Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:09, 22 March 2006

ARCHIVES:

• User talk:Ghirlandajo/Winter 2005
• User talk:Ghirlandajo/Summer 2005
• User talk:Ghirlandajo/Autumn 2005
• User talk:Ghirlandajo/Christmas 2005
• User talk:Ghirlandajo/Winter 2006

A question

• How to translate to English the title of this article? many thanks -- Vald 08:14, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Cappella Palatina, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Gurubrahma 11:43, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thanks for your voting!

Hi, thanks for your voting on my RFA. It has finished with the result 88/14/9, and I am promoted. I am really overwhelmed with the amount of support I have got. With some of you we have edited many articles as a team, with some I had bitter arguments in the past, some of you I consider to be living legends of Misplaced Pages and some nicks I in my ignorance never heard before. I love you all and I am really grateful to you.

If you feel I can help you or Misplaced Pages as a human, as an editor or with my newly acquired cleaning tools, then just ask and I will be happy to assist. If you will feel that I do not live up to your expectation and renegade on my promises, please contact me. Maybe it was not a malice but just ignorance or a short temper. Thank you very much, once more! abakharev 07:34, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

AfD vote

Hi, Since you are an experienced editor who has edited articles about acting in the past, I'm asking if you could take a look at this AfD regarding Jason Bennett. This article was posted by an editor who claims that he is one of the great acting teachers, but to me it sounds like an advertisement. He keeps inserting links to his acting school in anything related to Stanislavsky and method acting, I've notice you have reverted some in the past. Since I am not an actor, I am only able to judge based on the claims the article makes - I cannot find ANY third-party sources regarding his notability, only listings in commercial directories of acting schoools. If you have the time, your vote and comment would be appreciated. Thank you, Marcuse 16:14, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

I just wanted to say thank you for voting for my RFA, of course if you ever need a hand, let me know :) - cohesion★talk 23:09, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Studion, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Gurubrahma 03:34, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Jarilo

Thx for the input on Zbruch idol. I did a little rewriting and added a pic. Mayhaps you could take a look at new Jarilo article? Cheers -Hierophant 20:00, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Guus Hiddink

Hi, Guus isn't the national manager of Russia yet - nothing official has been announced (even despite the claims of the title of this page , if you read the article it says: I emphasize this once more: the Russian Football Union does not confirm Hiddink’s appointment. Also, he wouldn't be able to take over until after the world cup even if he were to become the next Russian manager. Cursive 14:04, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

interwiki links for GLBT cat

There is nothing out there. I've checked all links. Perhaps, someone should find appropriate (new) cats. I've checked German one and find only smth. called de:Liste historischer Persönlichkeiten, bei denen eine homo- oder bisexuelle Identität diskutiert wird --tasc 17:07, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Pavel Kiselyov, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Gurubrahma 17:34, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Knyaz Talk

All right, thank you for the information, and I apologise for making it look like I was using it for chat. I wasn't; you didn't read me getting personal or asking personal details about users...but I've told many people before, we are all human and sometimes we get excited. Watch a session of British Parliament and you'll see nobody is excluded. So far, most Wikipedians have been very good in they have answered questions which I have asked, related to whichever topic the page is on. I ask the questions because things are unlcear, or certain facts are not presented. Always remember, presentations are for everyone, not just those with 95% prior knowledge...I also know that Knyaz can be KNEZ in some languages, like Serbo-Croat and Macedonian (-ez). So I am still convinced that an earlier word in the language which gave birth to Germanic and Slavic featured a word from which Kuningas is taken - and your word Knyaz. OR, it might just be the case that the two words evolved seperately by accident...I mean what is to say that Knyaz was not something more Slav-like before? Celt 1 March 2006

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Nikolay Mordvinov, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Gurubrahma 09:59, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Mariinsky Theatre v. Bolshoi v. Imperial

Just after writing this but before sending, I looked at the discussion page of the Mariinsky article. It solves some of the issues, but not all. Shall post a version of this on that page also.

After finding a reference to on the Verdi page to the premiere of "La forza del destino" taking place in the "Imperial Theatre" in Saint Petersburg, I found that the link went nowhere, so created a link to the Mariinsky.

