Misplaced Pages

Hooray!

Congratulations on the main page. My condolences on the pain that brings. I hope you have returned in triumph...or returned anyway. Geogre 22:00, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Yep, I'll agree with that! Giano 22:04, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Cosigned. --Irpen 22:05, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Great to see you, and to see Sviatoslav on the main page. Bishonen | talk 22:12, 26 February 2007 (UTC).

Welcome back. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 15:20, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, my friends. Though my sabbatical is over, I am still busy in Russian Misplaced Pages. I will keep an eye on what's going on here as well. --Ghirla 15:14, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

POTD notification

Hi Ghirla,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Stpeteskyline.png is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on April 5, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-04-05. howcheng {chat} 02:06, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Valentina Tereshkova

The first woman in space turns seventy today, but our Main Page is perfectly ignorant of the fact. Ditto about Gabriel García Márquez, who turns eighty. Do you think it is OK? --Ghirla 14:23, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Ghirla. Thank you for your suggestions. Honestly, I am not that big on birthdays. For me to post a birthday on MainPage, the birthday boy or girl must be really, really notable and it should be a centenary or some nice, big, round number like 250, 750, ... etc. I'm afraid Tereshkova's 70th and Márquez's 80th birthday fall short on both fronts. If I am putting any birthdays on MainPage this year, it would be Leonhard Euler's 300th birthday on April 15. BTW, Tereshkova will be on MainPage on June 16, the anniversary of her historic flight. --PFHLai 16:17, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Ghirla, I share your frustration that the round anniversaries of Marquez and Tereshkova are considered not mainpage worthy by some decision makers here. Interestignly, the featured today Dred Scott Case annoversary, while important to be sure, has little relevance on our today's life, thanks god, as the world and the US since then have thankfully changed a lot from those disgraceful days, while the relevance of one of the greatest writers of the century and the first woman in space ever remains profound. Well, I will at least go check and make sure, that those are mentioned in ru- and uk-wuki mainpages. --Irpen 18:11, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Moving articles correctly

Hi, Ghirlandajo! I'm sorry I have overlooked some procedures. The last couple of days I have been busy reverting false article moves made by a now blocked user, User:SndrAndrss (with a host of similarly named aliases). Basically, he has moved articles from the correct, English transcription of Russian names into the incorrect (Norwegian, as it happens) transcription of the names. This was done quite some time ago, and the articles have been edited quite a few times since then, som it's rather time-consuming work (having to do it manually).

However, I'm absolutely ready to comply with all the rules & regulations regarding this revertion work. I'll make a list of the names which have been wrongfully moved, and will post move requests where appropriate. Thanx for the reminder!

Best regards Guaca 14:44, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your quick answer (on my discussion page). I will make the move proposals to the admin you mentioned there. Best regards Guaca 14:49, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Zimyatov

I moved it to WP:RUS-compliant romanization. It should stay there unless someone can demonstrate that (and why) some other spelling is more preferrable. Thanks for the heads-up.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:15, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Dixie Chicks

Hi Ghirlandajo. I just wanted to give you a heads-up on a partial revert on the Chicks page. It's time there's a clarification there between a band (e.g., Chicks) and a music group (e.g., Spice Girls). Thanks for raising the issue. Xiner (talk, email) 14:09, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

commons:Image:Basil IV.jpg

Do you have any idea what the source was where you found this image? Now it is on commons, but unfortunately it might perhaps be removed in the future if it doesnt have a clear source. Thanks already. --Hardscarf 09:33, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Batu Lintang camp

Hi Ghirlandajo, Have a look at Batu Lintang camp. It's written by young lady who is worried that the article in not balanced enough. Please, give her some advice how to proceed. --Camptown 08:00, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Internet troll squads

Per our past discussion, I would like to inform you that I consider this comment uncivil ("no Russian editor can edit Poland-related articles in English Misplaced Pages without facing some sort of harrassment", "gang of Polish editors "). Please refactor / remove / apologize for it. Thank you, -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  20:11, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Ghirla, on a closely related matter, please take a look at this comment and the whole thread. Apparently, someone is still denying the obvious reason why you nearly stopped editing here. Not unexpectedly, I must say. --Irpen 01:07, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

My edits in English wikipedia consist primarily of minor edits on minor topics, such as interwiki links to my articles in Russian Misplaced Pages, where I am still active full time. It is ridiculous to compare my present output with my level of activity predating New Year. I see that some people who molested me at the end of last year continue their destructive and baiting activities in the project. This is rather disheartening. --Ghirla 13:51, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Does this mean you are refusing to address your comment as asked above?-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  16:53, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

It is up to you to name a Russian editor who can edit Poland-related articles without feeling harassed. I don't know any. As soon as I speedied the deletion of an attack page which you had voted to keep, you come here to harass me. This is no incentive for me to return to English wikipedia, and you know it. That's probably the only reason why you press the issue. --Ghirla 17:03, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

(outdent) Piotrus got in touch with me so I'll just clarify that the door remains wide open at mediation. If you'd like to renew it just go ahead and start posting again. You're both incredibly valuable to this project and I hope we can move in productive directions.

