Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:41, 4 November 2006

Back from Wikibreak

It is good to be back! We had a great trip, and my wife was happy to see me away from the computer for a change. I will probably be a bit slow in catching up, but at least I am back now. - Mauco 20:55, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Glad to see you back, Mauco, I missed you. Is so boring Misplaced Pages without you! Don't forget the Request for Mediation where you are expected.--MariusM 21:57, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, but you almost sound like EvilAlex who says that life gets boring without Misplaced Pages edit wars. That is not what we are here for, let us all remember that. I will head over to the mediation page now, but you already know that I have my own particular opinion about that. Tsk, tsk. - Mauco

EvilAlex is an inspiring wikipedian model for me, I admire his commitment for truth, in-depth knowledge of facts and sense of humour.--MariusM 12:40, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Are you going to hang out the Auschwitz slogan on your userpage as well? --Illythr 18:22, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Hehe... I was going to say something similar, but I restrained myself. No need to "bait". And anyway, it is a free world (within the constraints of WP:UP, of course). - Mauco 18:25, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Answer to MarkStreet

Your request is not to me in particular but about the content on the page. I am not the specific editor who inserted the heading that you object to, so any changes should be argued either with him or with all the editors, in which case you should post it on the Talk page of the Transnistria article. My personal Talk page is not the correct venue for opening a discussion of this. - Mauco 13:03, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

"Bridging the Dniester"

Congrats on your first column over there! Marius is already busy advertising it for you here. :-) Well, my personal opinion happens to coincide with yours, although, to be truly neutral, I think you should've mentioned that the habit of "satanizing" the other party is a mutual one in this particular case. Outside the column's scope, I believe that the real causes of the conflict are purely economic interests of all involved parties, with the mudslinging being just a "natural side-effect" thereof. --Illythr 15:44, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

The interesting thing was that I made it a condition that there be no censorship and they respected that completely. They did not even change the name of the place (they prefer "Pridnestrovie" but that would does not appear in my column). With regards to the two sides and being neutral, you could say that I did try to write for the audience, however, I also dished out equal blame. Here is the passage: "One is recognised internationally, the other is not, and both of them are a far cry from showing any tolerance or mutual respect of those who live just a bridge away, on the other side of that river.". Having said that we should probably keep the Talk topical, it is Misplaced Pages and discussions should be primarily edit related as you know. - Mauco 01:01, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I already congratulated you about this article. I have however a question: You wrote: "Working with Moldovans, they had told me in no uncertain terms that this newspaper is an apologist for rebels, a Kremlin mouthpiece". With what Moldovans you worked? I hope you don't consider me a moldovan.--MariusM 18:58, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I do not. I also do not let my professional activities interfere with Misplaced Pages. I deal with Moldovans on a daily basis. If you have questions on this, please send me an email because this userpage is not the proper place for non-Misplaced Pages topics which are not related to collaborative editing. See WP:UP. - Mauco 19:04, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I've sent you an e-mail with some questions. We can continue our disscusion through e-mail.--MariusM 20:35, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

3RR notice

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert a single page more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. — Nearly Headless Nick 15:49, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. This is noted, and I have participated in the discussion of this matter on both the 3RR page and in the article's Talk page, urging others to do the same. - Mauco 15:51, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Take care at 3RR rule at Transnistria article. Friendly advice.--MariusM 19:53, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, likewise. - Mauco 20:06, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Article suggestion

Good suggestion regarding that 'non native' article, I have put a reporter on it MarkStreet Oct 23 2006

You have my permit to let your guy freely use whatever you want from the research that I've done so far in the matter. I don't really have anything else except from what is posted on Talk:Transnistria and a little bit in the discussion page for G. Marakutsa, so just give him the links and tell him to go to town. Other than what is available here, I don't possess any other info. There are no edits to this effect in main namespace. - Mauco 03:46, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Uh, did you just archive an ongoing (even heated, I'd say) discussion with Vecrumba? (*baffled*) --Illythr 13:50, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes/no: The discussion is now continuing in History of Transnistria, to avoid content forking. Then we will move a summary of that article into main Transnistria when done. - Mauco 13:56, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I'll move his arguments there, then. There appears to be some sort of miscommunication between you to... --Illythr 14:12, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Transnistria smuggling

Hi William, sorry for the delay in my reply but I was not very active on Misplaced Pages last week. I would be glad to work with you on the crime/smuggling section. What are the main points you wish to address? TSO1D 21:37, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

leaving

Hi Mauco, i have decided that my time here is completely wasted. We differed on many things but may I say you were about the only voice of reason here . It is really pointless for me being here if I am restricted to the talk page and even there my pleas to debate the important issues get ignored, When we do reach agreement on an issue that would present TD in a more normal light, these changes are seldom if ever made. It is depressing to read. MarkStreet 27th Oct

User Girla often feels the same way, just so you know. However, he has decided to "stick it out" just to make sure that ulta-nationalistic trolls don't poison the encyclopedia with their pet interpretations of important historical events. - Mauco 21:11, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

3RR

Friendly advice: Take care of 3RR rule.--MariusM 22:29, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

maps

My sources for the various Khazar-themed maps included the Cassell Atlas of World History by John Haywood and the Penguin Atlas of Russian History (Puffin, 1995) as well as descriptions given in a number of secondary sources. The maps are approximations though- they should not be used to "prove" that x kingdom ruled x region at x point in time. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 03:33, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