As you know, I also highlighted the name of the Imperial Theatre within the body text because I assumed that this indeed was the Imperial Theatre before a name change, but you changed it back.

So, that sent to me various texts to see what the source of all this is was, and I found the following:

Budden, Vol. 2,(paperback), notes on page 427 a letter to the composer asking "would Verdi consider a commission from the Imperial Theatre of St Petersburg".

Phillips-Matz, page 439, says "a proposal from the Imperial Theatre" was sent to Verdi in December 1860.

NOW - Budden gives the first performance as: "Bolshoi Theatre on 10 November 1862" (p.426), whereas Phillips-Matz states in the Appendix: "premiere at Imperial Theatre", same date as Budden, (page 893).

THEN - I looked at Thierry Beauvert's Operas Houses of the World and he refers to the "Bolshoi Theatre" constructed in 1783, rebuilt in 1817 after a fire; then later to the 1855 Circus Theatre which burnt down and was reconstructed by Cavos (sic) as the Mariinsky. (page 68). But he states (page 72) that the world premiere of Forza "was a work commissioned for the Maryinsky" (sic).

SO - what are your sources for any of the Mariinsky page? Can we assume that the "Bolshoi" is the same as the "Imperial"??? Who's right, who's wrong?

PS: books named above are referenced in the Verdi article, plus the Beauvert is on the Opera houses page.

Any ideas?? I'd like to solve this mystery..... Vivaverdi 19:33, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

• Re-writing makes a lot more sense now. Well done.
• I've added a note, based on Beauvert, re: the post-Revolution name of the theatre pre-Kirov.

The Opera magazine book names it as the "State Academic Theatre of Opera and Ballet" 1917- 1934. Which is a better English translation???

• We still have the issue of Verdi's "Forza"; was it premieried at the Mariinsky??

Vivaverdi 15:15, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Your rewrite of your re-write is excellent and adds great value to the original text. I'm glad that you have re-visted the article in light of the confusion of names, etc. over the years.

QUESTION: I read that the name was changed after the Revolution. Did it take as long as 1920 to happen?

QUESTION: by your continued inclusion of the Mariinsky being the site for Verdi's "Forza", can we assume that there is authentic backup for that??

Vivaverdi 01:29, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Molobo and 153.19.48.103

I seems quite plausible that Molobo is 153.19.48.103; and I've put in a req for CU. But do you have any particular evidence? William M. Connolley 19:50, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Women in Russian/Soviet military history

You're always creating new articles. Would you like to collaborate again? If my understanding is correct, the Soviet Union had more female combatants in World War II than any other other major participant. If you're willing to handle the bulk of the research I can supplement a little and copyedit on whatever aspect of the subject strikes your fancy. Regards, 68.101.254.59 02:52, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for restoring "Talk:Slavic peoples"

My removal of most of the comments was not on purpose. Just a result of a mistake I made.

Walks.ru

Алексей Трошин дал полное разрешения на walks.ru, скачивай чего хочешь, вот шаблон http://commons.wikimedia.org/Template:Walks.ru на пользования.--Kuban Cossack 18:23, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Great news, thanks. --Ghirla 18:25, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

New sock?

Hi, you may want to have to have a look at this: Stefan cel Mare (talk · contribs) --Latinus 16:41, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the alert. --Ghirla 18:54, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

