Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:05, 17 January 2007

Welcome!

Hello, NOAH, 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:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• 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. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  --PaxEquilibrium 09:52, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Archive Archive

Answer

Yes, at one time the territory of today's Albania was in the Serbian Empire. Take a look:

--Еstavisti 19:30, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Račak incident

Hi Noah30, thank you for your note on my talk page. However, I was only reverting vandalism. I did not intend to become involved in the debate on this article. Regards, Accurizer 12:14, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello again, you're not disturbing me. You've laid out your case on the talk page today. I would suggest waiting a week and see if a discussion develops. Regards, Accurizer 14:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

For Christ's sake, {{wikify}} means to format the text as for any wikipedia article, boldening the title, adding headers, copyediting, etc. What is your point adding it to Racak incident article?!? Please have some rest and leave my talk page alone. If you actually want to learn how to properly archive yours, check the help pages. Asterion 19:58, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

You have hated me since day one but the fact is that I do not understand why; how can you hate someone you have never seen. First you called me sock puppet, and now remove everything I do. Abuse of adminstrator authority. Calm down --Noah30 20:07, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Noah, I do not know exactly what your problem is but I assume you have troubles assuming good faith. Around five months ago, I thought you could be a sockpuppet of Hipi Zhdripi, given your similar edit patterns and command of English. I was wrong and apologised to you at the time. This does not however excuse you making horrible accussations against me or insulting me in the way you have done on my talk page. If I were indeed "abusing my administrator privileges" that have been trusted to me by wikipedia community, I would have actually blocked you myself. It is not my intention to block you or have you blocked. It is for this reason I have reminded you of the ArbCom ruling and so on. If you want to carry on with disruption of the like of marking a properly formated article with a wikify tag to prove a point, it is up to you. Regards, Asterion 20:20, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi again, I have asked univolved editors at the neutrality project to have a look at the articles, including the titles. Hope this helps. Asterion 20:40, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Massacre vs. Incident

I will be reverting the title of the Podujevo article to Podujevo massacre. Generally massacre is used for "individual events of deliberate and direct mass killing, especially of noncombatant civilians or other innocents without any reasonable means of defense". As Racak is still unclear, this is why this is called "incident". Regarding Podujevo, I can not find anyone disputing the civilian nature of the victims, therefore I think that it is better to keep the original title. Regards, Asterion 20:51, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I have copyedited and wikified the Podujevo massacre article. Hope you are happy with the result. Please note that I think you made a mistake regarding Goran Stoparic, as he was not involved in the killings. He actually testified against the two Scorpions according to the CBC article. Regards, Asterion 21:47, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I also edited Gornje Obrinje massacre. Please note that the text needs to read "allegedly commited by Serbian forces" as no court case has been brought. Asterion 22:27, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

of Kosovo or Kosova ?

Dear Noah30, regarding your edit at "Kosovo Liberation Army" , I find that instead of edit-warring in every single article containing certain names or words, the appropiate thing to do is discussing the issue in the main article dealing with that contentious name or word, and then, having solved the problem at its root, proceeding to modify all other articles in accordance to the result.

The same is valid to Misplaced Pages policies: instead of trying to edit articles in ways contradicting Misplaced Pages policies' you dislike, the correct thing is to attempt to change the policies themselves, and only after archieving that modify all articles accordingly. This includes, of course, the current policy on following common English usage.

So, if you consider that in this specific case "of Kosova" should be used, let's talk about it at Talk:Democratic Party of Kosovo. If discussion there leads to the page being moved to "of Kosova", I would help to modify all articles that mention this party in accordance to the page move :-)

But while that article remains in its current place (i.e. "of Kosovo"), in accordance to the two main ideas I mentioned at the beginning, I will continue to edit other articles to reflect current consensus on the issue (based on common English usage) and for consistency with that article. - Best regards, Evv 05:02, 14 January 2007 (UTC) If you wish to respond to this comment, please do it in this talk page; I will see it.

