WELCOME TO NOVIS-M'S DISCUSSION

Chinese military spendings

Hello you can't use the estimates from that source U.S. Department of Defense, only the US figures are for the year 2009 All other figures are projections based on 2006. and we can't use estimates but real official figures for the different countries and the official figures for China is 58,8 billion US dollars in 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.243.176.218 (talk) 17:41, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We will figure it out...its really confusing, because every country has different official and real spending. The problem with China is, that theres huge difference between those two statements. --Novis-M (talk) 22:47, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

you can't say the figures are false, thats not serious and if the chinese say that the budget is 58,8 billion then thats the figures, don't you think that the US or Russia or the UK has a bigger military spending then the official of course, but lets stik to the official figures.

You can not accuse China for telling lies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.88.130.252 (talk) 19:22, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What? are you kidding? who is talking about lies? You don't even know how it works. Some countries, like Italy or France have their official budget higher than it really is, because they also count some types of police forces. China, same as russia, has lot of its military spending under different names, so REAL Chinesse budget is about 120 bilion USD. Clear? It is also possible that China is telling lies, it is still communist country. --Novis-M (talk) 20:26, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

it is still communist country??? whats that?? are you kidding?? and about france and italy you don't even know what it police forces it is, and you can not say that China is telling lies stick to the official figures anything else is your fantasy figures —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.88.130.252 (talk) 23:31, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

it is for example Gendarmerie or Carabinieri...they are telling lies, and it also has lot of its military budget under the depratment of education, welfare, etc. (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/05/world/asia/05china.html?ref=world) Yep, china is still communist (word authoritarian fits better) country with mixed economy. --Novis-M (talk) 23:58, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you don't mind me butting in, but I must say with Novis, China is still very communist. Chinese Communism is somewhat different than Soviet Communism.Prussian725 (talk) 20:49, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chester, Warren County, New York

Chester, Warren County, New York - This article has been heavily edited since I worked on it. Many of my additions have been changed or even dropped. There is not a lot of material on line, my main source, because not many people live in this area, but I recall that I had some historic material and had a town web page too that was not very helpful. I drove past the area a few times going to Lake George, but did not stop, as I should have. Sorry I can't help more, Stepp-Wulf (talk) 02:07, 22 March 2008 (UTC).[reply]

In Ohio, we have townships; they're somewhat similar, and we have both CDPs and other unincorporated communities; there's no practical difference between Ohio unincorporated communities and New York hamlets. Nyttend (talk) 17:45, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Like Glens Falls North and West Glens Falls, W. is a CDP, so I think it should be placed with them. Nyttend (talk) 18:10, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But a CDP is a subset of hamlets: perhaps we could say "Other hamlets" for the bottom line? Nyttend (talk) 14:07, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My point in having "Other hamlets" is to clarify the distinction between unincorporated areas that are CDPs and unincorporated areas that aren't: if we didn't have any CDPs in the county, I wouldn't support including "other" in the line title — see {{Sullivan County, New York}} for an example. Something similar is done in some other counties nationwide; see {{Raleigh County, West Virginia}} for an example. Nyttend (talk) 18:56, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 13:20, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Hi

Sure, what would you like help with?--Lucky Mitch (talk) 03:03, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem

I know what you mean. It's kinda hard to debate this when just about everyone you talk to has a preconceived notion about the US that they will not let go. By the way, what is your native language? You seem to speak much better English than other people I've talked to.Prussian725 (talk) 17:24, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you like it here. I am from Texas, a little more south than New York! I once met a girl from the Czech Republic. She was pretty nice and I can see you are to. It's nice to meet a friendly foreigner.Prussian725 (talk) 23:13, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I had a quick question I wanted to ask. You probably remember when the Communists ruled "Czekoslovakia" right? Do you think I'm wrong, but it seems like a lot of the Europeans (and Americans) I talk to on Wikipedia have forgotten why we fought socialism for so long. What do you think? Is it just the British people that I'm talking to?Prussian725 (talk) 23:19, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I was born in 91 too. I actually was born in Alaska, when my dad was a rescue helicopter pilot for the Coast Guard. That's great that you like it here. I think we Americans often do not know what we have until someone from another country comes and tells us what it's like without freedom. It's also good to hear you believe in God. Are you a Christian? If so, what denomination, Lutheran, Catholic...? I'm glad to find someone who shares my views on Communism and Socialism. I'm so tired of talking to people who think it's the greatest thing in the world. Talk later.Prussian725 (talk) 16:00, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think China. I am by no means saying that Russia is no longer a threat, I don't think that the Bolsheviks or Soviets went anywhere after the fall of the U.S.S.R., but I think that they have some problems to work out right now before they start anything against us. (maybe I am wrong in thinking so?) The reason I say China is because I think they are willing to wait for ungodly amounts of time until the perfect time to strike. You probably know that China is Communists, with that being said, the Chinese shipping companies are operating all over the U.S. (Kosco, Hanjin, China Shipping...), and the Chinese are helping to build deepwater ports on the West Coast and the East Coast of Mexico, and not to mention the building of a trans-national highway that runs from Canada to Mexico right through the center of the USA. I think they will hit us like the Japanese did at Pearl Harbor. Another reason I think china is more dangerous is the fact that we rely upon them so much. A while ago, my parents went to Florida and visited Roy Boehm, the very first Navy SEAL, (SEALs are the very best special forces group in the US military, have you heard of them?), anyway, there was a lot of things he could not tell my parents about, but he did tell them to never trust the Chinese. I kind of stick to that a little.Prussian725 (talk) 21:42, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know he didn't give any specifics, what information he knew wasa probably classified or something. About us doing something, well it would be nice to just bomb them to death!!! But we can't really just go in and attack them for no apparent reason, we still get a lot of stuff from them unfortunately. I think that, while much more discrete, our stance against China is sort of like the Cold War, where we are just waiting for the other side to strike first. Besides, I think attacking them outright would be like stirring up an anthill (you know what ants are?). I think also that the rest of the international community is to "peace-loving" and would probably make us out to be the evil "American Empire" again. It happens every time we go into another country to wage war everyone says we are the bad guys and we are being mean and bullying people, but when the our "friends" are in a tight spot, we suddenly become the greatest people on Earth. By the way, I know you can't vote because you are not a US citizen, but who do you think would be a better president: McCain or Obama?Prussian725 (talk) 20:47, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, hehe, I'm a Republican. I actually prefer to be called a "Reagan" Republican after Ronald Reagan, one of our presidents and a very adamant enemy of Communism. I must say that my political standpoint is largely influenced by my religion and the basic principal of doing what is right, no matter the cost. I recently read something my dad gave me which was pretty neat...and scary! If you want, I can email it to you. It is a report to Congress from 1963 on the 45 goals of Bolshevik Communism. I find it somewhat frightening how many of them are the same as Obama's policies, and about how many we already accept. About China, I think that they will wait for a very long time before they hit us. I just get so sick of people who hate America and act like we never did anything to help them. I wonder if they have already forgotten about World War 1 and World war 2??? haha.Prussian725 (talk) 22:10, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to help! I have two older brothers, one in the Army and the other in the MarineCorps. The one in the Army is in Iraq right now. Believe me, they really appreciate support and thanks. I'll send the email on over. I once met a girl from Czech Republic a while ago when I ws twelve. It was at my Boy Scout Summer Camp. I think she was 18 at the time. I know it's a wild guess, but do you know a girl by the name of Monica Palankyova?Prussian725 (talk) 01:14, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

response to your camoflauge question

This is in response to the question you posed me regarding MARPAT and Universal Camouflage Pattern: depends. First, I'm assuming you are talking about the camoflauge pattern and not the uniform itself. Second, there are two different thought processes behind the patterns. The Marines went for a more cryptic or mimic approach, while the Army's pattern is disruptive in nature. Either approach works better and worse in different scenarios. The "one pattern fits all" has some advantages (logistics, production, cost, administratively), but it remains to be seen that it provides effective concealment in many environments ("universal" indeed).