St. Petersburg

Hello Ghirlandajo - fascinating name!  Just seen some banter between yourself and User:ALC Washington as regards the above redirection/disambiguation page, so wondered how I might help fix the situation. As neither a Russian nor American, I don't understand why having St. Petersburg as a disambiguation page is "trolling". The St. Petersburg previously known as Leningrad and Petrograd (and, incidentally, a city I look forward to visiting, not least for the Hermitage Museum) is what first comes to mind when I hear or read "St. Petersburg", but I'm also aware of its namesake in Florida. Best wishes, David Kernow 17:50, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Ghirlandajo, I'm a little disappointed by your edit summary and revert at St. Petersburg, which would seem of a lack of desire on your part to WP:AGF. I hope we can clear the air and disucss the pros and cons of doing different things in a rational manner on the Talk:Saint Petersburg page. But to answer your very serious accusations in your edit summaries, my edits were made after making a fairly detailed and, I think, thoughtful proposal on the Saint Petersburg talk page. After over a month without reply on a rather well-trafficked page, I took this to be acquiesence to the changes I have proposed. To the extent that you disagree with the changes I have proposed, you have not said so on the talk page, despite the fact that my edit summary of "St. Petersburg" directs the dicussion there. So my edit had in fact been open for discussion for quite a while, and was hardly trolling. Since neither of us want to violate the WP:3RR, let's discuss this on the Talk:Saint Petersburg page. See you there. ALC Washington 18:26, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Just posted to ALC Washington's talk page:

On second thoughts, since there seem to be only two (notable) places in the world named St./Saint Petersburg, I reckon the status quo ("St. Petersburg" redirects to "Saint Petersburg"; "St. Petersburg, Florida" and "Saint Petersburg" each include {{otheruses4}} directs to each other) is fine. Worldwide I'd guess the Russian St. Petersburg is significantly more well-known than the Floridian (correct adjective?). Best wishes, David Kernow 16:23, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry you felt unable to say hello. Best wishes, David Kernow 16:26, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Maslenitsa

Hello. Just wanna let you know that a link to the Maslenitsa page is on the MainPage today, on 'Forgiveness Sunday'. Happy Maslenitsa. :-) -- PFHLai 00:26, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

And don't forget that tomorrow is Pure Sunday, when new page in life must be started. As today is Forgiveness Sunday, I apologize for any wrong doings which may have displeased my colleagues here in Misplaced Pages :)) --Ghirla 00:34, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Baku Khanate

Hi. My information that it was general Bulgakov (no first name given) and Glazenap who has taken Baku, not Gudovich as you stated, so I have changed the article. Please provide your sources. Also, Baku was taken without a fight as the khan fleed at the advance of Russian forces Abdulnr 01:10, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Image of 1000 ruble

The image you uploaded, Image:Rouble jarislaw.jpg, could be renamed to Russia1000rubles97front.jpg to be consistent with the other ruble images. See Russian ruble. --Chochopk 11:33, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

DYK nominations

Thank you for the recent DYK nominations of my translations! It was really nice to see my work linked from the Main Page. Kusma (討論) 02:06, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Did you know??

Hi Ghirla, you have come up with excellent suggestions for DYK on a regular basis. You may be interested in having a look at this. --Gurubrahma 06:41, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Hermitage Theatre, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Gurubrahma 13:02, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Saint Demetrius

Hi, curious as to why you replaced my uploaded scanned icon of St Dimitrios, as I did not understand your reasoning: restored authentic image instead of kitchy copyvio. Cheers, Dimitri --Maggas 02:33, 7 March 2006 (ACDST)

Because I prefer encyclopedic articles to be illustrated with authentic images (a 12th-century mosaic in this case) rather than outsized contemporary comics-like pictures with violent colours which are claimed to be "private domain". Cheers, Andrey. --Ghirla 16:07, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Please help

Hi Ghirlandajo,

I really need your help with a user who wants to move Sukhum to Sukhumi. He denys that Abkhazia is independent and is trying to push the Georgian POV. See the discussion at User_talk:Khoikhoi#Sukhumi and User_talk:Papa_Carlo#Sukhumi. Please help, thanks. --Khoikhoi 06:55, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I was actually wondering if you could talk to him why on Misplaced Pages the page should be at Sukhum, not Sukhumi. I've argued with him long enough. --Khoikhoi 07:18, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, but I have to say that I don't really care anymore. I don't mean to be rude, but I've talked with Papa Carlo so much about it that I suddenly have no more interest in it. Thanks anyways though. --Khoikhoi 00:48, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Copy & paste moves

I am sorry. I did not know how to move the page properly. I asked Khoikhoi, but his way did not work. He also did not mention anything about WP:RM. Do you think he forgot?

