| Revision as of 00:54, 20 November 2007 editAlice (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,878 edits Edit warring and disruption← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:57, 20 November 2007 edit undoPerspicacite (talk | contribs)6,334 edits Undid revision 172603507 by Alice.S (talk)Next edit → | ||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
| == ] and ] == | == ] and ] == | ||
| ] looks to be a split from ]. Given that the main bank article really isn't that long, I don't think it needed to be split out, and redirecting your collapse article to the ] section would be preferable. However, before I go do anything, I wanted to ask you why you split the collapse information out to a separate article. thanks! -- ] (]) 06:16, 18 November 2007 (UTC) | ] looks to be a split from ]. Given that the main bank article really isn't that long, I don't think it needed to be split out, and redirecting your collapse article to the ] section would be preferable. However, before I go do anything, I wanted to ask you why you split the collapse information out to a separate article. thanks! -- ] (]) 06:16, 18 November 2007 (UTC) | ||
| ==] and ]== | |||
| You have been warned before about continually using simple and multiple reverts to destroy good faith and productive edits - especially when, out of laziness or ignorance (I know not which), you put back into our articles damaged templates or clear breaches of ]. | |||
| Please cease to characterise anyone that edits an article that you have also edited or started as a "Stalker". | |||
| In today's episode (one of many recently) you insisted that isolated years such as 1975 and 1989 ''should'' be wikilinked while ''reverting'' the correct formatting of "] ]" to "August 28, 1997 (unlinked). Please edit incrementally - even though it takes longer - and you will be more likely to keep the "good stuff" while changing what you believe to be "bad": | |||
| In these two reverts: and you lost the <nowiki>{{reflist}}</nowiki> template. Do you not understand that this is required to display any citations at all - or is it just sloppy reverting rather than editing that is making you look ignorant in your behaviour? ] 00:54, 20 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 00:57, 20 November 2007
Archive
Angolan Civil War
Hi, I saw you removed the infobox image on Angolan Civil War. While you are correct in that the tank is Croatian, the picture is of combat in the Angolan Civil War. Cuba bought many tanks from Eastern Europe which it used in the 70s and 80s when it invaded Angola. Would you mind restoring it? If there is any question as to the accuracy of its placement, see the Spanish Misplaced Pages article - they also use it in the infobox there. Jose João 06:11, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- I removed it because it is of a Croatian T-55 at Barbara Range, an SFOR drive-around-and-blow-stuff-up area near Glamoč, in Bosnia. There is no apparent connection between that picture and the Angolan Civil War. --Dynaflow babble 06:21, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- Really? How do you know the tank was in Glamoc? I added it based on what I found at the Spanish Misplaced Pages. Jose João 06:25, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- The winter-weight, rather un-Cuban-looking uniforms and the residual snow at higher elevations on the hillsides tipped me off, and the summary on the image page (Image:HVO Army T-55 Glamoc firing MG.jpg) confirmed it. I've also gone and removed the images from es.wikipedia. --Dynaflow babble 06:45, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- Hahaha thanks. Jose João 07:04, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- I've been looking into another, related article at es.wiki (es:Guerra de la frontera de Sudáfrica), and I've found more of the same pattern of semi-random image choices. The picture in the infobox is of a Eurocopter belonging to the (post-reunification) governement of Hong Kong, there's a picture of a Vektor Y3 automatic grenade launcher that I'm not sure had even been invented at the time of the border war, the illustration of a MiG-23 has it with Polish markings, the image of the UN peacekeeper is from the Bosnian War, and the group picture of UN personnel is of Czech members of the United Nations Guards Contingent in Iraq. I would remove the images from the article myself, but my Spanish isn't good enough to adequately explain what I'm doing, and I'd likely be reverted as a petty vandal. I'm assuming, based on your bringing things from es.wiki to en.wiki, that you know Spanish. If so, would it be possible for you to do the removal and tell the es.wiki people why it needed to be done? I just don't trust Babelfish enough for that kind of translation. Thanks. --Dynaflow babble 21:02, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Barings Bank and Barings Bank collapse
Barings Bank collapse looks to be a split from Barings Bank. Given that the main bank article really isn't that long, I don't think it needed to be split out, and redirecting your collapse article to the Barings Bank#Events leading to Barings Bank's collapse section would be preferable. However, before I go do anything, I wanted to ask you why you split the collapse information out to a separate article. thanks! -- ArglebargleIV (talk) 06:16, 18 November 2007 (UTC)