Now, if you were asking about the uniform itself, I'd have to say Marine Corps Combat Utility Uniform hands down; I've heard that the Army Combat Uniform is for less durable. The latter does have some nice features (like the Mandarin collar and all those pockets), they would make the wear of the uniform in garrison somewhat impractical. Marines tend to take a more Spartan approach to life than the Army.

Hope that answers your question. By the way, happy Thanksgiving. bahamut0013 ♠♣ 03:06, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When my unit was headed to Iraq, we had a verrrrrrry long layover in Prague. We spent the night in a terminal at Ruzyně International Airport while the plane was being refueled and repaired. It was such a miserable experience (very crowded and not comfortable at all) that I can't very well forget it nor discount it as a "visit". bahamut0013 ♠♣ 22:11, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Someday, when I have more money and have retured, I will tour Europe, and re-visit Prague under better terms. I'm glad you are enjoying upstate NY... has it snowed yet? I grew up in the Mohawk Valley region, and had some bitter winters... though the last few I had before I left were fairly mild. Be sure to visit the museams in Albany and learn about the Iroquois people. bahamut0013 ♠♣ 22:20, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Afghanistan Combatants

Hi Novis-M:

Thanks for your note on my talk page. I responded there to keep our comments together.

Best wishes, Wanderer57 (talk) 22:37, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Training question

In response to your question: It depends. United States Marine Corps Recruit Training emphasises very little actual infantry skills, so what little combat training occurs there, most of it is with unloaded weapons and a bit of imagination. The United States Marine Corps School of Infantry fills in that gap, but the last I heard, they still use blank amunition for drills and live ammunition only on a shooting range. Once a Marine arrives at his or her unit, what kind of training he/she recieves there depends on what kind of unit it is, where the unit will be deploying to, and what kind of training is available (location and funding). Many infantry battalions will recieve funds for Simunitions, and will use it. I've never used them myself, not being an infantryman. My pre-deployment training (in 2004) focused mainly on convoy operations, because that was our mission: convoy escorting. Most of the combat training I've recieved since then has been sustainment of skills already learned. bahamut0013 ♠♣ 21:12, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MARPAT swatches

Sorry for the delay in responding to you. I thought the origional MARPAT swatches were better because they are larger images (yours were 150 pixels square, the others are almost 500 pixels), yours are also shrunk (as if they were "zoomed out"), yours do not display the embedded Eagle, Globe, and Anchor, and your desert swatch was an obsolete version with grey in it. For what they were, they were high-quality images; but they didn't illustrate the pattern as well as the others. bahamut0013^words _deeds 16:25, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The latest question

Probably your best resource is List of United States Marine Corps individual equipment. Improved Load Bearing Equipment is the most common issued load bearing equipment, and by now, just about every unit in the Corps has replaced thier MOLLE inventories with ILBE. A few also still have some ALICE components floating about. There are no restrictions on using personally bought commercial products (such as vests, pouches, holsters, etc.), except on body armor and helmets: Marines must wear the protection provided unles they get prior permission. The average Marine would probably use a mix of mostly ILBE, with a smattering of MOLLE and some commercial products. For example, I have some commercial mag pouches that I bought that I like better than the issue ones, so I strap them to my OTV. I also have a commercial backpack that I like better.