As for listing it on WP:RM and voting I'd like to see the discussion and vote when the name was movedby in the first place. Is this information accessible?

Also can you please clarify what will happen if I just revert to the version prior to the last move (there's practically no editing done since this move)? Is that allowed? (PaC 07:17, 7 March 2006 (UTC))

Sukhumi

user:El C carelessly deleted the page when he was making his page move. I will restore the history. mikka (t) 07:25, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Although I appreciate your help in restoring the article's history to normalcy, I don't think that Sukhumi is the proper name. It is passing out of use in Russia and, when I went to Gagra last year, I never heard it used it Abkhazia as well. Probably a vote would be helpful to determine which name is proper. Previously, the subject was discussed on User talk:Khoikhoi and User talk:Papa Carlo. --Ghirla 17:40, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Re : Nomination for adminship for (aeropagitica)

Hello! Thank you for taking the time to vote for me in my recent request for adminship It ended successfully with a final score of (40/10/5). I value all of the contributions made during the process and I will take a special note of the constructive criticism regarding interacting with users in the user talk space. If you have questions or requests, please leave a message.  (aeropagitica)  17:33, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Варшава

A friendly reminder of WP:POINT policy. --Lysy 19:15, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

If you don't want such things appear in articles on all the Polish towns, please moderate your friends Molobo and Kosmak. Thanks, Ghirla 19:17, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Frankly, I don't mind Варшава appearing in the article. Maybe the context is a bit inappropriate, but it used to be the name of the city for quite some time. This said, I'm really fed up with all these name-wars but have no idea what can be done about this other than a strict policy. --Lysy 19:36, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Ummm, no.

I'm sorry, but Hermitage Museum simply can't remain that way. I'm surprised it lasted for so long in that condition, frankly. I did get pretty picky with my edits, and I'm willing to compromise, but a lot of those POV adjectives need to go. See: peacock terms. --Berserk798 23:19, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm willing to compromise, too. As I have 100 times as much edits as you, I didn't like it when you started to preach me the basics of editing. As I person who studied Rembrandt almost professionaly, I'm positive that the Hermitage's collection is the best. And I'm sure that its collection of ancient gold is "breathtaking", as the world has no other to compare it with. --Ghirla 23:25, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Well I understand why I put you off, and the article is written well, but for it to really be an asset to Misplaced Pages we need to clean up some of the adjectives. Perhaps the collection of gold is breathtaking, but you shoud tell more about it so people realize how amazing it is without using peacock words. I don't mean to be preachy. --Berserk798 02:45, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Please respond. This article can't remain calling the faberge collection "superb" or the ancient gold collection "breathtaking". We can't describe anything as being "tragic". This has to change, and if you want it to still be to your liking, I'm willing to discuss, plan, and compromise. --Berserk798 17:55, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Question

Hi there, Andrey! I incidentally found out that your picture of the Chudov Monastery in fact shows the Ascension Monastery, or Воскресенский монастырь. I'm not sure if I'm right, but see for yourself. http://www.dionisy.com/dionisy/34/ KNewman 13:10, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

But it never presumed to show the Chudov monastery. The caption says that it is the Ascension convent (a neo-Gothic church by Carlo Rossi). As both monasteries were situated close by, I don't think there is something criminal in our illustrating the Chudov article with a picture of the Ascension convent. --Ghirla 13:22, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Gotcha. KNewman 18:00, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Sanguszko

My dear Andrey (Ghirlandajo), why do you say so taxative: (I quote) "Like other princely houses of Poland, its origin has been considered murky"? Gustav Korwin-Szwedowski 02:42, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Answered on User_talk:Gustav Korwin-Szwedowski --Ghirla 09:55, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Vyborg

Please, you insist I present my point at the talk page, but you fail to comment them and instead revert back immediately. Why? I agree, that Siege of Leningrad is relevant in Continuation War article, but could you please tell why it is relevant in Vyborg article? --Whiskey 08:32, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

It is not good to deny community opinion in order to push your nationalist POV. Your deletions are just inacceptable. I listed the article on WP:RFC and asked for a third opinion of other editors. --Ghirla 08:40, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I've not so familiar with RFC process, should we produce some kind of presentation of our differing views? --Whiskey 10:45, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Although this issue is already in RFC, I'd like to try to find solution also here. I do believe, that most of the differences here arise from misunderstanding; language, shortly written entries, different philosophy on enclyclopedic articles etc.