You have to understand that the name of the party in English is Democratic Party of Kosova and we can not change this name. Do you understand what I am trying to say?--Noah30 16:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I believe you that Thaçi choose to call it the "Democratic Party of Kosova" in English: I take your word that it is a clear verifiable fact. As such, this fact (i.e. that Albanian politicians use "of Kosova") should be included in the "Democratic Party of Kosovo" article, with a proper citation. But, in my understanding of WP:NC, for the purposes of article naming and usage throughout Misplaced Pages, common English usage (which appears to be "of Kosovo" - see here) trumps whatever name a foreign political party chooses for itself in English.

Of course, I could be wrong about this. If you think that "of Kosova" should be used you can always file a move request at WP:RM (to be discussed at Talk:Democratic Party of Kosovo). If that request leads to the article being moved to "of Kosova", I will respect community consensus. - Best regards, Evv 08:34, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

You are totally wrong about the name on Democratic Party of Kosova. You or me can not change the name of a political subject, therefore edit the name to Democratic Party of Kosova. This is very logical.--Noah30 17:10, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

We disagree :-) Anyway, if you wish to move the article from "of Kosovo" to "of Kosova", you'll find instructions on how to do it at Misplaced Pages:Requested moves#Steps for requesting a (possibly) controversial page move. If you have any question or need any assistance, I will be happy to help. - Best regards, Evv 00:32, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Evv what about helping me request move of the Democratic Party of Kosovo to D. P. of Kosova. I hope you will help me.--Noah30 08:27, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

< - - - - - reset indent
Sure :-) To be honest, I really believe that such a request would fail, because it would go against the current naming convention of following common English usage. The idea is that we as editors should restrict ourselves to merely reflect common English usage, and not actively "correct" what we may percieve as mistaken or unfair usages. As a clear example of this, see the result of the very recent move request at Talk:Ushak carpet.

As shown in Talk:Democratic Party of Kosovo, common English usage appears to be "of Kosovo", and based on this I will oppose the move to "of Kosova"; but if you really want to go ahead with the move request I will do my best to help you organize it :-)

The required "paperwork" is fairly simple, consisting in adding the three templates mentioned in the WP:RM instructions, which in our case would mean:

In WP:RM, to inform about the move request:

{{subst:WP:RM|Democratic Party of Kosovo|Democratic Party of Kosova|summary of the reason for move}}

In Talk:Democratic Party of Kosovo (top of the page):

{{move|Democratic Party of Kosova}}

In Talk:Democratic Party of Kosovo (bottom of the page):

{{subst:WP:RMtalk|Democratic Party of Kosovo|Democratic Party of Kosova|reason for move}}

As you will notice during the previews, before saving the page, those templates generate all the standard WP:RM text and format.

Of course, what the above examples still lack is the important part, the reason for move: the explanation of why the move makes sense, and the demostration that it would comply with current Misplaced Pages policies (as stated before, it's with this last part where I see the biggest problem).

The reason for move could be given along these lines:

{{subst:WP:RMtalk|Democratic Party of Kosovo|Democratic Party of Kosova|The party has adopted "Democratic Party of Kosova" as its official name in English (as proven in these links link, link, link and these books/articles/papers example, example, example). This official name is used in many English-language books and publications: book, book, book. Therefore, this is the name Misplaced Pages should use, and the one the readers would be better served by.}}

Did I correctly convey your view of the issue ? Of course, I don't agree with that opinion :-) and I believe that most editors will oppose it also. Does this look like what you had in mind ? Did I succeed in dissuading you of going ahead with the move request :-) ? - Best regards, Evv 10:50, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I am still not shore if I am going to request move. --Noah30 16:46, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

My pleasure :-) In any case, you get the idea of how it works, facilitating any other controvertial move request you may want to carry on in the future.

As I said before, I believe that this specific move won't stand a chance while the underlying policy remains that of using common English usage instead of official names. What would be required is to modify the Misplaced Pages naming conventions first, and only then request the move according to the new policy. - Best regards, Evv 02:05, 17 January 2007 (UTC)