Now, even within the different systems, there are a multitude of different systems. For example, the current LBV is pretty close to identical to the old MOLLE LBV, except that its brown instead of green and has a zipper in addition to a plastic buckle. They are constantly trying out and issuing new items and replacing old ones, not to mention that not all units will get them uniformly. Additionally, while some units will mandate each Marine carries certain items (such as the first aid kit), others leave it to the individual's discretion. As a result, you'll see a wide variation of what an individual Marine wears from person to person, unit to unit. bahamut0013^words _deeds 05:12, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The LBV is part of the ILBE system, which encompasses all of the load bearing equipment, including the pack, vest, puches, etc. Most Marines forgo using the LBV in combat because they can attach thier accessories right to thier body armor, but the LBV is still issued for those times when body armor isn't necessary (usually training, sentry duty, stuff like that). Personally, I left mine home and dont expect to see it until I turn it back in. bahamut0013^words _deeds 17:51, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Correct on both accounts. bahamut0013^words _deeds 04:35, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

War on Terrorism Protection

Yo Novis, I've requested that an administrator helps properly protect the WOT page - like you, I don't understand why the protection isn't working right. Maybe, it is only 'move protected' at the moment...? Bounce78 (talk) 01:51, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection#Current_requests_for_protection

The WOT page is now semi-protected for a month, see below. A new user who clicks to 'edit' now sees a 'view source' option - they can't edit until they are properly registered. This will cut down on some of the vandalism. Bounce78 (talk) 05:36, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection#War_on_Terrorism_.28edit.7Ctalk.7Chistory.7Clinks.7Cwatch.7Clogs.29

Images

The reason I've cut back the images on the USMC article is to keep it from becoming cluttered. The Manual of Style notes that adding an image simply because you can is discouraged. Having an excess of images detracts the reader's attention from the text, and should only be used to illustrate something very relevant and directly tied into the text. The USMC article consists mainly of summaries of other articles, so we must be judicious in what images we choose to use: one per section and it must be a good summary of what the main article offers. United States Marine Corps is also a Featured Article and a high-importance topic, so we must be careful to keep it withing policy, guidelines, and maintain it as a professional encylopedia article. bahamut0013^words _deeds 10:17, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. other images in the article show Marines wearing the MCCUU, so having that image duplicated is unnecessary.

Terrorists

Please see Wikipedia:Words to avoid. If you describe the military of the United States as terrorist because they blow up buildings and kill civilians, you will annoy a lot of people! Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 17:19, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

MARSOC

You'd probably want to enlist User:RekonDog, he's a more knowledgable subject matter expert than I in that area. I know virtually nothing about Recon or the Special Forces guys compared to what I know about conventional units. bahamut0013^words _deeds 05:07, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings!

I was born in 91, two years after 1989 revolution in Czechoslovakia, but I know really everything about that time...communism and socialism are the worst things on this planet. Thanks to God that both major American parties are "normal", with different views only on social issues. Communists in Czechoslovakia started with killing and arresting all the rich people (my great-grand father include), and then real hell started. You had limited space for living, if your room was too big, you had to build wall in the middle of it. There was no free market, so you couldn't buy anything! You had to stay long lines for food, everybody received same ammounts of food. If you wanted something special, like jeans or oranges, you had to wait in a line for hours in special days. Lot of historical towns were destroyed by their cheap concrete buildings. All the money were sent to Soviet Union instead of spending on education or something, or building and cleaning the cities. No freedom of speech. Only horrible 50 years of going back to middle ages. Unfortunately, lot of people there still vote for communists, and for their allies, called Social Democrats which are sorta same. Their ideas is to have everything ruled by governenment, stealing from the rich people and giving it to unemployment and criminals. I'm proud to be Czech, but I love America and I'm glad I can be here for whole year,. And then, maybe, sometime, for longer time (college, work, etc). We'll see :) --Novis-M (talk) 23:30, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

First off, Welcome to America, and I'm glad to hear you're enjoying your visit. Your short story is quite compelling; I hope that you are able to come back to America after your exchange is over. However, when you do go home, don't forget to tell 'em not only what you saw here, but also the long lines and small rooms you didn't see :^D Fightin' Phillie (talk) 19:48, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Novis-M. You have new messages at Fightin' Phillie's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Great Power