First, I do fully recognize that Finland contributed to the siege of Leningrad, and it should be present in relevant articles. Second, I also recognize the lethality of the siege, and also it should be presented in relevant articles.

Third, I believe that article Vyborg is about the geographical location, its history and especially its present day and everything which is presented there should have strict connection to it.

And it is this test that disputed text fails to address. The siege of Leningrad was 130km away. Finns severing connections around Lake Ladoga happened one and half months before capture of Vyborg and over 170km away, too widely spaced in time and space to being relevant.

Also, it sets a bad example, as using it it would be possible to add anything to every article which could have nothing to do with an article in reality. (Like Vladivostok: "During WWII Finns never get even close to Vladivostok, but elsewhere..." or Cordoba:"During Napoleonic War French-Spanish fleet was defeated in the Battle of Trafalgar, only 200km from the town...", really, not a good idea.)

At the bottom of same chapter as our disputed text, there is a mention of another battle, Battle of Tali-Ihantala. Is it relevant? In fact it is, as both Tali and Ihantala villages were part of Vyborg municipality. Not the town itself, but the municipality surrounding the town (http://www.luovutettukarjala.fi/pitajat/viipurinmlk/viipurinmlkkart.htm).

On the siege of Leningrad, I'd really like to know when the last rail connection and land connection from the town was severed and where. I consider they should be told in the article of the siege.--Whiskey 10:50, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Actions speak louder than words...

....and so, I indeed consider it a privilege to award you the inaugural DYK medal. Keep up the great work!! btw, with the main page re-design and with changes in process for {{C-uploaded}} images, I'm thinking of some changes in the DYK updation process so that a slighly higher no. of admins can update the same. --Gurubrahma 10:01, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Ghirla, you are welcome. As for your query, as things stand only me and nixie regularly update the DYK. She is on a wikibreak and I too may go on one shortly. Many admins find it daunting to update DYK, as the back-end involves lot of work such as archiving, protecting, uploading etc. apart from checking the history of articles, reading articles etc. So, I am trying to simplify some of the processes so that other admins can find it less daunting and step in when required. A typical updation takes from 15-30 minutes generally. --Gurubrahma 10:18, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry

Dear Andrey your answer is quite convincing. I am sorry, I misunderstood the concept of “murky”. Gustav Korwin-Szwedowski 07:06, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: Turkish Literature FAC

Hi. In your Weak oppose vote on Turkish literature's featured article candidacy, the main reason (as far as I can tell) for your opposition seems to be your statement that "the prose is far from 'compelling'". Fair enough; however, I wonder if you could possibly pinpoint what it is that makes it uncompelling, tell me what problems you see in the prose, etc. If you could do so—either on the candidacy page, my talk page, or the article's talk page—I would greatly appreciate it (especially insofar as only one vote of opposition can prevent a page from being accepted as a featured article). Thanks for your time. —Saposcat 13:51, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Re:DYK

Apologies for the mistakes - I've updated DYK several times in the past before without any trouble, and this time I noticed that it hadn't been updated since before the weekend, and no one was getting to it. As such, I decided to it, but was tired because it was late in the night for my time. Never a good combination; I didn't even notice the repeated "the"... The bolding, though, was from the original nomination; I didn't change it at all. Thanks for fixing everything up, though! Flcelloguy (A note?) 14:44, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Shepilov and Muranov DYK'd

Thanks for chaperoning Shepilov and Muranov through the DYK nomination process!

