-American, British-American, English-American, a Londoner, a Rhode Islander, a New Englander, a Californian, and as of Scottish and Polish-Jewish descent (since I have almost no English blood and my mother calls herself Scottish rather than English). London is the capital and the largest city both of England and of the United Kingdom. I don't see that column (for "country", not nation or nation-state) as making any assertions about sovereignty (and Johannesburg isn't a capital).

On the one hand it's much cleaner to have a single line for the UK (or some would argue for England), and it avoids the messy parallel question of whether Jerusalem is also the capital (as Palestinians, but not most Israelis, would claim) of Palestine. On the other hand, it's incomplete and leads to the problems I described above. So if you could offer your own reasoning at Talk:New York City#Sister Cities London (not here or on my page), maybe we can see how strong a consensus might exist for different solutions. Happy New Year ! —— Shakescene (talk) 00:19, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

HNY

Thanks and Happy New Year to you too! Who knows maybe 2009 is the year of compromise that will unite our positions.--Avala (talk) 15:02, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 24, 2008 through January 3, 2009

Three issues have been published since the last deliver: November 24, December 1, and January 3.


The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 45 24 November 2008 About the Signpost
From the editor: 200th issue 
ArbCom elections: Candidate profiles News and notes: Fundraiser, milestones 
Wikipedia in the news Dispatches: Featured article writers — the inside view 
Features and admins The Report on Lengthy Litigation 
Volume 4, Issue 46 1 December 2008 About the Signpost
ArbCom elections: Elections open Wikipedia in the news 
WikiProject Report: WikiProject Solar System Features and admins 
The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Volume 5, Issue 1 3 January 2009 About the Signpost
From the editor: Getting back on track 
ArbCom elections: 10 arbitrators appointed Virgin Killer page blocked, unblocked in UK 
Editing statistics show decline in participation Wikipedia drug coverage compared to Medscape, found wanting 
News and notes: Fundraising success and other developments Dispatches: Featured list writers 
Wikipedia in the news WikiProject Report: WikiProject Ice Hockey 
Features and admins 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.--ragesoss (talk) 21:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Intl reaction

Anyway since the article we edit went cold here is the hot new one to update - International reaction to the 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict. The UK has made strictly neutral remarks. As for Serbia no word except for Muslims organisations, though I think the President Tadic is supportive of Israel but he made no remarks so he wouldn't harm good relations with Arabs. Ironically Serbia recognises Palestine as independent.--Avala (talk) 00:11, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah it dates back to the 1980s. Anyway I noticed that New Zealand is defiant again lol. The only thing they said regarding the situation is that they don't plan to send any aid to Gaza (though it could be related to the fact their PM is Jewish). That article is constantly vandalised btw, they added the photo of Israeli flag with a swastika, moved information on anti war protests in Serbia to anti Israel section etc.--Avala (talk) 16:18, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
I just accidentally found the position of Ecuador on Kosovo when I found their MFA website on diplomacymonitor. It's quite non enthusiastic, obviously they support Serbia but it looks like an answer their minister would give if they woke him up with the question.--Avala (talk) 19:59, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Kosovo diplomatic missions map

Ian, I just re-used the map created by Turkish Flame. I'm not good at creating maps, but have a general understanding of coloring SVG maps. You can use a program called Inkscape (available on Linux, OS X or Windows for free) and simply select a country with a simple click, and from a palette of colors - color it. It couldn't be easier. Maybe we should ask Turkish Flame to add those territories as he seems to be good at it. I'm glad you found the reference. --alchaemia (talk) 18:37, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Gas

Hi! Yeah I am not affected for two reasons. One is that many heating plants in Serbia can easily switch to oil which they did and the second one is that even those that can't got the gas after Boris Tadic managed to get it from Hungary, Germany and Austria. At first they wouldn't let the gas after talks with Serbian gas managers but they accepted Tadic's plea. Serbia has gas reserves but they didn't install the new pump so they can produce only like 5% of the needed gas from domestic reserves even though there are enough of them. So the most severely affected are the ones that couldn't get the gas for technical reasons - Slovakia (their reserves are on the wrong side of the country, gas can't flow in that direction or something like that so they are restarting some old nuclear plants), Bulgaria (even though Ukraine wanted to send them some gas it was impossible) and Bosnia (Serbia gives them some gas from what it gets from HU, AT and DE, I don't know how did Muslim politicians react to that knowing how they portray Serbia as some insane savage regardless of the fact Milosevic's been away for a decade). And regarding that burning flag, lol it looks some crazy locals seeking attention. I saw the photo, about three of them did it. I know that Serbia might sue Ukraine, at least the national gas company director announced it today. Someone will have to pay for the extra gas Serbia had to buy and it will probably be Ukraine.

I am all for that article. I think that there is enough of reactions from restarting forbidden plants to lawsuits, there will be plenty of material to fill it.

Btw Serbia finally made a statement on Gaza today. Sort of. In a pause of some conference the minister said he calls for the end of violence.

Cheers, --Avala (talk) 15:01, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

I have just created a map for easier and faster overview of aid given to Gaza and I see a hole in the WEU. It's Belgium. I instantly remembered something. When Milosevic was ousted in Serbia, Belgium was the only Western country not to give a donation for rebuilding of Serbia and they were openly criticized for that. Heh I had no idea they were that stingy.--Avala (talk) 20:18, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Serbia is preparing a lawsuit against Ukraine. This is what B92 has translated so far [2] though the same guy (gas company director) said that even though they will check both Gazprom and Ukraine he can already say that it is Ukrainians who will be sued.--Avala (talk) 22:52, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tamding Tsering

I thought you might be interested. --J.Mundo (talk) 23:06, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, January 10, 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 5, Issue 2 10 January 2009 About the Signpost
News and notes:Flagged Revisions and permissions proposals, hoax, milestones Wikipedia in the news 
Dispatches: December themed Main Page 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.--ragesoss (talk) 20:00, 11 January 2009 (UTC)§hepBot (Disable) 19:34, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, January 17, 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 5, Issue 3 17 January 2009 About the Signpost
News and notes: New board members, changes at ArbCom Wikipedia in the news 
Dispatches: Featured article writers—the 2008 leaders WikiProject Report: WikiProject Pharmacology 
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.--ragesoss (talk) 21:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 23:41, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

belated dispraise

Since nobody has informed you about this so far, and simply because I just stumbled upon Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muntadar al-Zaidi: This type of incivility and entirely unfounded assumption of bad faith is not a good idea. You should apologise to the editor (better late than never) and strictly avoid accusing other people of things like IDONTLIKEIT out of the blue like that. 78.34.129.171 (talk) 09:06, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Why don't you log in, instead of hiding behind an anonymous account, then I will talk to you. If you have a problem with any of my edits then I will have a real discussion with you and I will justify why I made them. But I am not going to waste my time with someone who does not dare log in. Also may I remind you that using an anonymous account whilst having an account can be classed sock puppetry and thus is in violation of WP:SOCK. Ijanderson (talk) 14:08, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Using an IP to avoid an indefinite block is also not allowed. Grsz11 18:20, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Just take a look at the block log and you'll get your answer. Grsz11 19:04, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Military of Kosovo

Ian, I'm ready to help with both articles. I am busy the next few days, but I will be able to help you after that. I think it's a fine idea to upgrade the articles as they need a serious facelift. Cheers. --alchaemia (talk) 03:08, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Ian, I don't know if you've seen this already or not, but the Kosovo Security Force has a pretty nice website up now, including English.[3] A lot of information can be found there. I will help you write the article too, but right now I'm busy with the Kosovan passport article. I'll join you when I have some time. Cheers. --alchaemia (talk) 00:12, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

About BNP

I gave up. I cant do anything to change that article. There is always a person that undoes what I do, so I just gave up.Eros of Fire (talk) 19:56, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, January 24, 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 5, Issue 4 24 January 2009 About the Signpost
Jimbo requests that developers turn on Flagged Revisions Report on accessing Wikipedia via mobile devices 
News and notes: New chapters, new jobs, new knight and more Wikipedia in the news: Britannica, Kennedy, Byrd not dead yet 
Dispatches: Reviewing featured picture candidates 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.--ragesoss (talk) 03:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Delivered at 04:17, 25 January 2009 (UTC) by §hepBot (Disable)

Gaza reaction

Could you review the position of Eritrea on that talk page as well? It seems that more opinion is needed. Thanks.--Avala (talk) 14:41, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Format

Thank you for converting the format back towards what resembles the standard for the other articles.

However I fail to see why European missions should be in two columns while missions in other continents are are one. Countries are sorted by continents according to the UN Geoscheme in order to prevent disagreements breaking out - it then becomes a standard dictated externally and not arbitarily by Wikipedia. And as discussed earlier London does not have a Kosovo consulate; it has an embassy (somebody has mistaken a consular function as being a consulate, which are two different terms)

Consistency makes articles look neat and professional - and is a core Wikipedia requirement. If you want to change these standards - and you are prepared to make the changes to the other 180+ articles, gain a consensus first. Kransky (talk) 13:46, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the Barnstar Ian! Cheers, Dan. Bazonka (talk) 15:12, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, January 31, 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 5, Issue 5 31 January 2009 About the Signpost
Large portion of articles are orphans News and notes: Ogg support, Wikipedia Loves Art, Jimbo honored 
Wikipedia in the news: Flagged Revisions, Internet Explorer add-on Dispatches: In the news 
WikiProject Report: Motto of the Day 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.--ragesoss (talk) 20:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 21:34, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

US centricism in Wikipedia

I read your list of "annoying things on Wikipedia." I couldn't agree with you more. Another example: right now it says on the WP front page, "(on this day) A hydrogen bomb now known as the Tybee Bomb disappeared off the shores of Tybee Island, Georgia." Again, we are supposed to automatically know that this means the US state of Georgia, not the country. I have question: do you know what is the right place to complain about US centricism in Wikipedia? This problem of US-centricism seems so widespread that it doesn't seem productive to complain about this on the individual articles' talk pages. Perhaps there is some other forum I could use? Offliner (talk) 00:55, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, February 8, 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 5, Issue 6 8 February 2009 About the Signpost
News and notes: Elections, licensing update, and more Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia's future, WikiDashboard, and "wiki-snobs" 
Dispatches: April Fools 2009 mainpage WikiProject Report: WikiProject Music 
Features and admins 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.--ragesoss (talk) 15:35, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 22:07, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: SVG map

Ian, I re-colored the map to reflect the opening of 8 new embassies. Cheers. --alchaemia (talk) 18:26, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — February 16, 2009

The Signpost
Volume 5, Issue 7
Weekly Delivery
2009-02-16

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.

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 06:50, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

quick answer

Hi. I have found so far when the diplomatic relations were established and that would be April 1996 for Macedonia and December 2000 for Slovenia. I will edit my answer if I find something more.--Avala (talk) 16:02, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Damn Wikipedians they erased the article on recognition of Slovenia by AfD vote. Anyway I can't find the exact date but from news articles it seems that the recognition of Slovenia happened in 1996 or 1997. I will try to find precise info.--Avala (talk) 16:22, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Some user saved the page here but it sounds doubtful that it happened in 1992. Probably it was erased because it had too much OR. I would direct you to ask the question in Serbian MFA but they never reply so maybe you should try with Slovenians, because they are probably bound by some EU treaties that they actually must answer questions.--Avala (talk) 18:17, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Btw here - [4] is a list of the Macedonian MFA of diplomatic relations by date. It's interesting that some large countries like Chile did it only in 2008 (not even listed in English version of the page) while some that were eager to do it with Kosovo did it with Macedonia only recently or not at all. As for Macedonia I believe the date is the same, on that date FRY recognised them, established diplomatic relations and accepted the name RoM instead of fYRoM. As for Slovenia, it remains a mystery.--Avala (talk) 18:24, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: Idea

Hello, IJA. You have new messages at User talk:Jeff G./Archives/2009/February#Idea.
You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{newmessages}} template.

  — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 22:23, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — February 23, 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 8, which includes these articles:

The kinks are still being worked out in a new design for these Signpost deliveries, and we apologize for the plain format for this week.

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 01:47, 24 February 2009 (UTC)


Stolen Kosovo

Hello Ijanderson. I thought you might be interested in this documentary about Kosovo, as it tells the story from a Serb perspective. You may not agree with everything but it's interesting and sad to see the suffering of the Kosovo Serbs, Romani, non-Albanians, etc.

Here are the YouTube links to the documentary called "Stolen Kosovo": Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6

--Tocino 07:04, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — 2 March 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 08:15, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — 9 March 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 23:42, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


The Wikipedia Signpost  — 16 March 2009

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 22:57, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

more on "Disruptive behaviour"

Thank you for your thoughts, especially on your expressed belief in my in-good-faith actions. (I appreciate that). I've recently discovered (perhaps rediscovered) that the article was possibly semiprotected and that my bold (as per WP:BOLD and perhaps contrary to WP:CYCLE) act of trying to rename it might require some form of consensus on that step. I could take the liberty and not agree with you that I have given a proposal at all, exactly because of my act (without any prior discussion about it) given, and if so, I could conclude that then there was nothing to reject in the first place. Not to mention that the terms overwhelming or even majority are to the least inappropriate, if not even biased. I concur that the argument of temporal proximity of discussions and renamings could be regarded as an argument for not to rename again, but I think it doesn't suffice. Thank you for the link provided, I cherish the gesture a lot.

I could again be free and express my disagreement with your opinion that I have to perform the rename via WP:RM, for I could consider that there is no obligatory procedure to be taken for such an act of renaming. Why, WP:RM is merely a guideline, if it is at all - nothing is stated at the page. Perhaps a project is the right name to select for WP:RM, as it is implied on the page itself. Since, the term project inherently has no attributes of obligation - if not even posesses a certain quality of casualness - I might considered the term has quite different characteristics. But, I honestly appreciate you informing me on this issue. All the best, Biblbroks's talk 15:23, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Not quite. Ijanderson expressed his concerns on your disruptive behavior on my talk page and although it is a fact that WP:RM is a guideline, all controversial move proposals must go through it in order to have any validity. Persistent, constant proposals are just a waste of time for everybody, especially if being pushed by a single user against everyone else, and hardly tolerated on an article that is under an Arbcom probation against disruption. Húsönd 16:43, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Well I might consider and then might even agree with you that perhaps one could point me to WP:DBAD (here spelled in a form of euphemism for my potential benefit :-) ), as I consider you had pointed me (  ;-) ), but that still hasn't given any solutions to the disagreement which goes on the talk page (here I mean the Talk:International recognition of Kosovo page). As far as the WP:RM (if this is what you had in mind) is concerned, my opinion is that the third conversator Hús thinks other of the procedure (I'm still not sure that there is one). Moreover, I'm certain that for the time being he doesn't think of another POV of the "procedure", because of this words of his, which are somehow unclear (at least to me): "Any new proposals will be speedy closed. Persistence will be dealt with sanctions as per the WP:ARBMAC probation this article is under the scope of." concerning the closure of "proposal". I'm not sure if he meant new proposals through the talk page of International recognition of Kosovo ("IroK") or through the WP:RM. Actually, I find WP:RM somehow vague on the sequence of steps to be taken when new request/proposal is to be made. I've tried to follow the procedure proposed as it is given at WP:RM, but then I might misunderstood something. I might consider asking for explanation on the very own project's page, as for that matter. Hus, as a formalist as I consider you at the moment, I must ask you now this: when you wrote all controversial move proposals must go through... in order to have any validity you actully wanted to write all controversial move proposals should go through...in order to have any validity. I suppose I pointed out ( one might consider I've used irony, I apologize to those) to the ambiguity of interpretation of the potential procedure, since the very procedure hasn't been tagged as a guideline, but still named a project, to the least. Maybe, some other place exists, which I'm not aware of - I apologize in advance for me being somewhat a whiner, since I've been passive and not searching for potential one myself. Not to mention judgemental and still non-constructive enough, to contribute myself (although recognition of the problem might be considered as form of contiributing action :-? :-/ ). Sorry for that.
Ijanderson977, you asked: Why are you not claiming that this article has a POV title: International recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia? Well, actually, I do consider this title is biased also. But personally I consider the "IroK" more globally important, not just to me, as one might think it is. If the bias is dealt with this issue (IroK title), it could be dealt elsewhere also. And IMHO it is good to keep the discussion in one place -> maybe creating a new page, where this discussion concerning the term "recognition" (or more) could be taken, should be considered as an idea.
All the best. Biblbroks's talk 08:17, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
It's true, WP:RM is rather vague, but although you are right that controversial proposals just "should" go through RM, in fact what you get due to Wikipedia's tradition on controversial moves is that they "must" go that way. Otherwise any outcome is disputed, drama and move wars follow, and after mediation the matter is settled through a proposal at RM anyway. Tradition also maintains that once there is a proposal to move an article, the same matter should not be brought to the community's attention for a few months, otherwise everybody would be just going over the same arguments endlessly. Húsönd 19:40, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Solomon Islands