And particularly to Ghirla, one of the reasons I'm a Wikipedian is because of you. Way back when you approached me about collaboration on the Nadezhda Durova page I had been utterly frustrated by a couple of obstructionists at another topic. You came along at the right moment and it was a joy to work with you. If it hadn't been for that bright spot I might have given up and left the site. So if there's a fair and neutral way I can help out now, I'd put some other things on the back burner and make you a priority. You've earned it.

Warmly, Durova 00:22, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back!

It's good to see you active again! Errabee 20:37, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Template:Sergeymila

commons:Template:Sergeymila has been nominated for deletion. Could you please come in and give more explanation about the permission so that it can be kept? Thanks in advance. - Andre Engels 13:06, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Oddball edits to Russian history articles

I don't know a lick about the topic, so could you look into what Kingfish (talk · contribs) has been doing all over the place? Considering what he did at {{History of Russia}}, I doubt he's really a new editor. Circeus 16:19, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Russian-Circassian War

Hi Ghirlandajo, I was wondering if you could take a look at the Russian-Circassian War article. It has just passed GA and, as I noticed your contributions to similar articles, I was hoping you would be able to take a look. The article covers the longstanding hostilities between the Circassian region and its inhabitants, and the Russian's, lasting from the mid 18th century until ~1864. I hope you can take a look for me! Will appreciate any help you can lend to the article.

Thanks, SGGH 07:39, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Soviet invasion of Poland

Ghirlandajo, re your comment on my talk page, I know you aren't as involved with Misplaced Pages as in the past, but would you be prepared to come and critique this article on the talk page? I don't care how savage your criticisms might be, I would be prepared to address them (I have only English-language sources available, but a lot of them). I am not interested in arguments between Polish and Russian-speaking editors, but for personal reasons I desperately want this article to reach the highest standard; I don't want to be associated with an article regarded as POV, and I'm prepared to do what it takes. qp10qp 17:28, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Soviet intervention in Afghanistan, 1979-89

Ghirla: I saw your comment in the Panjshir offensives discussion page. Obviously there is a lot of misinformation afloat in the West regarding what happened in this war, and we'll need to get the facts straight in the future. I've expanded the discussion page a bit; you may want to take a look at it and comment.

Kenmore 03:00, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Restoring of Internet Troll Squads after AfD was endorsed

Привет Ghirlandajo! It seems that user Biophys has restored recently his Internet Troll Squads article containing his original research again, this time under Internet brigades title.Vlad fedorov 04:04, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Превед, Гхирландайо, nice to see you healthy. Hope you'll give your contribution there. Wlasow 16:58, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Христосъ Воскресе!

-- Biruitorul 17:40, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Воистину воскресе! --Ghirla 18:01, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Ура! :) --Irpen

Van Morrison songs

Hi Ghirlandajo: Appreciate the encouragement and also your contributions. Read your user page comments and I couldn't agree more. I'm looking up material on the two songs you mentioned as they are very important songs and need articles. I'll let you know when I enter them. Thanks so much! Agadant 18:38, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Started two more songs tonight-Saint Dominic's Preview, also And It Stoned Me. Thanks for all you help. Agadant 04:36, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Tupelo Honey Article: Interesting material but I see someone deleted it due to saying it was POV. I'll check it out and see if I can reference it (or some of it.) Thanks for your help. Have you seen someone added Wikiquotes for him? I'm sure I can also find some quotes for that. Agadant 15:28, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Just added Wavelength and a few others recently. Agadant 15:04, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the BarnStar. It was much appreciated and made my day! Agadant 19:41, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Petr Baranovsky

FYI: Posted rewrite on Petr Baranovsky NVO 09:34, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom/Piotrus

Case has been started, probably you will be interested: M.K. 10:22, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Your question

No, on the whole not. Bishonen | talk 12:19, 23 April 2007 (UTC).

Eagle hunting

Did you know? was updated. On 30 April, 2007, a fact from the article Eagle hunting, which you recently nominated, 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.

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Picaroon (Talk) 20:34, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Dmitry Pozharsky article question

Hi Andrey,

I was wondering what the source of this info was:

"In autumn 1611, when Pozharsky was recuperating at his Puretsky patrimony near Suzdal, he was approached by a delegation of burghers who offered him to assume command of the second Volunteer Army then gathered in Nizhny Novgorod. The prince agreed on condition that he will be assisted by Kusma Minin, a representative of the Nizhegorod merchants."

Specifically, I was wondering about the names of the towns--the sources that I've been able to find (including the ones listed in the article itself) seem to have these names somewhat different. For example, the "patrimony" is usually called Lindeh, and tends to be placed near Nizhny Novgorod, not Suzdal. I'm very interested in finding out where you found Puretsky/Suzdal, if you could help me out, I'd greatly appreciate it.

Best, H.J. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Homerj801 (talk • contribs) 03:55, 2 May 2007 (UTC).

Answered. --Ghirla 12:55, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Ghirla,
Thank you very much for that information, I was not previously aware of the sources that you mentioned. In my experience doing research on Pozharsky, I've found that it is very difficult to find information on the future of his family after about 1640. I was hoping that I could use local geography or heraldry to get a little further, but unfortunately this does not seem promising as I am having trouble finding reliable sources on either. Should you ever write that article on Pureh/Puretsky volost', I'll be very interested.
Thanks again for all your help!
Homerj801 15:37, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

The Pozharsky princely family had been extinct by the end of the 17th century. For their family tree, please go here. The burning of mestnichestvo records makes the later generations of their lineage rather obscure. The still-existing Pozharsky families of Russia are just namesakes. --Ghirla 10:01, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Tsarevna

I just stumbled across this stub while looking for something else - is the info there correct, I thought the Tsarevna was the daughter-in-law of the Tsar, the wife of the Tsarevich, not the Tsar's daughter - am I right or wrong? Nice to see you back albeit fletingly and seldomly Giano 22:05, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Tsarevna is the daughter of the tsar. I rechecked the dictionary, btw. But the article could use some destubbing. --Irpen 22:15, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps Giano knows some Russian fairy tales? "Tsarevna Lyagushka"? That frog was a daughter-in-law of the tsar, but, confusingly, the daughter of Koshchei Bessmertnyi. Of course, you may all three be thinking of that, but are not mentioning it because it is so obvious - should it be in the article? --Pan Gerwazy 22:56, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

No no Russian fairytales at all, sadly, but I have read a couple of biographies in which Dagmar of Denmark is referred to as the Tsarevna, when first married - so perhaps the term covered all daughters of the Tsar in or out of law - the wife of the heir must have had an official title just as the Dauphine and the Princess of Wales did/do, something must gave distinguished her from other mere Grand Duchesses. Giano 10:25, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Dagmar was Tsesarevna, and Alexander was Tsesarevich. It's easy to confuse these terms with Tsarevna and Tsarevich but there's actually an extra syllable to distinguish them. --Ghirla 10:29, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Right I see, I think a lot of people don't know that, including several authors and publishers, I suppose though in general speech it was easy because one was referred to as Tsesarevna and the others as Grand Duchesses. I will amend a page I edited accordingly. Nice to see you about though! Giano 12:13, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Bronze Soldier of Tallinn

Dear Ghirla! We need a correct architectural classification. Can you come up with a more appropriate classification than Stalinist architecture? It was deleted by somebody who suggested socialist realism instead. I thought "socialist realism" may sometimes be part of the "Stalinist" style, especially since the monuent was erected under Joseph Stalin in 1947. -- Camptown 09:47, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

It is a rather boring example of Socialist Realism. There is no specifically "stalinist" style of sculpture, for what I know. --Ghirla 09:49, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree although I am no expert. The term Stalinist architecture is usually applied to the neo-classical style for what I know. --Irpen 09:53, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I was suggesting Stalinist architecture as the monument was actually an ensemble of a statue and a mastaba like lime-stone structure. Would it also be correct to classify the ensemble as Socialist Realism? --Camptown 09:56, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

What you call a mastaba-like structure may be compared to the colossal pedestal for Worker and Kolkhoz Woman. The existence of such architectural appendages does not make architectural terms applicable to the statues in question. The core of the dispute is the statue, not the structure behind it, as you probably know. --Ghirla 10:12, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Why is it that one Swede and one Finn have to alone defend both the Russian and the neutral point-of-view in this article, againt a horde of agressive and hostile POV pushers from Estonia? Up to now there has been virtually no participation from Russia. -- Petri Krohn 08:46, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Probably because the fabled "Russian nationalists" and patriots, if they ever took part in this project (which is doubtful), have all been ousted by people you know all too well. --Ghirla 20:52, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

The Bronze Soldier article is quite a good example that destructive editing may come in most different forms and shapes. --Camptown 10:45, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Structure

I see what you did with the positive, mixed, and negative sectioning, but, Misplaced Pages IS written in formal english, and when you are writing non-fiction, there needs to be at least 4 sentences to be considered a stable paragraph. If you can find some more stuff for that first paragraph fine.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 14:14, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Can you refer me to the guideline which requires at least four sentences for each paragraph? Please remember that Misplaced Pages is the opposite of formalism. --Ghirla 14:15, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

You state that it is a summary, but just saying it's mixed reviews is hardly that good to support a short paragraph. Two sub-par sentences make it incomplete. If you want it to be a summary of the reviews, then I suggest incorporating some of the general consensus from the critics into the opening paragraphs. The subsequent paragraphs can detail what your talking about. Like, including that most reviewers felt there were too many storylines. The whole point of a criticism section is to find things that were commonly addressed, and not just list everybody's separate opinion.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 14:26, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I do agree that would should mention the early reviews, but we cannot back it up any long since we can't find RT's reviews for May 2 alone.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 14:26, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:1915 Dance by Rodchenko.jpg

Hello, Ghirlandajo. An automated process has found and removed a fair use image used in your userspace. The image (Image:1915 Dance by Rodchenko.jpg) was found at the following location: User talk:Ghirlandajo/Spring 2006. This image was removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image was replaced with Image:Example.jpg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image to replace it with. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 23:00, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

article about Kuzmin

Hi,

I saw that you restored the old version. This is partially justified, since the new one contained lots of errors; however, the older one is also full of errors.

For example, 'The Trout Breaks the Ice' was definitely written before 1929 (in fact, it was published by 1927); it is hard to disagree that this is one of Kuzmin's major works (esp. since everything he wrote after 1930 disappeared), but homosexual motives do not play but a minor role in it.

Why did you decide to undo all the later changes?

Best, Sasha

C Праздником!

Kizhi!

Thank you, for your clean up of the article your oversight to the article gives it the prestigious touch. Most excellent. LoveMonkey 03:05, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Better late than never

You asked me two years ago to make an image for you, well, here it is. I wish I had it ready for Den Pobedy, but I hope you like it. User:Zscout370 02:58, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Better late than never, as they say :) --Ghirla 09:15, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

I am glad you like it. I made another Russian ribbon, but I am not sure what other ribbon colors are worn by Russian citizens (the second I made was the red/black/red I saw during Yeltsin's burial). User:Zscout370 17:35, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Just to Inform you

You and the number of articles you have successfully submitted to DYK has been noted here because you have been discovered as one of the twenty-five highest DYK article contributors. If you feel compelled to continue to update your number of DYKs on this list, and therefore the list itself, then it would be very helpful and help make sure that the list is as up-to-date as possible. If you, indeed, do not wish to be present on this list, then please notify me, the creator. Regards, —A • D 11:38, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Have you tried to count Wetman's DYKs? My only DYK connection these days is that I regularly update the section in Russian Misplaced Pages. --Ghirla 12:23, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Greetings Andrey.

I am a brandnew member on wikipedia though I've been reading articles here since about 2002, I've decided to register here yesterday. You've edited an article I wrote and I wanted to ask you for guidance, can we have some kind of correspondense about this article ?

Replied. --Ghirla 16:41, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Miskin

Sorry, but I'm right on that one. The user DID have a history on the topics: prior blocks were on Epirus and Macedonian related articles. All of the user's disruption is on Greek/Persian/Macedonian/Ancient Greek civ topics.

a 24hr block is appropriate for a new editor who accidentally violates the 3RR, or even a warning and no block. But for a 2 year, established editor, with MULTIPLE previous 3RR blocks: he is well aware of the policy and willfully chose to disrupt it.

Ironically, I was warned before all of this that a block would be ineffective, as his alleged admin friends would come unblock him. I'm not sure whether you're one of those alleged friends or not, but I continue to stand by block, and I feel the facts stand with me. The block review is up on AN/I if you wish to comment. ⇒ SWATJester 16:52, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Firstly, I've never applied for adminship and I never will. Secondly, I don't think I've met Miskin before, so I'm not one of his "alleged friends". Thirdly, who warned you that "a block would be ineffective"? Did it happen on IRC? I see scores of notorious IRC personalities waltzing around WP:ANI this very minute. Some of them know how to put a slur in your block log. Some of them were even desysopped for that. Desysopped they may be, but the "dirty" block log remains with an editor forever, unless he chooses to abandon his unfairly compromised account, as some were forced to do. If their principles were applied to anyone, I should have been indef blocked any minute. I suppose the only way to proceed is to ask ArbCom to review the situation, which "smells fishy" enough for me. --Ghirla 18:16, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Never claimed you were one of them. It was on email, not on IRC by the way. Anyway, given the way AN/I responded, I think I've been justified, but I'm obviously more than willing to proceed to ArbCom: it'll likely have to be done at some point: now or in a few months.

I realize my prior edit may have come off a bit accusatory, please note that was not my intent at all. I was warned that he had "friends" and lo and behold, my apparently well justified block was overturned promptly, despite numerous uninvolved admins later providing overwhelming support for it. See how I could be a little jaded on this one? Something fishy is indeed going on here. It's obviously has nothing to do with you, you simply oppose the block and that's fine. ⇒ SWATJester 19:03, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

I oppose one-month block for "disruption", especially since one of Miskin's opponents seem to have asked you in e-mail to impose it. I don't approve this practice. This is a matter of principle, not personalities. Since I know too little about Miskin's pattern of editing, I will support your investigation into the sort of conflicts he's been in. The revert warring of both sides need to be investigated in order to put an end to this once and for all. Good luck, Ghirla 19:32, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

I fully well agree, if both sides are revert warring, both need to be investigated. I'm strongly considering taking it to ArbCom so the arbitrators can put a stop to the revert warring permanently: it's been suggested multiple times that the case would be more appropriate there. If that happens, I'll be sure to let you know, obviously your input would be valuable there.⇒ SWATJester 21:26, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Image:8thdukecroy.jpg

I have re-instated the no-source tag. Misplaced Pages image policy requires that all images - irrespective of copyright status - include information on where the image was sourced from. This includes images that are public domain because of their age!. Madmedea 22:08, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp., 36 F. Supp. 2d 191 (S.D.N.Y. 1999), was a decision by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, which ruled that exact photographic copies of public domain images could not be protected by copyright because the copies lack originality. --Ghirla 22:20, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't think anyone is disputing that. Madmedea has asked for the source of the image, per the clear instructions on the upload page. The JPS 22:24, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

I moved discussion to WP:ANI. I think this is an issue with wide implications for the project. --Ghirla 22:28, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Abu'l-Khayr Khan

Thanks for your very good work on the Shaybanid dynasty article. However, Shiban needs to link to an article about him, not to the article about the Shaybanid dynasty. In the Abu'l-Khayr Khan article you restored the Shiban link to a redirect to Shaybanid. I have now written a stub for Shiban and replaced that redirect. The Shiban article has a hatnote to the Shaybanid dynasty article. The reason that I unlinked Shiban (in the Abu'l-Khayr Khan article) in the first place was that the link did not say anything more about him than was already said. Links have to provide additional information if they are to be useful. I do appreciate your work. So much that I find in this area is so poorly written, and poorly sourced, it is a joy to see good information going in. --Bejnar 01:04, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Template:Unreferenced

Wow, guess that I had to say sorry about this one, I remembered reading about the template help article months ago which suggests the tag should be placed above the article or sections, I guess they had changed it. Anyways, thanks.Eiorgiomugini 17:24, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:UNDUE

You needs to be more specified of what you trying to say, here is what it said:

NPOV says that the article should fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by a verifiable source, and should do so in proportion to the prominence of each. Now an important qualification: Articles that compare views should not give minority views as much or as detailed a description as more popular views, and may not include tiny-minority views at all.

Ashina

Alright, thanks, I think the Ashina is a minor issue, I don't know about you, but if you continued to do so in other articles that I had edited minutes ago, I would considered that as WP:Stalking.Eiorgiomugini 18:06, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

In fact, this is called dispute resolution. After I edited the article for about an hour, you came and destroyed my work with your meaningless phrases. I can't say that I'm enthused about that. --Ghirla 18:12, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I hope that you're aware that people are free to added in whatever source they like provided they does have a citation. The article Tarim mummies I edited today are days ago after you edited for your information. And you even made a personal attack on my talk page too. I said I might be wrong about the tag, but that doesn't meant you should had accused me for that Eiorgiomugini 18:14, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually it is not true that you may add whatever source you like. Please see WP:RS. Moreover, the text that's added to an article must be comprehensible. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 18:35, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:RS doesn't said anythings about comprehensible. Mind to give me a specified quote? Eiorgiomugini 18:41, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Ashina

On the contrary, I think your English is quite good. I have no idea what is being said in that segment, so I moved it to Talk and asked for clarification. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 18:19, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Statement refactoring

I moved your statement under the general arbitration clerk privledge to refactor. - both the Miskin case and the one below it had become unreadable from the volume of statements. In both cases, I removed all statements not by participants so that arbitrators could more effectively find key pieces of information. This is a new move, but it's provided for by policy written specifically to deal with cases that were getting out of control. Phil Sandifer 06:31, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it's very much in the purview of what clerks can do. Please note that WP:RFAr says, in very bold letters, that it is not a page for discussion. Thus comments by parties uninvolved in the case are generally a problem anyway - especially when the case gets flooded with comments by over a dozen people, making it harder for arbitrators to size up the situation - which in turn contributes to slow and poor arbitration. In light of that, I refactored. Please also note: "Arbitrators or clerks may summarily remove or refactor discussion without comment." Your comments, while well-meant, are not among the most vital in the discussion. By your own admission, you have not dealt with Miskin before. You have a few concerns, all of which are raised by Miskin in his statement. As a result, truth be told, the arbitrators have little to gain at this point by reading your statement. It doesn't really belong on WP:RFAr. There's some evidence in it you might want to submit to the evidence page should the case be accepted, but mostly your statement just isn't that applicable to the stage of accepting/rejecting the case. To this end, I removed it, and will remove it again. Please do not re-add it, since it is both not very helpful to do so and since I am in fact well within the scope of my responsibilities in removing it. Phil Sandifer 15:55, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your lengthy explanation. I moved further discussion to Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for arbitration. Your "new move" does not concern just you and me. It sets a dangerous precedent for other arbitrations. --Ghirla 17:11, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Miskin

Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Miskin. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Miskin/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Miskin/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, - Penwhale | 17:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Yaropolk I of Kiev

Yaropolk I of Kiev Privet, Andrey. I am going through a number of articles on Saint Vladimir, since the Dutch article on him is basically no more than a stub and contains errors. So, I fell upon his brother. You wrote most of this article.

