Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:11, 17 February 2009

Welcome!

Hello, Muscovite99~enwiki, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date.

Links

• <ref name="NAME"/>
• Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2008-02-04/Tutorial
• Misplaced Pages:Embedded citations

Pope Pius XII

Sorry for being late in coming back to Misplaced Pages:

AAS stands for Acta Apostolicae Sedis, which is the official organ of the Vatican containing all official papal documents. some but not all encyclicas are available online at the Vatican Website in the papal archieve under Pius XII. for ex. Google Mystici Corporis or go to Misplaced Pages Mystici corporis and you will find the link. Cheers--Ambrosius007 (talk) 12:56, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

RE Communism: The Vatican as in the case against Nazism, issued in the thirties condemnations against communism. Pius XII took issue with certain communist ideas and ideologies in specific speeches and radia addresses. The Vatican condemmed the hostile actions of communist but usually not individuals. Exceptions were individuals guilty of acts agaisnt the life and liberty of Chruch representatives who in turn were excommunicated. Cheers--Ambrosius007 (talk) 13:01, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Kirill

Here is what we can use: commons:Category:Metropolitan Kirill of Smolensk and Kaliningrad. Maybe after January 7 there will be more pictures with free licenses, but so far this is what we have got. Colchicum (talk) 21:50, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

De-linking Levada Center from VTSIOM

Do you believe a link to the former does have a place in the article on the latter? --ilgiz (talk) 02:40, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Reply

see that. Biophys (talk) 23:44, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Please

Do not remove views simply for they are different from yours, as you did here. That prevents a normal discussion of complicated issues. Whether you agree with them or not, views you erased are shared by a large number of Russians. Regards, ellol (talk) 16:34, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Insertion of copyvio content.

Your reinsertion of copyvio content into the article Putinism, as you have done here, is not allowed. It is a copyright violation, as it does not comply with the non-free content criteria for materials on English Misplaced Pages. The book cover can be used on the article on the book, in order to illustrate the book, only, not on other articles, and especially when there are free alternatives available. I, frankly, do not care if other editors have suggested to use a book cover, it is obvious they are not familiar with WP:NFCC, and if they are, they should know better than to suggest such things. Do not reinsert it again thanks. --Russavia 09:08, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Also, in looking at your recent edits I have noticed that you are not using edit summaries. Please read Help:Edit summary, and start using edit summaries in your edits. Thanks --Russavia 09:26, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Putinism

Please, answer, do I understand you correctly, that if there was an article Shit in Russia you would put all attention to the amount of shit annually produced in the country, while totally ignoring sanitary services and technicians? ellol (talk) 12:57, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

• I cannot see any sense in your message.Muscovite99 (talk) 12:59, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

I can explain. Annually tons of shit are being produced and 99% of it is cleaned away. "This belongs here, that not" logics looks exactly like claiming the mentioned article is about shit, rather than about cleaning. What results in POV pushing, nothing to do with reality. ellol (talk) 13:05, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Everything you are saying is totally meaningless to me: you employ marginal opinion of a complete unknown on the subject that is neither negative, nor positive: it is practically the YedRoss official line that Putin is top dog. What is the trouble here with you? Also you cannot use such ropey English that you use: it is just totally ungrammatical.Muscovite99 (talk) 13:09, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Obviously, I'm a supporter of a different party. You would know that if you checked my page. ellol (talk) 13:20, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

3RR

You should probably self-revert your last edit. I think you have broken 3RR. Offliner (talk) 13:21, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Mind your business: reversions are due to the WP Policies as designated: you cannot dump all sorts of tabloid rubbish in the article.Muscovite99 (talk) 13:29, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a short time in accordance with Misplaced Pages's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below. The duration of the block is 7*24 hours. Here are the reverts in question.

You were offered good advice but have chose to ignore it, so yo get something more forceful than advice

Hi Muscovite99. My condolences. Do not you remember what I said: none of us can edit Russian government-related articles. You can try Human rights in Russia next time (that was my favorite). But do not edit article Vladimir Putin please.Biophys (talk) 04:33, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

As about "tabloid rubbish", yes, I agree. Every article unwanted by certain people usually comes through three stages: (1) nomination for deletion; (2) deletion of sourced materials, and (3) insertion of irrelevant materials (the "garbage" you are talking about). Another innovative approach is Deletion by merging. Biophys (talk) 04:48, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Seemingly, whether the info is "tabloid rubbish" is in this particular case determined not by the actual credibility of this or that information, but on personal feelings.

See "Putin is in charge": the first source cites deputy director of Center for Political Technologies A. Makarkin. The source isn't considered "tabloid rubbish".

Now go to "Medvedev and Putin have power": the source considered by Muscovite "tabloid rubbish" is a quotation of deputy director of Center for Political Technologies S. Mikheyev .

Now: where is the logics? ellol (talk) 13:19, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

The logic can clearly be seen here, where the "innovative deletion by merging" was quite logically supported by Biophys. (Igny (talk) 14:39, 13 February 2009 (UTC))

• Very well.Muscovite99 (talk) 16:00, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Question

You know a lot about Russian wikipedia users, and some of them also operate here. Is anything I should know about this? Thanks.Biophys (talk) 05:00, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

• • Usually they use the same nicks, hence it is easy to make your own judgement. Very few are capable of (or seriously interested in) editing here: you can see some guys' contributions on the Discussion page of Putinism. One thing, though, that i strongly suspect (i haven't any proof of course) is that the last chap who has edited Putinism (with all these preposterous "Introduction" subsections within a subsection) is the same person who is registered as "Olegwiki" in the RuWP: just a lot of similarities in style, ideology and very poor language (his Russian is not much better) -- kind of mildly leftist (pink), pro-Russian nationalistic doctrinaire pushing his own views in all possible articles. I should not be surprised if "Mikheyev" (the guy he quotes in that ludicrous subsection - http://news.km.ru/mixeev ) is actually him. By-the-by, do you have any idea what is that tabloidish site (km.ru) that opinion is sourced to? It is kind of Communist youth publication, i guess. By the RuWP standards, his opinion should be expunged as he is not even a кандидат наук in the relevant area. Then, his sole opinion should not merit the whole subsction along with (and before!) the dominanat experts' opinion. Think there's a host of violations there now.Muscovite99 (talk) 12:37, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Unlike you, I do not conceal my personality. Perhaps I'm just not afraid to express my position on numerous questions? ellol (talk) 18:10, 17 February 2009 (UTC)