No more news on Solomon Islands. I reckon their Director of Immigration was incorrect when he said that they'd recognised. But who knows? Without an official statement either way, there's not much we can do. Bazonka (talk) 17:47, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 23 March 2009

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:05, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland

We are now dividing our members into active, semi-active (have not edited a Poland-related article in more then three months) and inactive (have not edited at all for three months or more). You are active on Wikipedia but I see you've not edited any Poland-related articles in in many months; we are moving you to semi-active members category. Please consider participating in our project activities again in the future, we would love to work more closely with you again! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:11, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Feel free to move yourself to active members, and tell us about your interests! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 20:26, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Chat

Msn. Canadian Bobby (talk) 21:07, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 30 March 2009

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 20:06, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Kosmet

Yep sure, it's the short form for "Kosovo i Metohija" which means Kosovo and Metohia in Serbian. Kosovo itself is short form of "Kosovo polje" (Kosovo polye) which means "Blackbird's field" (kos = blackbird, ovo = 's). And metohia is a traditional churchland, basically that area is filled with medieval Serbian churches and heritage (in case you missed it, that would be the main reason Serbia is so hard to let Kosovo go) with the most exceptional ones being listed on UNESCO world heritage so therefore it is a metohija. Cheers --Avala (talk) 19:19, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Image tagging for File:AlbanianPassportVisaFree.png

Thanks for uploading File:AlbanianPassportVisaFree.png. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 16:05, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 6 April 2009

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 19:09, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 13 April 2009

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 16:23, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 20 April 2009

Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 18:36, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Chat

MSN. Chat. Canadian Bobby (talk) 17:58, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 27 April 2009

Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:20, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Just a thanks for the Barnstar, and also your work on the article itself and obviously the Yorkshire problem, thanks again. -- [[ axg ⁞⁞ talk ]] 17:45, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I only started using SVG since 2008, I had no idea how it worked, the only software I use is Inkscape, so good look! -- [[ axg ⁞⁞ talk ]] 17:55, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

3RR and ENGVAR/ ISE

A couple of reverts is not my definition of an edit war and surely it can't be yours either because you've also reverted me twice. I mean - can it? (In fact you seem to think you have made 3 reverts which I wouldn't consider to be true. Your first change I wouldn't count as a revert at all as you left most of my edit intact).

I would be curious to know when it was agreed that the page should be ise British rather than ize British but I accept that if there is such an agreement then I am in the wrong.

But why do you consider ise more British? Dejvid (talk) 00:13, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Kosovo – Panama relations

Hi! Kosovo – Panama relations has been nominated for deletion. Please feel free to explain your opinions. Go and see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kosovo – Panama relations. Thank you for your time! --Turkish Flame ☎ 17:40, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Dear Ijanderson977, I assume that you are trying to know information related to Kosovo from the given link. I translated necessary part and posted it on my talk page bellow your request. Feel free to ask me if you need anymore translation. Cheers. - Niaz(Talk • Contribs) 22:40, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I was going to translate it, but seems like Niaz has already done an excellent job. Thanks anyway for asking. --Ragib (talk) 02:47, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I was going to translate it too. Anyway, thanks for asking. Auyon —Preceding undated comment added 08:21, 6 May 2009 (UTC).
Yeah same here Tec15 (talk) 09:32, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Same here.--Cool BD (talk) 12:36, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
sorry, I was busy. All my buddies have already done this! Regards --Tarif from Bangladesh (talk) 18:45, 15 May 2009 (UTC)


Herzegovina

Sorry for the late answer. Your question is quite interesting, I always thought the name of BiH can cause confusion (as well as many other things over there like administrative division which can take some time to comprehend). Herzegovina is a geographic not an ethnic term as well as the term Bosnia. Herzegovina is the southern part of the country mostly populated by Serbs and Croats but there are also Bosniaks especially in Mostar which suffered a lot from the Croatian army shelling during the war in the divided city. To answer your questions, yes many people would refer to themselves as Herzegovinian (Hercegovac/Hercegovci; Hercegovka/Hercegovke) but it is strictly a matter of local patriotism. There is no one term for the BiH (Bosnianandherzegovinian or smth like that) though so most of the people from the outside will call them all Bosnians (the further complication is that the Muslim population call themselves Bosniaks but their language Bosnian which is not recognised by Serbs and Croats who either don't accept the existence of their language or they call it Bosniak language).

For an example both Catholics and Protestants of N Ireland can refer to themselves as (N) Irish instead of British to emphasize their local flavor. Though this might not be the best example. Let's take for an example Sicilians, they are Italians but they are probably all calling themselves Sicilian because they think of it as something special.

Herzegovina is geographically different from the northern parts. It's more rocky and dry, not so tame with no valleys and fields. That is probably why they consider themselves different, they live in harsher conditions. This is what the landscape usually looks like around Herzegovina: File:Vlasulja.JPG. You can see it in the backdrop of the main town in Serbian part of the area plus the stone houses - File:Trebinje River.jpg or the same thing in Croat/Bosniak main town File:MostarBridgeNew.JPG.

