User talk:Kirils

Welcome!

Hello Kirils, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! ^Blank ^Verse 02:45, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea

Kirils, I will mostly restore your version of the article. However, I will correct some statements concerning:

Gay and Lesbian Republic of the Coral Sea (such a thing never existed!) There is an informal group called "Gay and Lesbian Republic" but this group has nothing to do with Coral Sea or any particular territory.

The group you mean, is the Gay and Lesbian Commonwealth Kingdom, reportedly a Duarchy with one Lesbian Monarch and an (still to be appointed) Gay Monarch.

Hugs, Vanrozenheim 19:17, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know much about that thing. I was only reverting vandalism (blanking), until at last someone claimed that it's all lies and provided a new, shorter article. Kirils 16:04, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for the answer. Спасибо за информацию. :) What shall happen with this passage on your talk side now? I am not familiar with rules concerning the clarified points... Vanrozenheim 17:58, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chuckle

Hi! Funny user page! Especially like the "de-0" template. You're alright! Krankman 20:38, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

danke! ;))) Kirils 22:31, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:SSM

Do not edit war over {{SSM}}. This shows a consolidated list of articles on Same-sex marriage. Since there is an article Same-sex marriage in Latvia, it makes sense for it to appear there. If you dispute the contents of Same-sex marriage in Latvia, please discuss this on Talk:Same-sex marriage in Latvia. Thank you, Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:36, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-vandalism discussion

It is unfortunate you were unwilling to compromise in light of my numerous attempts to keep your contribution in the article, even though it was unprofessional, inappropriate, and already removed once by another contributor. I am willing to discuss this further if you wish, but such discussion is better suited for a user talk page. Thanks! dr.ef.tymac 03:09, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to hear you are willing to discuss that. As far as I can see it was removed by mistake the previous time, because it was overseen as an unneeded element, but vandalims levels peaked after that. And I already explained twice, why it is more appropriate to have an unofficial type of disclaimer this time, so I'm not going to that again. The "Before adding any sort of content, ask yourself what would a reader expect to find in an encyclopedia." is irrelevant, because it can be seen only by editors, not readers: and YES that IS the sort of content and editor would expect to find here.

I respectfully disagree. Moreover, you have repeatedly forwarded claims with zero substantiation, and all of the significant claims can actually be interpreted as *undermining* your apparent stance on this issue.

For example:

0) Every editor is a reader and every reader is a potential editor, and every vandal is an editor (malicious), therefore the policy is indeed relevant, and you have provided no substantiation or cite to indicate why certain articles are "exempt" from policy;
1) You claimed that the "cutesy" comment stopped vandalism. Even a cursory review of the edit history proves this is incorrect. Moreover, even if vandalism had stopped, correlation does not prove causation.
1.5) You have provided zero substantiation for the claim that a warning is supposed to "stop" vandalism, or even decrease it.
1.5.1) You have not demonstrated how CutesyCmmt does anything to discourage someone hell-bent on vandalism, you invoked psychologists and yet you provide zero cites, zero case studies, and no substantiation.
1.5.2) Absent proof or cites, it's all just a matter of opinion, and consensus opinion would indicate that CutesyCmmt is disfavored (or at least ignored) by *at least* two contributors to WP.
2) You claimed that "people don't read" the 8 word caution, and instead do read a wordy 48 word cutesy comment, I suggest the exact opposite is probably true (both may be true), which is why I added the header in the first place, so that people could quickly scan and figure out what you were getting at (as a courteous attempt to compromise instead of just removing the inappropriate CutesyCmmt outright). Moreover, you have provided zero substantiation for your claim in the first place.
3) In support of (2) above note the edit summary (when first removed) called it "random crap in html comments..." indicating the editor/reader i)did not even bother to read what was there; OR ii) did read it, and considered it inappropriate. Either way, on that basis alone, it undermines both appropriateness and effectiveness.
4) too long (48 words) and had irrelevant stuff that people had to be motivated to even look at, let alone read, much easier to bypass and claim ignorance;
5) the "cutesy" and unprofessional tone exactly mimics some of the vandalism that it supposedly was added to combat, some could call this hypocritical;
6) the "cutesy" tone is inconsistent with encyclopedic content
7) the CutesyCmmt did not even address "malicious" vandalism (e.g., "love stinks"). On this basis alone, the 48 word CutesyCmmt was inadequate and incomplete;
8) 'have a happy life' how is that relevant to a wikipedia article? How does that convey professionalism? That sounds like personal correspondence or an advertising slogan and is more suited for a user talk page;
9) You haven't provided a single citation, or authority to support the inclusion of cutesy, loving notes inside a WP article. How can anyone make a good faith effort to assess the validity of your claims when you provide zero support for them? It's completely indistinguishable from personal opinion. Which you are entitled to, but let's keep it to the talk pages.

Even if it is just a comment, it's what potential editors and vandals see and it sets the tone for the encyclopedia. The goal was to keep the comment in, despite the *many* shortcomings, but the refusal to compromise by allowing a simple 1-sentence header to make the content more scannable and professional has made it necessary to elaborate on all these deficiencies. dr.ef.tymac 04:21, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up: Hi User:Kirils, I notice you re-added content that was previously removed, but did not address any of the deficiencies with it, nor provide discussion, cites, and follow-up. This may be a pit problemmatic. For example, as alluded to in points (1 and 1.5.1) above, a vandal added a very offensive slur (not sure if in direct response to your re-add) right after your edit. This shows some of the points I mentioned are relevant issues. Also, by addressing outstanding issues, you help prevent interpretation by others that your re-addition was done to be disruptive. Thanks! dr.ef.tymac 16:14, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Canning this for later: We know, it's amazing to love and be loved, but please express your love by helping Wikipedia to improve, not by telling all the world here in this article how much you love your significant other. The edit will be removed in seconds anyway. Have a happy life!

Follow-up: Hi again, made some more modifications. Don't know if you haven't yet had a chance to respond, or what. It would be helpful to see some support for some of the points you forwarded, since it could be put to good use once reviewed and verified. Interestingly, it seems at least one person created an account for the specific purpose of vandalizing the article. user edit ... (this relates back to points 1.5 and 1.5.1 above). Anyway, just an observation, c-ya! :) dr.ef.tymac 08:31, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

13256278887989457651018865901401704640

Please do not create redirects for articles for things NOBODY will ever type into the search box. The HD-DVD controversy is over, continuing to spam the number makes no sense. -N 19:23, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. Furthermore, I am 100% sure that for the remainder of the year at least ten people per day will type this number into google, which in turn might effectively link to wikipedia. If only we had a paged named like that. Kirils 21:03, 22 May 2007 (UTC) *Please do not re-create deleted content, as you did at Talk:13256278887989457651018865901401704640. This is considered vandalism. Take it to Wikipedia:Deletion Review if you disagree. -N 22:21, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there. Re-creating a deletion discussion that has been deleted just minutes after creation can not be considered wandalism, furthermore I did not restore the discussion. Kirils 22:25, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I was wrong. -N 22:52, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Image:Yuri Gagarin official portrait.jpg

Please note this image is NOT PD-old, as that requires 100 years from publication IN THE MINIMUM. Please read a template before you use it. -N 22:57, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:User wikipedia/Dunno-Administrator

A tag has been placed on Template:User wikipedia/Dunno-Administrator requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:02, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A Request for Help

Hi there Kirils :), I noticed your username on Translators Available Latvian to English. I was wondering if you could help with updating Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi on the Latvian Wikipedia? Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi on the English Wikipedia has been majorly revamped- particularly, its being treated as a BLP now, since no one has been able to find evidence of his death. I'm sorry to say I know little Latvian, so I'd really appreciate your help in this :), although I understand if you don't have the time. Thanks in advance! Omirocksthisworld(Drop a line) 04:41, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. Why is there a particular interest in translating this specific article? The person is insignificant to the latvian speaking population and there are still more important pages missing IMHO. Kirils (talk) 21:10, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just trying to get the information to be consistent :), but I understand if its not possible atm. Thanks anyway! Omirocksthisworld(Drop a line) 05:45, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback rights request