The problem is with the conversion text about Bruno of Querfurt. Our article on him states he was born in 970, so if he converted a ruler of Kiev, that must have been Vladimir and not Yaropolk, who died in 980. Of course, Bruno's birth year may be wrong, but that date was from the Catholic Encyclopedia. 1911 EB says 975! That would exclude Vladimir as well - hm, one of the sources for the Bruno concversion story is a known forgerer, perhaps this is one more thing he invented.

As for the entire story about Yaropolk's conversion, there may be something to it. Weller's History of Russia (in German originally) says that Vladimir was the candidate of the heathens in Kiev (actually he writes "in 980, the heathen party in Kiev was still strong enough to impose their candidate for the throne") However, he may have been using the same source(s) as you.

I notice the article on Yaropolk has since be marked as lacking references or sources. I will probably be able to add some. But again: what were yours?

I hope this does not appear unfriendly to you. I did not know you knew so much about music, by the way. --Pan Gerwazy 19:55, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Fixed. --Ghirla 20:03, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Awesome. Ogromnoe spasibo for the links. --Pan Gerwazy 00:10, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

50 000 edits

Hello,

I'm a french admin and Student, with something such 15.000 edits on all wiki projects. Since I know all the time and energy that take to me to do this, I have one question :

• what do you do in your true life ?

• To be able to have so much free time ?
• To know so many things.

Yug (talk) 15:56, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I work as a legal adviser. I don't have as much free time as I'd like to, so little wonder that my backlog of to-do articles is depressingly huge. I actually did not contribute to English Misplaced Pages from December to May, when I was active full time in Russian Misplaced Pages. There are many wikipedians who have much more edits than me. Just watch the contributions of User:Dbachmann or User:Mikkalai to get some idea. --Ghirla 20:44, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Russian-Circassian War

I appreciate your efforts with the above article, but please be more specific with your comments. Having to trawl through edit summaries, with "this article needs to be completely rewritten" being the most helpful of them to be found, doesn't give me much of an idea as to what needs to be changed and fixed, and thus I have less of a chance to be able to follow your advice and improve the article! I realise that you have been here a long time, and know what you are doing far more than I, but I'm never going to be able to improve an article if you are going to slice through it without giving me any real idea of what you want changed...

Also, you have fact-tagged a couple of things which are cited about 4 lines or so below, during previous FAC's of mine such double citing was advised against, so I haven’t fixed these fact tags. Getting conflicting advice here that I would appreciate clarification on...

In short, please make a comment on the talk page or my own talk page to air your views so I can actually go about improving the article, rather than just slapping on fact tags and making comments that I can't really follow up on. Many thanks, and I appreciate that you are clearly willing to work on the article. :) SGGH 17:53, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Replied. --Ghirla 18:06, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I thank you for helping to address the issues in the article, however comments like the aggressive "Have you ever heard about that?" or using terms like "It is pathetic" are not acceptable. I don't have any feelings pro or anti Russian, however you go ahead and accuse me of some sort of bias. I could just as readily accuse you of being biased towards Russia because you are Russian, but I don't, and I will not tolerate being attacked in such a manner. If you could be more respectful towards a fellow contributor, then together you and I can de-list the article from FA status and work it into a proper article, which is the way wikipedia should work. Please be a little more respectful, and lets work together! SGGH 13:16, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Well some of your comments on the talk page came across as particularly hostile towards me, but yes, let's work on the article. I'm not sure if an author can de-list his own FA but we ought to de-list until these problems are sorted don't you think? I hope you have better access to sources than I, as I had little-to-no sources to work from. SGGH 13:22, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Okay then, lets go for it! Do you have any written sources? I had access to two, the Bradley and the Mackie, via googlebooks, but aside from that my sources were either UPNO or published articles available on line from the Circassian Historial association in America, and they were pretty POV so I tried to soak up only bare facts from them. SGGH 13:35, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Ashina

I was based on my source for your information, same goes to your saka origin sources, what are you gonna report me about? Eiorgiomugini 07:28, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Please refer to the Talk:Ashina (clan) for proper sourcing instead of listed as so, it could had done a little more appropriate with his claim on Borjigin. Eiorgiomugini 02:49, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Images

Is there any reason why the Orkhon Valley article should not have the picture I added? Do you think it is over-illustrated?--Doron 14:39, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment! By the way, is there any reason why the World Heritage infobox was removed?--Doron 11:14, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Energy issues