The whole situation is different from Montenegro where 10 years ago mostly everyone referred to themselves as Montenegrin (geographic sense back then) and speaking Serbian language. In the mean time a movement of the national rebirth by the current PM (the same guy who was Milosevic's ally in early days and a Serb nationalist, he even led the siege of Dubrovnik but that's another side of these schizophrenic events) arose so some people became Montenegrin by ethnicity and decided that they speak Montenegrin language and Serbs distanced themselves from this by changing their declared nationality to Serbian. So in between two censuses in Montenegro, half of the population changed their ethnicity and half changed their mothertongue language (obviously you can't change either but if you live in Montenegro it's different heh).

Hope I answered your question. If you have anything else please ask.--Avala (talk) 18:44, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Well I think their passports say "Nationality: Bosnia and Herzegovina" without demonym. Perhaps it says bosanskohercegovačko državljanstvo which would be Bosnianherzegovinian citizenship but I doubt it. However, like I said before, there is no personal demonym (Bosnianandherzegovinian or smth like that).
Bosnian language (bosanski) is a term used by Bosniaks because they are trying to impose it on Serbs and Croats as well. Others use the term Bosniak language (bošnjački) however either way it's not really a language. It's 100% the same as one of the official dialects of Croatian and Serbian (another issue is that some of the official dialects that make Serbian and Croatian are absolutely equal). I really couldn't care less what some Bosniaks call their language, but I am sure it pisses off the real linguists. Serbian and Croatian themselves are grammatically the same (they could have been different before but through Yugoslavia they were basically merged). The main difference between what people speak in Belgrade and Zagreb is the rendering of the former Slavic letter yat as it became e in Serbian and (i)je in Croatian. So milk would be mleko in Serbian and mlijeko in Croatian. However the problem is many Croats say mliko even though this so called ikavian is not officially recognised while on the other side all the Serbs in Bosnia, Montenegro and eastern Serbia say mlijeko just like Croats do which makes things quite complicated and these two languages are very tough for distinction. Usually people like Germans or Chinese would call Serbs and Croats nuts for making two languages out of this as their regional variations are much bigger yet they are still calling them dialects. The thing is many regional unofficial variations of Serbian (areas in the South) and Croatian (areas in the North) are so much different from the official languages they belong to meaning that people from Belgrade and Zagreb would easily understand each other but we can't say the same thing for people from those regions with whom they supposedly share the language. Linguistically there is more difference between these dialects and Serbian or Croatian than between Serbian and Croatian. Also some Croatians say kaj or čak for "what" while most of them use što and Serbs use šta. That is the second "major" difference.
Also Serbian uses Cyrillic while Croats use Latin only. Therefore Serbian is 100% phonetic language when written in Cyrillic. Both languages don't have such thing as spelling as they are written as they are spoken (Croats use the original spelling for foreign names usually though) with only difference that Latin version has some double phonemes which makes it 99% phonetic (nj - pronounced as ny like soft n, is just њ in Cyrillic but either way there is no word where this letter combination is supposed to be pronounced as n and j, it's always nj so there is no worry there even though it doesn't look completely phonetic).
Obviosuly there are vocabulary differences, mostly because Croatian linguists try to translate foreign borrowed words while Serbs don't do it on that scale. So for an example telegraph is telegraf in Serbian while it is brzojav in Croatian. Many of these translations are not widely accepted in the population but they do exist and are used in official sense even though neither language has the noble or official variation as some languages do.
As for the Montenegrin, it is a recent creation, no international institution recognises that it exists.
Mostar bridge was blown up by Croatian army because they wanted to cut off the Muslim part of the town. It was reconstructed from the rocks in the river, in 2005 I think.
What you gave as an example for Wales, is what Montenegro was like before. Everyone declared themselves as Montenegrin speaking Serbian. Today half of these people changed their mother tongue and now declare they speak Montenegrin while half of them changed their nationality and now they are Serbian. It's all politics and what makes it insane is that the guy who is doing this, who is behind it all was the biggest Serb nationalist at the beginning of his career and even participated in Dubrovnik siege but today he is the Montenegrin nationalist who suddenly speaks Montenegrin language etc. I am talking about Milo Djukanovic of course. Personally I think there is too much fuss about what is going on with the country of 500k. Media or people never talk that much about issues of Luxembourgish language (a High German dialect which became a separate language just because Luxembourg is a different country while in reality every High German dialect is equally different from the Official German we all know about) even though it has twice as many declared speakers and even the intl recognition.
Nope still didn't install one.
Btw, to me it seems that Lesotho wont recognise Kosovo. It's a bit funny and it would be pathetic to open a section on that (not only because of the crystal balling) in the talk page of recognition article but Jeremic is visiting Zuma's inauguration to thank S. Africans for no recognition (also possibly for their representative making fun of the US representative in the UN last year hehe) and he met with Lesotho counterpart. I guess that now Lesotho shall join the frontlines of Serbian fight for international law (: --Avala (talk) 21:04, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 11 May 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 21:55, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Jakezing

Obviously not suitable for adminship, and the (temporary but lengthy) indef-block would be the kiss of death for sure. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 00:06, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Hm? Oh and anderson, why do you have to bother me? I never requested your input so yah.--Jakezing (Your King) (talk) 19:51, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
[5] Ijanderson (talk) 04:27, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

That shows that BB is right.Max Mux (talk) 10:23, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Reply

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

Hello

You seem to be active in map making. I wish to share my view with you about Kosovos' status as a semi-recognised state. Yes it is true that some countries recognise Kosovo yet a great number of countries specifically view Kosovo as a province of Serbia (governed by the temporary UN administration). So please relfect this reality in your map by either fully accepting the UN definition of a country (include Kosovo with Serbia), or highlight Kosovo by verticle lines (signalling that it is a desputed territory). Thanks for your time mate.Mike Babic (talk) 12:25, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

embassies

Can you help?Max Mux (talk) 11:42, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I have just send a message. Hope they answer soon.Max Mux (talk) 13:13, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Do you have other addresses as well? I have found this:

http://www.embassyworld.com

Max Mux (talk) 13:20, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Comores

They have recognized Kosovo!Max Mux (talk) 18:15, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I have now written to about 50 embassies but often I had a failure notice!Max Mux (talk) 07:50, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Do you have found others?Max Mux (talk) 10:26, 20 May 2009 (UTC) I receiced an answer today.Max Mux (talk) 14:38, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

And now from Ecuador.Max Mux (talk) 16:13, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Newzealand has answered but except for these two nobody jet.Max Mux (talk) 18:33, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 18 May 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 12:59, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Please give up your futile attempt to split the article Kosovo

As you can see you are the only one and we are the majority. Accept the poll, please, ok? It makes no sense at all to try again and again to split/rename/move the article. Thank you. --Mustafa Mustamann (talk) 21:27, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

If so, why do you (and others) again and again start a poll about splitting/moving/renaming? This is the point and I want you to see this point and correct your behaviour accordingly. As I asked you for help it was because I wanted a poll about the contry box on top and not a poll about a splitting. Your move was not helpful in any way but it was contrary to my intention. --Mustafa Mustamann (talk) 07:17, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
I can't believe it, but you are right, I mixed you up with another person. Please excuse me, I was confused! --Mustafa Mustamann (talk) 10:45, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 25 May 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:39, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

You're Welcome

No problem at all, like I said either it was either an honest error or it went against the principles of wikipedia. cheers batobatobato (talk) 22:05, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 1 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 22:30, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

highway

Well, for now I think that would be a fair name. We don't know anything else for now, but if in the future a different name shows up, we can move the topic. ^^ (LAz17 (talk) 00:07, 2 June 2009 (UTC)).

Have you decided to abandon this? Please don't. (LAz17 (talk) 13:20, 9 June 2009 (UTC)).
Hello? (LAz17 (talk) 03:22, 14 June 2009 (UTC)).
I didn't want to wait any longer for you. Check it out, Albania-Kosovo Highway (LAz17 (talk) 04:53, 14 June 2009 (UTC)).

AfD nominations

Hi! Emirati–Kosovan relations and Icelandic–Kosovan relations have been nominated for deletion. Please feel free to explain your opinions. Go and see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emirati–Kosovan relations and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Icelandic–Kosovan relations (2nd nomination). Thank you for your time! --Turkish Flame ☎ 14:25, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

A late hello

Ian, I'm originally from Prishtina, Kosovo, but have been living in the United States for a long time now. I do have MSN, but I'd like to exchange addresses with you in a more private setting if possible? --alchaemia (talk) 14:40, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I have added you on MSN - hasn't it gotten through? I'll re-add you tonight. Take care. --alchaemia (talk) 21:17, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

English language

Hi, maybe I am not good at English so could you please try to explain to alchaemia that the content he removed was actually standing here for months and months. He thinks that I added it today, but I only noticed today that he removed it but he did it about two weeks ago. He is completely confused, I wrote to him that he removed the content that was standing here for months (and then gave links for history all the way to January) two weeks ago. His response "January 2 wasn't "two-weeks ago."" makes me believe that there is some issue with the language barrier. He is also claiming how the content was copy/pasted from the main ICJ case article and I am trying to explain to him that the main ICJ article was created from the content of what we have on Intl recognition + with other content, not the other way around so therefore we couldn't have copy/pasted from the future article because it's impossible unless we had a time machine but I am also failing at that. Thanks, --Avala (talk) 23:34, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Kosovo

Thank yuu for relying on me for Bengali translation. The Link is a description of US diplomat's meeting with Bd minister. It's about US ambassador's request to recognize Kosovo to Bangladesh Foreign Minister Ms. Dipu Moni. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hossain Akhtar Chowdhury (talk • contribs) 04:19, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 15 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 11:36, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Israel

Hi! You know very well I am always pro for including more information in WP articles and that I was fighting Mareklug every time he would come to that article cutting it into pieces and removing information. However we should have limits and they are perfectly described by WP:V. Palluxo is an extremist website as they are trying to twist the truth about Holocaust by turning it into a Serbian-Jewish squabble while both were victims of Third Reich and other nazi puppet regimes of that time like Croatia, Italy etc. This is quite insulting to both Serbians and Israelis who suffered the most in the WW II. Only if you are Ahmadinejad you can say that because there are neo-nazis in Israel today or that there were collaborators in Serbia in WWII somehow changes the general truth over who was predominantly a victim and who was a perpetrator. It's like saying that Germany was not a nazi state because there was Claus von Stauffenberg. Finally by being an extremist website and by not supplying any evidence for their claims and by having a history of false reporting (they had almost the same article a month ago but change word Israel with word Russia) they are not a reliable website per Wikipedia rules. Like I said, I am always for including more information but this is one is really on the other side of the line and including it in the article would cast a shadow of a doubt over everything else in that article that we've done together over the past year and a half.--Avala (talk) 19:16, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

OK we can always put it back on if this reaches mainstream media. Btw Israel is not Malaysia, they very much weigh their positions and statements. It took the whole year and a half after the independence declaration for their Ambassador to Serbia to give a clear statement without dodging and he said that Israel will not recognise Kosovo. I think that they might have recognised but now that KSA did it they wont. Btw I do believe that Israel has a strong influence on the US and that the US can't order them to do or not do anything. They built a very very strong lobby in the US.--Avala (talk) 20:11, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
Yeah no problem there. I think we should work on adding Palluxo to the list of unreliable sources. I guess there is such a list here? Btw it seems that the hoax was revealed because they claimed Netanyahu spoke on Saturday which they wouldn't do in Israel unless there was some kind of an emergency.--Avala (talk) 15:46, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 22 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:52, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Well, sorry I didn't read the article thorough enough. Sorry again, hope you understand. :/ impactF= 21:52, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Abuse log