Hey. I just undid your edit for Great power. While I agree a section is needed for the time before WWII, please use a reliable non OR/SYN source for the countries of that time. Once you have one, go ahead and add it. Also, I doubt that China was a great power during 1939 especially since they were invaded by Japan and controlled by Japan. Deavenger (talk) 03:21, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help on the Great Power page. Deavenger (talk) 03:46, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. I looked over the source, however, it does not seem to be a reliable source, but a blog instead, which aren't allowed in Wikipedia. There's one small problem. The source states Japan as a rising great power, not a rising superpower. There is a great difference between great power and superpower. So you could add the source to the Great Power page, but Japan is already stated as a great power. Deavenger (talk) 04:03, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could you check out the discussion page before making any further edits to the article please? Thanks. David (talk) 22:06, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Republican Party

Rather than telling me to reread your version more, perhaps you should actually study and get to know the Republican Party's history. Soxwon (talk) 02:18, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, there have been many bullshit changes to the ideology and I assumed you were making another one. Soxwon (talk) 02:27, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PRC gov type

Hello, Novis-M. You have new messages at Talk:People's_Republic_of_China.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

China discussion

You had asked me to explain more concerning real property on the PRC Talk page, but rather than make that page a forum, it's probably better that we talk here. I worked in China for 6 years and still "own" some property over there, so that's how I know about the laws regarding ownership. If you have any questions, I'll do my best to answer them.LedRush (talk) 14:26, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, sure, it will be definitely better here. Well I wasn't asking only for property, but about the whole let's say "lifestyle" of the country, how everything goes and works, if you can really feel the old imperial-style China and its great culture and traditions, and what do you think about the country and its future, etc etc. Thanks a lot for your time. --Novis-M (talk) 18:49, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I loved China and I loved being there. I spent most of my time in Shanghai, which doesn't really have much of a history. For that reason, I don't think I really experienced too much of an "imperial" culture. Also, the gov't did a lot to stamp out a lot of the traditions, history and culture which were unique to China. If you want a more traditional view of China, Beijing is the place to be. You can see the history in the streets and the museums, and it's a wonderful place to visit.

I feel very optimistic about China's future, both economically and politically. I can sometimes be frustrated with the level of self-denial and navel-gazing which occurs there, but in the end, I still consider Shanghai to be my second home. I still "own" property there and go back at least once a year. I strongly recommend you go there and visit it for yourself. China is so big and different, that everyone comes away with their own view of what it is.LedRush (talk) 19:24, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Novis-M. What part of the discussion in China's Talk page did you referred in the message you left on my personall page, on March? I'd be pleased to help to give a little bit of order and coherence to discussion.DeepQuasar (talk) 21:46, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Back from sleep and errands

Hello, Novis-M. You have new messages at Talk:People's Republic of China.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Cybercobra (talk) 22:11, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

US SOCOM UNITS

Do not undo my edits they are factual and cited, if you and anyone else changes this anymore ill have you reported. im tired of going back and forth with this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spencer1157 (talk • contribs) 21:09, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some More units

Hey Novis-M, my apologies for the hostility, you were right my friend, Iv'e been with wiki for awhile, i just get carried away sometimes. Anyway I just wanted to run this by you, I was thiniking about the US Coast Guard Deployable Operations Group On the US SOCOM Forces page, I was trying to find something that says they are a definitive SOF, maybe you could help?? Spencer1157 spencer1157 (talk) 16:20, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That link was the best i've ever seen for US Special Ops, thankyou Novis-M spencer1157 (talk) 18:10, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to bother again

I was looking at the peoples republic of china talk page to find out if we could change the government type, and i was attacked by these Chinese users about how i don't know what im talking about. at any rate I found some comments of yours in Archive 9 about the name change, did you get anywhere? and what are your thoughts? spencer1157 (talk) 18:45, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ya I just saw it, looks good, good explanation, i tried earlier but i got carried away again so I exited myself. ==spencer1157 (talk) 10:28, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree 100%, email away. ==spencer1157 (talk) 10:31, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation pages

The Manual of style for disambiguation pages states, "Each entry should have exactly one navigable (blue) link to efficiently guide readers to the most relevant article for that use of the ambiguous term. Do not wikilink any other words in the line." That is why I just reverted your linking of Royal Navy on the HMS disambiguation page. -- Donald Albury 21:07, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sad news

Novis-M, I don't know if you are still active or if you have been told but, User:Bahamut0013 with whom you have interacted in the past is no longer with us. He passed away September 16, I would like for you to know that I left a message to this regard on his page: User talk:Bahamut0013. Tony the Marine (talk) 00:43, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Krav Maga

Hey Novis-M. You said "It is normal to list 'in popular culture' sections about every martial art and similar things" which might be true but that doesn't mean the practice is in line with Wikipedia guidelines. From WP:TRIVIA "Avoid creating lists of miscellaneous information" and "Trivia sections should be avoided". That a character from a TV show uses Krav Maga does not help the reader understand what Krav Maga is, it's just a point of trivia. Off the top of my head I can think of three other TV shows that have mentioned the use of Krav Maga and I'm sure there are literally hundreds of more such examples out there which while maybe interesting to some people do not help us understand what Krav Maga is. Now, if someone has written a book or paper on the use of Krav Maga in TV shows and the significance of that, then that might be worth including in the article because it aids in our understanding of the subject of Krav Maga. But creating a list of when Krav Maga was used in TV shows, films, or games, etc., does not help the reader to understand Krav Maga's relationship to popular culture. For an example of how this kind of information can be properly integrated (if at all) read the Influences on culture section from The Simpsons article. It doesn't just list trivial information it places all of it in a context which is then supported by reliable sources. SQGibbon (talk) 23:00, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the thing, it's not really about what you and I think should be in Wikipedia, it's what the community has agreed should be in Wikipedia. And in the case of trivia, the community at large has agreed that it should not be part of the project. If you think trivia sections would benefit the project then you can bring it up with the community at large and try to get it changed — consensus is always changing on something. Another thing to note is that other editors might come along and notice the section and will tag/delete it as well. It's going to be an ongoing issue and given the community view on the subject the section is going to be deleted eventually regardless of what you and I might think about it. SQGibbon (talk) 00:03, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

junior middleweight page

Interim champions aren't included because all an interim title means is that you're the mandatory for the fighter with the actual title. If Koceny fights and beats Baysangurov or if Baysangurov for whatever reason gets stripped or vacates the title, THEN Koceny will be listed alongside the other titlists at 154 pounds but until that happens, he's not an actual world champ. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.235.111.193 (talk) 13:06, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. --Novis-M (talk) 12:15, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Minor edits

I noticed you added some information about game mods on The Lord of the Rings page which added information to the article. In your edit summary I noticed you had marked this edit as M (minor). Your contributions list shows that a majority of your edits are marked as minor while actually changing article content. Minor edits are those that do not change the information in the article, such as spelling or punctuation errors. Edits that change content are regarded as Major edits. Please review Wikipedia's rules regarding the use of the minor edit mark so as to not make this mistake again. Thanks. Akuvar (talk) 23:04, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hells Bells

Your edit of Hells Bells (song) that added reference to Vitali Klitschko seems trivial and fails WP:IPC. I have removed it. Feel free to discuss on the article's talk page if you believe there is significance regarding this reference.—Bagumba (talk) 22:26, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Novis-M. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by NtheP (talk) 13:11, 5 January 2013 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template.[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Prizefighter series, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page American (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:13, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Czech help needed

Hello Novis-M, I'm contacting you because we need some Czech translators to help with the deployment of the new VisualEditor on cs.wikipedia. There are help pages, user guides, and description pages that need translating, as well as the interface itself. The translating work is going on over on MediaWiki: Translation Central. I also need help with a personal message for the Czech Wikipedians. If you are able to help in any way, either reply here, or head over to TranslationCentral. Thanks for your time, PEarley (WMF) (talk) 23:40, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of equipment of the Russian Ground Forces

The information about reserves was displayed on two places,I deleted only one place.Sry for bad English xDD — Preceding unsigned comment added by RussianBear158 (talk • contribs) 18:05, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited European Parliament election, 2014, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Civic Democratic Party (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your account will be renamed

Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Novis-M. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Novis-M~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours,
Keegan Peterzell
Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation

01:51, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Danish election results

Hello Novis. Please join the discussion on the article talk page and gain consensus for your edits. This is expected as part of the WP:BRD cycle. Thanks, Number 5 7 18:55, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Program used for opinion polls

Hi, I use Excel and poll averages (which I calculate with Excel too) to have the graphs done. Excel also allows to calculate it with moving averages, but it only tends to look cool when there is a large quantity of opinion polls. Impru20 (talk) 11:39, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 25 October

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Next Dutch general election page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:47, 26 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) 16:22, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Novis-M. 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]

Program

How to make the graphs about the intention to vote of the polls in the elections, Novis-M? With which program? I would like to help you, but I wanted to do the same design as you. Thank you very much and answer me when you can! --Oriololmo (talk) 16:47, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Novis-M. 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 2018 election voter message

Hello, Novis-M. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 2020

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

I noticed your recent edit to Versus populum does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Elizium23 (talk) 16:47, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Novis-M, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your additions to Versus populum have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Elizium23 (talk) 16:51, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

March 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Versus populum, you may be blocked from editing. Sundayclose (talk) 17:22, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disrupting Wikipedia? You are funny. I've been contributing to Wikipedia for about 11 years, with over 3 thousand edits and over 60 established articles. Now, just because someone disagrees with some ideas, and keeps reverting it, doesn't mean they are right and I am not. The quotes I used are not that long and I used only three of them. Nothing wrong with it and nothing against Wikipedia rules. --Novis-M (talk) 17:25, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you're an expert on Wikipedia, you should be familiar with WP:COPYRIGHT, WP:COPYVIO, WP:BRD, and WP:CONSENSUS. I suggest that you review them instead of edit warring. Sundayclose (talk) 17:31, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am no expert. But I believe I have added a lot of quality content, including images, graphs, infoboxes, etc. What I absolutely hate is quick reverting of someone's editations, citing vague "Wikipedia policies" - when the real issue is just "ideological" disagreement. Many articles used 10 times longer citations than I have and nobody has a problem with it. Not many people, like I just did, actually buy a book and then cite it. I haved added three citations and suddenly it's the end of the world. If I thought something was wrong with someone's editation, I would try to work with the editor on some concensus, try to perhaps reduce the length of citations, or use different sources. I would never resort to outright reversion of the fellow editor's contribution, and would never threaten them with banning. --Novis-M (talk) 18:50, 15 March 2020 (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) 01:31, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:12, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

BLP

wp:blp also applies to article talk pages. Slatersteven (talk) 17:04, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 00:30, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What a RS is

You use random WP:BLOGs such as Mary's Secretary, Rorate Caeli or Tradition In Action as sources. Those source are unacceptable, they are not WP:RSs. Please read WP:RS before adding any other source. Veverve (talk) 07:59, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:31, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

Hello, I'm Doug Weller. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to 2024 United States presidential election have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 10:44, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lol Novis-M (talk) 11:37, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So you are happy with adding content contradicting the source. Interesting. Says a lot about you and your integrity. Doug Weller talk 13:30, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok Novis-M (talk) 13:34, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Contentious topic alert for related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Doug Weller talk 10:46, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:18, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]