Regarding your request for rollback rights, I am sorry but I must decline your request at this time. I notice history of alleged edit warring and this is specific grounds for denial of rollback privileges. I also see that you were inactive for about the last six months until the last few days. I would like to see evidence that you are making constructive non-controversial edits before considering such a request. Furthermore, although it isn't necessary, I don't see significant evidence of vandal patrol work which would suggest a potential need for rollback rights. I would like to know what you propose to do with the rights, how you think they would benefit you and the project?--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 23:08, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I normally don't split up discussions, but I want to make sure that others see a record of this on both our walls, to that end, here's a permalink to your comments on my page thus far: [1]. I must admit that I looked at your page very quickly and did not notice how long ago some of the comments were. On it's own your level of recent participation would not be an issue, but it would take quite a bit of effort to evaluate your most recent editing history and how it compares to several years ago. I recommend you request again after you've edited uncontroversially for several more weeks or a month or two, in fact, I'd be happy to entertain your request then. Than being said, you are welcome to ask other admins if they'll grant the rights. I'm generally fairly liberal and if I didn't have to search your edit history back a year or more just to see if you've still been any situations or get into the details of old battles, I'd do that now, but I'm not as active lately on this project. I would suggest that rollback is not a very useful tool. I'm not sure I've ever used it. I use TWINKLE, it's more effective for most things, though I understand it can be slow if you are racing to kill the most recent vandal edits. Twinkle allows more variation in the edit summary and allows you to tag some edits as "Rollback Vandal" and others as "AGF" and still others as simply rollback (though it uses the same name, these are really automated "undo's", not rollbacks). It also has a number of warning messages that can be sent. Another tool that is sort of a sister to Twinkle is FRIENDLY, it allows you to post a welcome message automatically. Back when I was actively dealing with vandals I would generally post a welcome message and then if they continued to vandalize I would warn them. You can even give a welcome message called "Welcome Vandal" which is nice way to try to turn someone from the dark side as well as to show that you have faith that they may just misunderstand things or not realize the value of the project. I hope this is useful information and that you continue to edit whenever life allows.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 21:02, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection of Coca Cola

I suggest you pick something a little less high-profile and the admins will be more likely to agree with you ;). -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:51, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Intex Cloud FX

Hello Kirils,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Intex Cloud FX for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. ubiquity (talk) 20:53, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: New helper policy

Hello member of Category:Wikipedians who use IRC! You are invited to join an ongoing discussion on Wikipedia talk:IRC/wikipedia-en-help aimed at defining a policy for prerequisites to being a helper in the "#wikipedia-en-help ^connect" channel in a section titled "New helper policy".

To prevent future mailings about IRC, you may remove your user page from Category:Wikipedians who use IRC.
Assistance is available upon request if you can't figure out where it is being added to your user page.
This message has been sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:59, 27 April 2015 (UTC) on behalf of — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)}[reply]

Article upgrade assistance request (Pre-translation stage)

Seasons Greetings,

This is in reference to a relatively new umbrella article on en-wikipedia named Ceremonial pole. Ceremonial pole is a human tradition since ancient times; either existed in past at some point of time, or still exists in some cultures across global continents from north to south & from east to west. Ceremonial poles are used to symbolize a variety of concepts in several different world cultures.

Through article Ceremonial pole we intend to take encyclopedic note of cultural aspects and festive celebrations around Ceremonial pole as an umbrella article and want to have historical, mythological, anthropological aspects, reverence or worships wherever concerned as a small part.

While Ceremonial poles have a long past and strong presence but usually less discussed subject. Even before we seek translation of this article in global languages, we need to have more encyclopedic information/input about Ceremonial poles from all global cultures and languages. And we seek your assistance in the same.

Since other contributors to the article are insisting for reliable sources and Standard native english; If your contributions get deleted (for some reason like linguistics or may be your information is reliable but unfortunately dosent match expectations of other editors) , please do list the same on Talk:Ceremonial pole page so that other wikipedians may help improve by interlanguage collaborations, and/or some other language wikipedias may be interested in giving more importance to reliablity of information over other factors on their respective wikipedia.

This particular request is being made to you since your user name is listed in Wikipedia:Translators available list.

Thanking you with warm regards Mahitgar (talk) 05:53, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:39, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Kirils. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Kirils. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:21, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]