Yeah their abuse log seems to be faulty. I removed a couple of cities from the sister cities list that were not actual sister cities of that town and among them one was the city in Macedonia. And an abuse log thinks it was something dodgy. They should either fix it or shut it down. Thanks for notifying me.--Avala (talk) 18:46, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah they answered at ANI. Apparently they are aware of the problem, and there is some process to deal with false reports.--Avala (talk) 19:06, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Macedonia request for comment

Since you have in the past taken part in related discussions, this comes as a notification that the Centralized discussion page set up to decide on a comprehensive naming convention about Macedonia-related naming practices is now inviting comments on a number of competing proposals from the community. Please register your opinions on the RfC subpages 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5.

Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:56, 26 June 2009 (UTC)


Palluxo at it again

We really need to find or create the list of banned sources because Palluxo is going crazy and other media are picking up their stories and giving them relevance - > BREAKING: Palluxo Media claims Michael Jackson died of AIDS, publishes alleged pic of his dead body and yeah there is this article on their main page as well as heaps of new anti-Serbian hysteria and they of course didn't remove the article on Israel recognising KOsovo. These neo-nazis are some really horrible people.--Avala (talk) 22:32, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Cheers for that. Hopefully they do it.--Avala (talk) 11:22, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 29 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 01:58, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 6 July 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:47, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Editing survey

Hi Ijanderson977. My name is Mike Lyons and I am a doctoral student at Indiana University in the United States. I am conducting research on the writing and editing of high traffic current events articles on Wikipedia. I have noticed in the talk page archives at 2008 South Ossetia war that you have contributed to the editing or maintenance of the article. I was hoping you would agree to fill out a brief survey about your experience. This study aims to help expand our thinking about collaborative knowledge production. Believe me I share your likely disdain for surveys but your participation would be immensely helpful in making the study a success. A link to the survey is included below. An explanation of my project is included with the survey.

Link to the survey: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=kLMxj8dkk_2bls7yCBmNV7bg_3d_3d


Thanks and best regards, Mike Lyons lyonspen | (talk) 22:43, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Defence

Yeah sure that's fine what you say. However I think that the Serbian Government doesn't have the book of standards so it's not impossible that you will find the word Defense on their website too. I don't think that they were thinking too much about this, it's just that the translator probably got the degree in Serbia where the British spelling is used in Philological Faculty. There are many inconsistencies, for an example Serbian MFA changed it's name some time ago to Ministry of External Affairs in Serbian but it remains Foreign Affairs in their English title to this day. As for the Wp article, it's inconsistent, it uses both versions and I think you should review that by changing all American spelling to British spelling and renaming the article accordingly.--Avala (talk) 11:59, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 27 July 2009

Delivered by -- Tinu Cherian BOT - 10:00, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

ICJ

Hi, as you can see in the official document by the ICJ, Russia, China and Brazil did not comment on other contributions. Albanian media interpret that as leaving the process for good lol. They and other countries (court will probably allow all UN members regardless of the written contributions) will be back in December for oral arguments at public hearings.--Avala (talk) 11:53, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Btw it was agreed a long time ago and has been standing that way ever since to have Serbia outside the rest of the list because obviously it's case is different to the one of Nigeria etc. I think that even if Serbia recognised Kosovo it would still warrant a separate section explaining the details and not just listing it among the other states. In International recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia we have Georgia separated too. I think it's normal, it's not like it's pushing for attention of something that doesn't deserve it.--Avala (talk) 00:19, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

British and American English

Hi, is there any particular reason you replaced American English spelling with the British spelling in this edit? The words were spelled correctly and since the article is written entirely in American English your edit makes no sense to me.--98.232.98.144 (talk) 04:11, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I generally didn't know that British and Americans spelled the word travelling differently, I thought they were general spelling mistakes. I will revert my edits, sorry. Ijanderson (talk) 04:15, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Same with judgement Ijanderson (talk) 04:17, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
It doesn't bother me whichever way the words are spelled and normally I wouldn't bring attention to it, as long as it's correct in some form of English. Sometimes I prefer British, as in cancelled and canceled. The trend here in the states seems to favor dropping one of the L's for some reason. Anyway, the thing is, at the moment the article is under review for good article status and some editors prefer if articles stick to just one form of English. No hard feelings. --98.232.98.144 (talk) 04:24, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Apology

As per this edit, I apologize for commenting on you, instead of the topic. What I was merely trying to express is that someone who considers Hashim Thaci a hero can't be as neutral as he or she claims, but such claims do not belong on the Kosovo talk page. All the best, --Cinéma C 18:55, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 3 August 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 04:35, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

06-08-2009

Hello, IJA. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#POV_Pushing_by_User:Cin.C3.A9ma_C.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I am disappointed you didn't discuss this with me first. I do not believe you were acting in good faith this time. However, next time do talk to me before you go off accusing me of this and that. I have provided sources for my edits and you have every right to challenge them, but not on the Administrator's noticeboard. I have not shown a single sign of not being cooperative and I do not think I deserve this from you. --Cinéma C 17:59, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

And might I add, the source that was there before was an article titles "THE MYTH OF BRATUNAC: A BLATANT NUMBERS GAME", a quite sensationalist article from a very pro-Bosniak organization in Sarajevo (and as a "neutral" Bosnian organization that doesn't even have the version of the site in all three official languages of Bosnia and Herzegovina, but rather only English and Bosnian) and from what I've noticed, there doesn't seem to be a single Serb working there. My link is a Serbian link, but it provides full names of those who were killed, which I have added to the talk page. --Cinéma C 18:07, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Comment
That "pro-Bosniak organization" data were used by Serbia in Bosnia v. Serbia Genocide Case. Serb side even praised that organization from Sarajevo for neutrality. Here is the link: [6]: "the other side – Belgrade – accused the Bosnian side of “deliberately amplifying the number of victims”, quoting the data collected by Mirsad Tokaca’s Investigations and Documentation Centre." ICTYoda (talk) 12:31, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Regarding your saying about languages used on RDC site, I have to tell you, you're not going to achive anything with lies. As you can see here, [7] the text you delete from Kravica article is in English. Bosnian version on the other hand refers to all three official languages in Bosnia: Bosnian, Serbian, Croatian, which is essentially the same language with three different names. ICTYoda (talk) 12:41, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

In fact, doesn't it trouble you that in the Bosnian War template, not a single massacre by Bosniak forces was listed, before I created the Kravica massacre article? All the massacres listed are massacres committed by Serb or Croat forces against Bosniaks. Don't you think that's incredibly one-sided? Or am I a pro-Serb, anti-Bosnian for pointing that out? --Cinéma C 18:26, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Kravica

Hello Ijanderson977. I've seen your case against Cinéma C, and I agree 100% with you. I've found, Cinéma C tried to forge facts related to Kravica massacre. I explained it all on the talk paga Talk:Kravica massacre. It looks as this user is trying to justify some events and to defend national pride. However, there are offical documents related to the topic, so it is very easy to check it all. Take care. ICTYoda (talk) 12:26, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Ijanderson977, you can not accuse me of not acting in good faith - you didn't even talk to me when you noticed my edits that you did't agree with, but went to report me right away. Why? --Cinéma C 00:05, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, you could've just done that right away, I don't understand why you were so eager to get someone to 'slap me on the wrist' for taking some initiative. It's still shocking that of all the Bosnian war massacres listed here, 1 is against Serbs (6.25%), 15 against Bosnian Muslims (93.75%) and 0 (0.00%) against Croats. The moment an article about a massacre against Serbs appears, suddenly everyone jumps and starts accusing me of being pro-Serb, anti-Bosnian, spreading Serbian propaganda etc etc. It's really shocking to me, considering I'm not even of Serb ethnicity, and yet any action where I'm not bashing Serbs is perceived as biased Serb POV... I'm quite disappointed to see how this works here... --Cinéma C 04:42, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I can do that. --Cinéma C 17:04, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

RE

I agree with your solution. Although, in order to avoid propaganda, we should stick to verified facts presented in the trials. According to those trials, "Kravica massacre" refers to mass execution of 1,500 people (that's the incident you titled as Kravica incident (1995)). On the other hand Kravica attack (that's the name used in the Naser Oric judgement) refers to Kravica incident (1993). The attack was initiated by Bosnains from the enclave surrounded by the Serbs, and it ended with casualties on both sides. The damage on property was caused by both sides. Why I am saying this? As I study materials from ICTY, I concluded that most of Serbian sources are very biased. It's very similar with Hutu sources regarding Rwandan Genocide. I don't believe in users, who are trying to find balance or justification for war crimes committed on some ethnic group. In Bosnian War, Serbs committed 90% of war crimes, Croats 19%, Bosniaks 1%. Those are exact data based on the number of years in prison for the war criminals from one ethnic group. So, I agree with this solution as a start point for improving it with facts established on the trials. Best regards. ICTYoda (talk) 20:05, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 10 August 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:55, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Get ready for a fight over at Gallery of passports. The person who very possessively runs the page insists on listing Kosovo as "Kosovo, Serbia" because "most of the world considers Kosovo part of Serbia." I changed it to "Kosovo," so I imagine that Bosonic Dancing or whatever the person's name is will revert it to "Kosovo, Serbia" and will accuse me of screwing with the page. Kindly check into it when you see this message. - Canadian Bobby (talk) 03:29, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: Nick Griffin

thank you for notifying me! I think i have Nick Griffin confused with another comedienne / person. I should have Read the userbox more carefully before I put it on my wall. thanks fo catching that for me. User:Smith Jones 13:16, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Srebrenica massacre/genocide

Thanks for tidying up the spelling. I don't think that it's worth worrying too much as there tends to be conflict between source materials and references because both locally and internationally different variants of English are being used in them. In fact the Potocari Center should be spelled the American way - that's how it is in the English version of the legislation published by the Office of the High Representative - "OHR decision 2007 enacting the Potocari Memorial Center Law". It's no big deal though, there are rather more fundamental issues at the article! Opbeith (talk) 08:24, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

When I said "it's no big deal", I meant don't worry about it. It's nice to have someone intervening at the article who's not fighting a battle to sabotage it. It's got a lot in it, but it's the product of a lot of battles on individual issues. There are some inexplicably odd patches which were the site of tussles and insertions and deletions and then left because the main effort had moved elsewhere. A number of issues are still "work in progress". With the Karadzic trial coming up shortly there'll be more interference by the propagandists but gradually, very gradually, it's moving towards being a settled article - for example since the ICJ judgment confirming the ICTY the efforts to deny that what happened was genocide have diminished a lot. Do feel free to contribute, but be prepared to be robust, there are some very determined characters who turn up from time to time. Opbeith (talk) 16:42, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

17-08-2009

I saw your edits. Your name is not a complete secret but it is very, very well hidden. The secret is safe with me. Acme Plumbing (talk) 02:51, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you IJA (talk) 13:20, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User:IJA/Archive_3&oldid=1182135162"