I have to admit that I am a little ambivalent about the whole idea. How much does an encyclopedia really benefit from having more or less random (although perhaps amusing/informative) facts showcased on its front page? I guess it doesn't hurt and, besides, this is The Brave New World which hidebound conservatives like myself are liable to find bewildering. Back in my day, we edited encyclopedias the old fashioned way, via letters delivered by homing pigeons :) Ahasuerus 20:35, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, that's a reasonable point, although everybody's "command of English" is of necessity "limited", sometimes more than they realize :) Ahasuerus 14:35, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: User:Calmouk

Hi, I tagged his images as "no source". I'll leave him a note regarding public domain too, I've seen worse though. At least he haven't uploaded hundreds of images like that, and those maps seems to be legitemate PD at least. --Sherool (talk) 12:16, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi Ghirlandajo,

Thanks for the barnstar - I really appreciate it. I’ll add some new articles to the Russia portal these days. How can I check if they are already present? Thanks again! Kober 19:14, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Eastern Front

It aint pro-german I have balanced it I made the test page I know what pro german is you should have seen the versions before and the edit war that followed. And there are huge diffrences with my test page and the locked one. That editor who said it is very german centric only wishes to glorify the germans and nothing else dont make comments unless you know the whole story. I have fought for months trying to keep the article neutral. Every fact that I have added I have needed to back up with millions of sources just to equalize what others pulled out of their asses. So dont think for a second that my test page is pro german you have no idea what pro german is if you want to see what pro german is check out the locked page and the versions by ksenon there you will see pro german(Deng 19:37, 14 March 2006 (UTC))

I think we should what Deng is doing the great service to the article. Just check his work. He sometimes does things in haste but overall he had a huge positive impact on the article and I hope he will stay around. Cheers to both of you, --Irpen 19:56, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

The major diffrence Is ofcurse the mention that 4.3 million Germans died and not 2.5 million, also the Bagration now fits with the article operation bagration before it hade way to low german casulties and much higher soviet ones. Also Industrial production is diffrent and all graphs are now black grey and white so that color blind people can read them to. The Industrial production also now mentions that the soviets lost production capacity and the germans gained it by takeing over the lost land. Raw material production was lost by the Soviets and gained by the axis. The introduction is also very diffrent.(Deng 11:05, 15 March 2006 (UTC))

Battle of Krasny Bor

Hi - I did a bit of work on it today to address your concerns. Let me know if you think it is improved now. Andreas 15:53, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Hello, just because you lose more men dosent mean you didnt win also if you have questions about nummbers ask this guy User:Woogie10w and Andreas does have lot of knowledge about ww2 and I dont know shit about that specific battle so I am the wrong person to ask. (Deng 17:39, 15 March 2006 (UTC))

Krasny Bor

You are quite right, of course, that Battle of Krasny Bor refers to a different settlement (namely to an urban settlement of the same name in Leningrad Oblast). There are also at least four other villages of that name elsewhere in Russia (Nizhny Novgorod Oblast included). I will create the dab page. As for Savicheva, looks like she was indeed buried in Nizhny Novgorod Oblast .—Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) 17:42, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. --Ghirla 17:57, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

You are behaving like Molobo did in the Moscow Victory Parade. Please pull yourself together and contribute constructively. Andreas 09:00, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Order of St John

Greetings, I was just curious as to the reasoning behind adding the Russian Orders category to the Order of St John page. From what I understand, having a Russian Commander in the Order would not make it a Russian order. Just curious. --Evadb 18:48, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I think that you might be confusing the Order of St John (or the Most Venerable Order of the Hospital of Saint John of Jerusalem) with other Orders of St John. I'm not sure who gave the article about the MVOSJ such a definitive title, but it clearly states at the top that this article deals with the order after its 19th century revival. The Order discussed in this article is currently a British order of chivalry. I'd be all for renaming the article to more accurately reflect the fact that it is NOT the only Order of St John in the world, but I'm fairly certain that it is not a Russian Order.--Evadb 07:25, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, there is a lot of confusion. I looked through the interwikis - some of these lead to such articles as nds:Johanniter or bg:Хоспиталиери - which are clearly not about the British order. --Ghirla 07:33, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

It seems like the whole situation needs to be reorganized. The Dutch and German Johanniter Orden are both allied with the British Order and with the SMOM. Perhaps someone can go through and get everything straightened out.--Evadb 08:21, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

It's easy to be a russophobe vandal...