Hi Ghirla. First of all, please let me apology not greeting you after your return from wikibreak. Actually we didn't edit same pages quit a long time. Concerning the edits of Trans-Caspian Gas Pipeline, actually we edited at the same time, so removing your edit about Krakow's meeting wasn't intentional. However, I would like to notice, that Krakow's meeting wasn't about Trans-Caspian gas pipeline, play around this pipeline is going over the head of Poland. The main interest of participating countries was Odessa-Brody pipeline and prolonging this into Plock and afterward to Gdansk. But for investing into such project, you should be sure you will have enough oil. As I explained at the talk page of Trans-Caspian Gas Pipeline, there is not enough oil without Kazakhstan. Of course, everybody expected Nazarbayev to come Poland, and it's understandable that without Nazarbayev there was nothing to discuss. So, the information about Krakow's meeting could be relevant in some other articles, but not necessarily in this particular article. Of course, all these pipelines are related to the politics, but I think it's better to keep these technical and to add politics only so much as necessary.

Concerning the Russia-Belarus energy dispute, the information about Ukraine dispute is not relevant, because in 2006 Ukraine has already price of $230. Again, concerning Russia-Ukraine dispute, there is separate article. Beagel 18:11, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

And thank you for the barnstar. Actually you made some useful edits and provide some good references, so lets continue to cooperate.Beagel 18:16, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

OOPS - did not see this last one. Well, I stand by my two templates on Trans-Caspian Gas Pipeline - that article needs to be cleaned up, both of POV, bad structure and bad English (and the info on Haig needs to be added). I do not know when I will find the time, however. Andrey, the one about bad grammar does not refer to your edits, of course - dare I say that I checked ;>) ? --Pan Gerwazy 01:56, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I made some edits to clean up the Trans-Caspian Gas Pipeline and replaced also external links with references. Concerning your edit on Krakow's meeting, I replaced "...to discuss plans for the Trans-Caspian Gas Pipeline bypassing Russia" with "...to discuss plans for the energy routes bypassing Russia". This covers both oil and gas connections, including the Trans-Caspian Gas Pipeline. I hope this is ok for you. I am still worried about the POV tag, because I don't understand what is exactly POV on this article. If possible, maybe you could assist to clarify this issue. Thanks. Beagel 13:42, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I still see a lot to be done about the grammar. The problem with the structure of the article is that, because this thing is probably going to be shelved again for ten years, you have to change or add to about every third sentence in the article. As for the POV, I have no doubt Ghirla could do that better than I, but I will try to explain on your talk page. --Pan Gerwazy 11:51, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I had an edit conflict there with you. Too bad for my last sentence, where I quoted Petri Krohn (It is Misplaced Pages, not Natopedia) - that disappeared into "bit heaven". --Pan Gerwazy 13:15, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Concerning Prikaspisky (North Caspian?) pipeline, it's actually the western branch of Central Asia-Centre gas pipeline. This is quite corrupt right now and most of the Turkmen gas runs right now trough the eastern branch of this pipeline. The agreement signed on 12 May 2007 by Russia, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan concerns renovation of the western branch and laying second pipe beside of it. It's not clear if this new pipeline will be considered as a separate pipeline or as an integral part of the Central Asia-Centre gas pipeline. According to the news, more technical agreement will be signed later. Therefore I propose right now to put an information about 12 May agreement into the article about Central Asia-Centre gas pipeline.Beagel 17:29, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, Ghirlandajo

Thanks for helping in Tambov rebellion article. Besides, could you comment on Biophys revert warring on http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Disruptive_editing_and_possible_wikistalking. Your help would be appreciated. Vlad fedorov 08:48, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't follow your and Biophys' edits. I am sure that revert warring is not going to stop him from posting blatant original research and links to heavily biased fabrications. I advise you to stop revert warring, to glean as many incriminating diffs as possible and to proceed to dispute resolution procedures. Forum shopping on WP:ANI is not going to resolve the issue. --Ghirla 08:57, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Russians in Ukraine

Could you please explaine the reasons on the article talk page? --Hillock65 13:45, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Your edits on Bohdan Khmelnytsky and elsewhere are being closely scrutinised. Take care, Ghirla 14:14, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I take it from your answer that you didn't have any reasons for your revert on this article and that you are just engaged in revert war?--Hillock65 15:21, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

During the last 24 hours, you made thirty edits on the article, most of them in partial revert of the previous edit. I made only one edit on the article since it had been created. Judge for yourself. I suggest the article should be protected until you work out a solution for your grievances. --Ghirla 15:28, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, Andrey

You have absolutely no need to apologise for anything, Andrey. Of all the messages I have received-for which I am grateful-yours has moved me the most, because of our recent disagreement on the Light Brigade issue. I was hurt, I freely confess, by the suggestion of 'Russophobia' because I love Russia; I love its history, its culture, its people and its literature. I think I have read every significant Russian author since Pushkin. Sadly, only in translation, though learning the Russian language is one of my personal goals. I even understand the dark corners of your history, and have understanding and, dare I say it, even some residual admiration for Ivan Grozny and Stalin. I spent a wonderful Christmas (by this I mean Christmas by the Catholic calculation!) in Moscow in December 2005, staying in the National Hotel. The people I met were unfailingly courteous and attentive-especially the wonderful men! I will reflect on what you wrote on my talk page, but I feel very angry just at the moment. It may sound paranoid but I think that I have been deliberately 'set-up' by a stupid and petty-minded clique. Long live Mother Russia! Clio the Muse 08:09, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Clio is back, Andrey, thanks to you and others like you. There is a note of explanation on my talk page. My advice is to ignore what you see below; I am, as are others. Anyway, I hope to get to know you better. Love from the Grand Duchess Anastasia, or as she is better known Clio the Muse 23:57, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

The 100 DYK Medal

		The 100 DYK Medal
		I, Smee, hereby award you with The 100 DYK Medal, for over 100 impressive contributions to Did you know? Thank you. Yours, Smee 03:50, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Renaissance architecture

Ghirlandaio, I've got to ask this, since you are an experienced editor. Do you look at what you are doing? I really don't mind putting in the Palace of Facets, if you prefer it to the cathedral, but your comment and your removal of a perfect example of Neo-Renaissance building (the Cathedral of Montreal which was illustrating the section below) was arrogant to say the very least. --Amandajm 14:29, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Italian Wars

Oh, I'm not taking it to heart at all; I have nothing but the highest respect for Wetman's work, and the occasional misunderstanding doesn't change that. Kirill Lokshin 15:55, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, that's jolly decent! If I hadn't been glazed from from the multiple vandal reverts that begin each sesion, I might have noticed who I was reverting and thought twice!--Wetman 16:42, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back

Good to see you back on English wikipedia. --Lysy 18:02, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Can't say that it was your examplary behaviour that induced me to return. --Ghirla 13:59, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry. I'm trying to improve myself. Still, I think my "exemplary behaviour" that you mentioned was correct. --Lysy 16:49, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Foreign relations of the Soviet Union

I'm glad you liked it! Clio the Muse 05:16, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Expurgation?

I have nothing against using Russian spellings and even Russified names (e.g., Alexander Khakhanov, Ivan Gurielov) were they are evidently appropriate. I have added the Russian spellings to those passages in the text where the families' connection to Russia becomes apparent to the reader.--Kober 10:58, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Autotravel

I'm interesting in your opinion. Alex Spade 12:32, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

talk page of 3 Löwi

Is there a particular reason why you would be interested in messages left to 3 Löwi? Digwuren 15:07, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

My position is well-known. I don't approve of foreign-language messages in English wikipedia, especially when they seem to contain incitement to circumvent the WP:3RR rule. --Ghirla 15:18, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I'm not familiar with you or your "well-known" positions. Remember, I only became active in the politics of Misplaced Pages about a month ago.

Furthermore, this raises two new questions:

• Why would you think (incorrectly, as it turns out) that "incitement to circumvent the WP:3RR rule" was the content of the message?
• How did you become aware of a "foreign-language" message left at User:3 Löwi's talk page in such a short time?
• If you thought a WP:3RR "circumvention" was taking place, did you take a look at the article in question?

Digwuren 15:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

There seems to be an implication of stalking in the comment. It is quite possible, that Ghirla has been following my edits. If not, I hereby ask him to follow my edits closely. I will not consider it stalking. -- Petri Krohn 20:02, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Erotophobia

I am sorry. You were saying? who are calling on erotophobia? It would be considered as WP:STALK if I did participated on all of your articles you had edited. Eiorgiomugini 17:26, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Eritrophobia is the phobia of red colour. It has nothing to do with sexual desire. --Ghirla 17:33, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Ghirlandajo, I had no idea what are you blabbing about, but if you think my intention was bad, so be it. Eiorgiomugini 17:42, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I always assume good faith, even when the actions of other users may seem to cause trouble or harm (WP:AGF). --Ghirla 17:47, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Here is where the problem goes, considered your responses from edit summary and my talk page, I don't think you are assuming a good faith. Eiorgiomugini 17:51, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I suggest we set our differences aside and corroborate on Suyab for the time being. --Ghirla 18:20, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Suyab

For your information, I did not changed your addition much, just keep adding details and accurating the article, you might want to take a look at it. Its fine for me if don't like it, I had used to it anyway. Eiorgiomugini 21:26, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Editors from Tartu

You predicted that the issues with this group of editors from Tartu would end up in WP:ArbCom. I find it very likely. There does not seem to be any way to stop this wave of vand> unconstructive editing without administrator intervention. I started collecting evidence at User:Petri Krohn/Evidence. Initially this page was hidden, but now stalkers have published the link, so I feel I can do the same. Feel free to contribute to the page.

Also note these: