| Revision as of 13:50, 24 February 2004 view sourceChrisO~enwiki (talk | contribs)43,032 edits Sysop - woohoo← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 20:55, 30 April 2015 view source Maintenance script (talk | contribs)Bots398 editsm Maintenance script moved page User talk:ChrisO to User talk:ChrisO~enwiki without leaving a redirect: Automatically moved page while renaming the user "ChrisO" to "ChrisO~enwiki" | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| #REDIRECT ] | |||
| ==Hello== | |||
| I don't know if you realize that your edits are not showing up as by you. | |||
| You've got to be logged in for them to show up under your user name not | |||
| the IP address you're using. Since you seem to be working from a lot of | |||
| different IPs, this is important. | |||
| You also get access to useful features like section editing, the "this is a minor change" checkbox, and watch lists if you make sure to log in first. | |||
| -- ] 22:19, 18 Oct 2003 (UTC) | |||
| Hi ChrisO :) I hope you like the place and choose to ]. | |||
| Some links that may be of use: | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] - ask questions you may have here, or leave a message on my ] | |||
| ---- | |||
| ==Scientology== | |||
| By the way, your last change to ] removed valid content and was biased to one point of view - which is against ] policy. We have to represent all points of view here :) | |||
| Thanks, and keep contributing! ] 01:20, 9 Nov 2003 (UTC) | |||
| I've moved the comment to my talk page, and replied to your concerns at ]. ] 01:43, 9 Nov 2003 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks for your contributions to the Scientology articles. In general, the editing here on Misplaced Pages is pretty much free-for-all, except for when edit wars break out. There are a number of folks keeping an eye on the Scientology articles, and I guess you've seen by now that this particular subject is ''very'' sensitive to some. (No, really?!?) | |||
| When I'm tired of looking at flames and serious stuff about anti-Semitism and the like, I find it relaxing to go and edit fun subjects for a change of pace. --] 00:04, 19 Nov 2003 (UTC) | |||
| ---- | |||
| ==Eduard Shevardnadze== | |||
| Fabulous rewrite of ]! ] 23:35, Nov 29, 2003 (UTC) | |||
| Edit on Soros/Yugoslav connection makes lots more sense, yes. Really good work. | |||
| ] 13:14, 30 Nov 2003 (UTC) | |||
| ---- | |||
| ==Vinca alphabet== | |||
| Thanks for getting involved in ]. ] 15:07, Dec 13, 2003 (UTC) | |||
| ---- | |||
| ==Binational solution== | |||
| I left a note on ]. I hope you will contribute to more mideast articles as your knowledge of it appears uncommonly deep. --] 12:49, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC) | |||
| ---- | |||
| ==Macedonia== | |||
| ] is not ] ---] 09:38, 1 Jan 2004 (UTC) | |||
| ---- | |||
| ==Kosovo== | |||
| Hi I'd just like to say youre re-write of the Kosovo War article is impressive. I've been saying it should be re-written for a long time ] 00:46, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC) | |||
| You've removed Albanian placenames from ], ] and ]. Please don't delete the alternative Albanian names for Kosovo and its communities - the names are internationally recognised as valid and (obviously) are used in Kosovo itself. We have a similar issue in the UK and Ireland, which is resolved in Misplaced Pages articles by giving both the anglicised and the Gaelic or Welsh version of placenames (see for instance ] (''Baile Átha Cliath'') or ] (''Caerdydd'')). In the same way, both Serbian and Albanian versions of placenames should be given in articles about Kosovo localities. -- ] 11:14, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC) | |||
| : Yes, I've removed them and will remove them again. Alternative names are where they should be - at the top of respective articles, from where I will never remove them. Alternative Albanian name for Kosovo is at the top of ] article, alternative name for Pristina is at the top of ] article, and alternative name for Racak should be at the top of ] article when it is created. But there is no need to put alternative names whenever they are mentioned, or parhaps you think that I should put ] (Beograd in ]) wherever Belgrade is mentione, ] (Jugoslavija in ]) wherever Yugoslavia is mentioned, ] (Srbija in ]) wherever Serbia is mentioned, ] (中國 in ], 中国 in ]) wherever China is mentioned... By the way, these are not Albanian names, but Serbian names in Albanian language. I don't see enough paralells between Kosovo and Wales, and think that this decision was also wrong (but won't remove them as I don't care that much). I also don't see that names are "internationally" (regardless of what it means) recognised as valid. ] 08:48, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC) | |||
| :: I don't propose to put the alternative Albanian name for Kosovo at the top of ''every'' Kosovo-related article - I agree that would be unnecessary, and I've not done it on the articles about Kosovo towns - but I think it does need to go in the major history and political articles on the subject. This currently includes ] and ]. On the same principle, if anyone was to do a separate article on Kosovo before 1912, it would be appropriate to give the alternative Turkish and Italian-derived names for the province (e.g. Kossovo, Cassovo). However, where individual towns are discussed in articles specifically about Kosovo (i.e. not simply mentioned in tangentially related articles) it is certainly appropriate to provide the alternative forms, as happens with Celtic placenames. (Incidentally, the English versions of Welsh, Irish and Scottish placenames are usually anglicisations of Celtic originals.) -- ] 11:35, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC) | |||
| ::: Why? ] 07:57, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC) | |||