The Sviatoslav map you cite was created by me too... serious objections were raised to it and it has been removed from the Sviatoslav I of Kiev article. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 05:23, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I am actually aware of that. Irpen participated in that discussion. In fact, I would never use a selfmade map from Misplaced Pages as a source for anything. My question was merely focused on your sources. So far, I have identified five sources which pretty much say the same thing and give equally overlapping years (950 - 962 - 970). These five are all reputable, academic sources. I am specifically not counting Misplaced Pages, biased websites, political parties and so on. - Mauco 05:58, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

The Primary Chronicle

Oh and, umm, sorry for not replying for so long - I'll give the Chronicle a try, but the language there is so different from modern Russian that in reads like gibberish for most of the time to me. I can still try and get some useful bits and pieces from it, but it'll take a while to study. --Illythr 03:48, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, if it is hard for you, imagine how it is for someone like me whose knowledge of Russian comes from reading books. - Mauco 04:00, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Asking others help

Hi Mauco, I have a question. In Transnistria talk page you accused me for asking Dpotop input about this article. You presented this as a major violation of Misplaced Pages guidelines but you also used the same methods, as I answered on that page. I don't understand why you accused me of bringing other people on the pages we have disputes, as you used the same methods. I never was the first to accuse you for asking others to team with you, I only answered at your accusation. In fact, I am not convinced is something wrong to ask input from other users, is only you who made such a problem from that, and it seems for me there is some hypocrisy here. For "History of Transnistria" you asked now the help of Russian user Ghirlandajo. No problem for me, but why you keep accusing me for similar behaviour? Try to be consistent in what you consider a good behaviour in Misplaced Pages, don't use double standards, and it will be more easy for others to WP:AGF for you.--MariusM 13:09, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Asking known experts in a specific field for a help with fact-checking in a specific historic matter where I am not myself an expert is not the same as canvassing for supporters and engaging in wholesale vote shopping, as would have been clear if you had included DIFFs. My behavior is hardly comparable to yours. Pleeeeeease...... - Mauco 23:21, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Re: "enthusiatic followers"

Would you be able to show me some examples? If it's an anon it's most likely Bonaparte, which would therefore give me the right to block him. Khoikhoi 06:14, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

No, they are the ones who engage in the lame edit wars on Talk on several Transnistria-related subject (my specialty and area of expertise). They have taken to studying my contribs now. Anyway, I don't want them blocked. It is disruptive, of course, but if it gets too out of hand I think that the next step will just be an RfC or two. Hopefully it won't even come to that. - Mauco 06:19, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Thanks for clarifying...are there any specific pages you'd like me to check out? Khoikhoi 06:22, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Alright, no problem. If the stalking gets out of hand, post something at WP:AN/I. BTW, also make sure you don't do the same thing. ;-) Ciao. Khoikhoi 06:38, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

I hear you loud and clear! It is not cool to disrupt to make a point but this particular one which you mention was just a bit over the top -- literally first-first-first AND had already been reverted by another editor, prior to me going there. - Mauco 06:45, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Alright. All that matters is that your understood my point. Khoikhoi 06:51, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Sheriff

Hi William,

Thanks for your friendly note. I appreciate that you are asking for a third opinion on this matter. You know, I don't know a whole lot about Transnistria, except that it's a hotly contested area in Eastern Europe. I certainly don't feel qualified to weigh in on the topic itself, although I will note it is an awfully short article for the disproportionately large discussion on the talk page, which exceeds the article itself by several times! However, if you need administrator assistance, or advice on how to make the article more neutral, this sort of edit worries me, as it doesn't appear NPOV. Can you at least back that assertion up with a specific incident when they were confrontational? For example, a specific date when a confrontation happened? This will at least clear up the notion that such a statement isn't NPOV: if a confrontation actually took place, it is easy to document it using WP:CITE. If it was just a comment in a newspaper or something, consider the idea that maybe you're giving it too much undue weight. If there's an article on Sheriff on another language edition of Misplaced Pages that is longer, such as the Romanian edition, you could use that to try to model this article. Feel free to contact me again if the issue remains "hot". Best wishes and happy editing, Firsfron of Ronchester 04:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Firsfron, it was on purpose that I picked you at random from the AM list, since I didn't want any indications of inappropriateness on my part. Your non-specialist status is just what we need: Someone who is not an expert on the area will be able to look at it with a cool head and see things from a Misplaced Pages point of view, not from the POV of a participant. In the matter of the confrontational Renewal-Smirnov position, which you specifically asked about, these eight different sources all back up the statement. To save you from wading through all of them, a summary of the key points from each of these can be seen here: Talk:Renewal_(Transnistria)#Sources. Basically, the request was not to ask you to "take sides" or rule on who is right in a content dispute, but just to provide some detached Misplaced Pages policy/guidelines guidance on what is appropriate for such an article and what is not, in terms of relevance and criteria for inclusion and exclusion. - Mauco 04:45, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

3RR board

In connection with the message left there by Marius, please heed to an advice to not ever revert war whoever you are dealing with. Marius' ridiculous previous attempt to "win" via the at once rejected ArbCom submission suggests that there are indeed certain problems with this user. But rv warring is not ever a solution. --Irpen