... apparently, just adding to an article about some aspect of Russian culture or history is sufficient. Or did I miss something vital about your recent reverting of "vandalism" in Kievan Rus? Regards, Burschik 13:53, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Art galleries

When you get a moment, could you please review recent anon additions of art gallery sections to articles on Nizhny Novgorod and Saratov? They are not very informative, but nevertheless POVish. Thanks!—Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) 14:49, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Successful RfA

ru wiki

Hi there, how do you think is it possible to do smth. to improve situation in russian wiki? seems like vandals're not only being majority, but they're trying to get elected for admins. --tasc 17:54, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

DFA

Hi Igor, good to see you again in a new guise. I'm only an occasional wikipede, I'm spending too much time researching Egyptian genealogical and calendrical stuff. But I saw the DFA article and it was an easy one to contribute to. --Chris Bennett 17:53, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Category:Suburbs of Saint Petersburg

Don't worry, I'll take care of it. Thanks!—Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) 17:05, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Marie Palace, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Balchug, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

I'm very unimpressed. This is immature.

I've offered you the opportunity to discuss the changing the article, given you far more time than you needed to respond, and waited patiently. You did nothing, and I'm not going to just leave this alone. I'm now going to list every single change I made to the article and you can tell me why each one is wrong.

• The article states that the Hermitage Museum is the "most important" museum of human history and culture in the world. I removed that statement in accordance to Misplaced Pages's style guide, because it's not a verifiable fact but merely someone's opinion, and that it gives no actual information about the museum.
• I changed "Leonardo" to "Leonardo da Vinci" because many people will not correctly identify the name Leonardo as being Leonardo da Vinci.
• I changed "but there is actually much more to see" to "there are several more collections, however, including" because the former sounds too informal for Misplaced Pages, in my mind. This is, however, very debatable.
• I removed the "superb" description of the Faberge jewellery in accordance to Misplaced Pages's style guide, the POV factor, and because it gives no information about the collection. If you want people to realize how superb it is, tell them facts that show what makes it superb.
• I removed the "breathtaking" description of the ancient gold collection for the same reasons as the "superb" description.
• I removed the statement that describes the German architect as "stylish". This is, obviously, for similar reasons as the two previous edits.
• I removed "its quality is still unsurpassed". Please, don't even argue with this one. The same reasons as "superb" and "breathtaking".
• I think "notable" is more neutral than "remarkable", but this is debatable.
• "Several" means the same exact thing as "a lot" except it sounds more encyclopedic and is less informal. Why do you even have an issue with this?
• Describing some paintings as "somewhat less irreplacable" than others is fallacious and POV. Similar reasons as the "superb" and "breathtaking" edits, but I hope I don't need to go into detail about them.
• The period was only "tragic" in the eyes of some people. Obviously the Soviets didn't think it was too tragic; obviously the people abroad who bought the paintings didn't think it was tragic at all. This is purely, wholly, undebatably POV.
• Saying that the impressionist works were "by far the most precious" is POV for obvious reasons as well.
• Misplaced Pages is not given the right to judge whether or not works of art are "incredible". I don't think we should be describing this movie as such.

If you can reasonably explain to me how all of this is "fact" and not just POV, advertisement, and BS, go ahead. I'm willing to discuss this. --Berserk798 20:58, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

East-West Schism

Although that section is very poorly written, to the point where I cannot tell exactly what is being described in parts of the second and third paragraphs, it looks reasonably well-balanced to me. One might choose some adjective other than "hot-headed" perhaps, as I'm not certain how possible it is to gauge a historical figure's temprement strictly from his surviving writings, but the premise that there were political intrigue and power games on both sides is basically true. TCC (talk) (contribs) 22:28, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Need help with a POV-pusher

Hey Ghirlandajo,

I really need your help on the Abkhazia page with a pro-Georgian POV-pusher. He's not Georgian (not that it matters), but he continues to attempt to add his own bias to the article. He has cited works such as "History of the Georgian people" and "Making of Georgian Nation"... See the talk page for more information. Thanks. --Khoikhoi 02:44, 22 March 2006 (UTC)