| :::: Sorry, why what? I don't understand. -- ] 10:15, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC) | |||
| ::::: Why it does need to go in the major history and political articles on the subject? By the way, I've noticed that the situation here is the complete opposite of the situation with Celtic placenames - there you are putting English versions of Celtic placenames and aside them original Celtic names - while here you are putting English versions of Serbian placenames and aside them Albanian versions of Serbian placenames. ] 07:10, 12 Jan 2004 (UTC) | |||
| :::::: Thanks for the clarification. As I'm sure you know, the question of naming in Kosovo is very contentious - using exclusively one version or the other would be a POV (rather like the clash over the name of the ]). If we're to be evenhanded, I think we need at least to acknowledge the existence of both versions. Also, you say that the Serbian placenames are actually given as English versions. Should there be ] characters in them or are they wrongly spelled? I've been relying on the list at -- ] 17:01, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::: I don't see why is the question of naming in Kosovo contentious - there is established practice of English language, and there are a few political groups which would like to change that practice. I surely will not allow that Misplaced Pages is used for promotion of these groups. I don't see why is using names that are already established in English POV (what POV does it represent???) Existence of both versions is acknowledged at respective pages. And you have still failed to give me an explanation about why do Albanian versions of Serbian placenames need to go in the major history and political articles on the subject. ] 15:36, 4 Feb 2004 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::: I've found that there's a discussion going on at ] about place naming issues, so I think it would be a good idea to ask for the participants' advice. I'll post an explanation of the problem and my reasoning - it'd be good if you could give your views as well. Thanks. :-) -- ] 16:54, 4 Feb 2004 (UTC) | |||
| I noticed you included the less obvious pre-conflict stuff in the ] article -- something the page badly needed. Thanks, a lot of it will be recyclable for use in the ] article. --] 00:47, 16 Jan 2004 (UTC) | |||
| ---- | |||
| ==Misinformation== | |||
| Dear Misinformator: Wearing your underpants on the outside is fighting against basic principles of supervillism! :) ] 20:49, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC) | |||
| ---- | |||
| ==Bolshevik amendments== | |||
| Please take a look at my recent proposal in ] ] 16:41, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC) | |||
| == Shining Path == | |||
| Very useful improvements to ] this afternoon; you seem very well informed on the subject. I hope that user:Lancemurdoch stops insisting on calling them the PCP. Perverse if you ask me! -- ] 19:17, 15 Jan 2004 (UTC) | |||
| :Thanks for your note on my Talk page earlier today. I posted a lengthy reply to you and Kewertii apropos of use of the term "terrorist" on my ]. -- ] 23:58, 15 Jan 2004 (UTC) | |||
| ---- | |||
| ==Countries involved in World War II== | |||
| Chris | |||
| I've added a comment at ] that you might be interested in. ] 15:59, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC) | |||
| ---- | |||
| ==Luka and those so-called Helsinki guys== | |||
| Thanks for the information about that so-called Helsinki group that keeps supporting everything that is going on in Belarus. Do you think there is any merit to what they say? When I was in Belarus (about four times before his last election) while I found that the populace was generally enamoured of Lukashenko there were people who were protesting and exercising some of their human rights. It is very difficult to compare a "western" democracy with a post FSU regime as most of the locals are still reminicent of the "good ol'days". ]] 05:22, 28 Jan 2004 (UTC) | |||
| ---- | |||
| I think the Talk page makes it quite clear what has happened. ] 09:11, 1 Feb 2004 (UTC) | |||
| ---- | |||
| ==Anthere's name== | |||
| It is an official attempt to resist some users trying to limit our liberty of choice, as regards user name. Someone suggested that in case some users in different wikipedias had the same name, we could use a code, such as xxyyyy, with xx being a reference to the language of origin, and yyyy a number. This would prevent people from having same username. | |||
| I found that horrible. | |||
| I also learn in the process that my frequently using ant as a nickname would be passable for banning, because it could confuse other editors in thinking I am ]. | |||
| So, here is my protest against useless and unhuman policies. | |||
| Fr is my language code. 0069 is my number. Granted, I chose my number myself, which could be seen as an unsufferable attempt to cheat with the new policy. | |||
| I might use this nickname for a week of so, and perhaps I will switch back to PomPom (which is the one I use when I feel in the spirit of a pompom girl) :-) | |||
| ] | |||
| ---- | |||
| ==Greater Serbia== | |||
| Thanks for those clarifications. I intended everything to be written with a neutral tone like that but I must have gotten carried away near the end. --] 15:06, 7 Feb 2004 (UTC) | |||
| : No problem. :-) I have some maps of the proposed Greater Serbia, but they're of poor quality; I'll see if I can redo them so that they can be added to the article. By the way, ] doesn't seem to like ''any'' of the changes I made recently to ] and has reverted it to his earlier (problematic) version, so if you have any thoughts on this please let us know on ]. -- ] 15:12, 7 Feb 2004 (UTC) | |||
| :: Don't be modest. I don't like ''any'' changes you made to ''anything''. ] 18:37, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC) | |||
| ::: Well, that clarifies things a bit. :-) -- ] 23:29, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC) | |||
| ---- | |||
| ==External links within articles== | |||
| I happened to notice that you placed several external links in your commits on ] and ]. The links themselves are fine, but shouldn't they be either in the ''External links'' sections, or even better in each of the linked pages (the page on ] exists, for example), rather than in each relevant page? They're harder to maintain if scattered around the place. --] 01:18, 8 Feb 2004 (UTC) | |||
| : Fair point. I've done what you suggest on ]. -- ] 01:39, 8 Feb 2004 (UTC) | |||
| ---- | |||
| ==Protected page policy== | |||
| It's a tough one, Chris. Right now, I'm too tired to think straight. But I think we need to think long and hard about the points I just made on ], in particular the observation that ''99% of the page protections are caused by 1% of the users''. We need to be very careful with this line of thought, as it could easily lead us down the slippery path to prescribing an official, cabal-enforced POV, but .... I dunno. I think I need some sleep. Best -- ] 14:23, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC) | |||
| ----- | |||
| ==Thames foot tunnel== | |||
| Hi :) Great work on ]! The quotations are a really good idea -- ] 10:52, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC) | |||
| : Glad you liked it. I've added an interior pic as well. -- ] 13:48, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC) | |||
| ----- | |||
| == Kosovo war introduction == | |||
| "Massive displacement" is perfectly acceptable to me in the introduction to the Kosovo article. No one disputes that Albanians were displaced; it was the unqualified acceptance of the claim of genocide that bothered me. ] 19:17, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC) | |||
| : Strictly speaking it isn't legally genocide (at least in the legal sense, AFAIK) but I take your point. -- ] 23:49, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC) | |||
| ---- | |||
| == Iberian-Caucasian peoples == | |||
| Hi. I'd love to know what you make of ]. It's been put on votes for deletion, originally written by Levzur. Is it saveable or is it nonsense? ] 19:27, Feb 17, 2004 (UTC) | |||
| : Umm, bit of a tough one that, isn't it? It doesn't seem to be complete gibberish but it certainly needs a bit of work. -- ] 23:49, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC) | |||
| ---- | |||
| == Moderatorship == | |||
| You've been nominated for moderatorship! Congratulations! See ] for details. --] 20:48, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC) (A fellow S.P.) | |||
| : Now ''that's'' something I wasn't expecting! How did you drift into Misplaced Pages anyway? There seem to be quite a few old SPs hanging around this place... :-) -- ] 23:49, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC) | |||
| ::I stumbled across this place a year and a half ago, and was immediately hooked. I can't even remember how I first found it; I think I was searching for references to Scientology, to see if they had infiltrated any place we didn't know about. But it was all the other entries here that kept me coming back; I think the articles I'm proudest of here are the ] series. As for the adminship, it gives you the ability to completely delete articles, protect them from vandals, block and delete users, and resurrect deleted articles. Otherwise it's pretty much the same. --] 00:38, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC) | |||
| :Just so you know, in response to your question on RfA, your "gold star" (admin abilities) won't come until at least the 24th. :-) We always wait a week to be sure any grievances can come to light, although obviously that looks most unlikely in this case. Sorry I didn't vote for you, but I don't recall having ever crossed your path (though my memory is growing spotty -- forgive me if I forget something!). Obviously you're much respected, though, so I certainly hope to work with you in the future! ] 00:01, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC) | |||
| ==Elephant pic== | |||
| Very cool indeed! Sorry for not responding to your previous post on my talk page. Somehow I managed to miss it entirely - I think I need to clean up that page again. If you are so inclined, set up a ] ], and I'll give you two units. - ] 21:38, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC) | |||
| ---- | |||
| ==Sysop== | |||
| Congratulations! You are now an ]. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the ] before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the ]. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. Good luck. ]] 02:34, Feb 24, 2004 (UTC) | |||
| : Nice! Next on my list, getting a barnstar. ;-) -- ] 13:50, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC) | |||
| ---- | |||
| ==Southwark== | |||
| Hi. The list of people connected with Southwark is excellent work. I've got one comment - which is on the ]. I presume that you added them because of the belief that they sailed from Rotherhithe. However at work I've heard it said that this is an invention of Southwark Heritage Association. It needs to be said that Southwark Heritage Association are not flavour of the month at the Council for many reasons, some of which are party political. The truth is that I don't know, but I know it is contested. | |||
| Apart from that I will have a think. One place to look is the list of contenders for blue plaques (the Southwark voted by the people ones, not the English Heritage ones). We also need to be aware that areas often claim links with famous people that may be not that strong - a sort of local pride, if you will. The Southwark articles are looking quite good now, and this makes me think that I ought to start on Lambeth which looks pretty bad by comparison. ] 13:46, Feb 24, 2004 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 20:55, 30 April 2015
Redirect to: