Misplaced Pages

User talk:Lihaas

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SineBot (talk | contribs) at 05:43, 21 September 2008 (Signing comment by 65.19.22.124 - "→Didn't vandalize?: new section"). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 05:43, 21 September 2008 by SineBot (talk | contribs) (Signing comment by 65.19.22.124 - "→Didn't vandalize?: new section")(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Welcome!

Hello, Lihaas, 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:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!  S3000  ☎ 17:46, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

{{helpme}} I was wondering how I could get a translation OR forward something to a wikipedia site in another language (with a disclaimer ofcourse)?

Thanks, Lihaas (talk) 05:41, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi,
Not quite sure I understand your question. Do you want to read English articles in other languages? or trasnslate them?
--  Chzz  ►  05:52, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

{{helpme}} Well there's an article about DYA in Spanish but not in english. I was wondering if I could like to the Spanish version from the English version, OR get it translated over to English.

Thanks

maybe an auto-translation, you mean? e.g. this ? --  Chzz  ►  06:20, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Can I use that for a wikipedia english page? all the sources would be in spanish.

thanks Check out Misplaced Pages:Translation especially the link for translation from the Spanish language. I think that is what you are looking for. -Optigan13 (talk) 06:51, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

if you are able to translate the page into reasonable English, then yes. The refs can be spanish - no problem there. You should put (Spanish) on the end of them. But that's fine. --  Chzz  ►  09:36, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikiproject:Terrorism, you can add your name at ] to formally join, and help us on our disussions on the main talk page. Sherurcij 16:25, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Zionist political violence, not Israeli actions.

Hi Lihaas. I've removed the Lavon Affair and the USS Liberty from that listing, they're not "political violence" in any regular sense.

There are lots of other incidents that do belong, however.

I'd suggest starting a TalkPage discussion on the lede to specify what we're talking about, the current "Zionist political violence, or Zionist Terrorism, in the British Mandate of Palestine occurred mainly in the 1930s and 1940s aimed at making the functioning of the British rule difficult and restriction of immigration impossible. The Zionist organizations Irgun and Lehi targeted British policemen and soldiers, United Nations-personnel, Jews suspected of collaborating with the British, and Arab civilians . Irgun was described as a terrorist organization in media such as the The New York Times newspaper, and by the Anglo-American Committee of Enquiry. Irgun was formally condemned by the World Zionist Congress in 1946." is ridiculously inadequate.

I'd suggest something along the lines of "Zionist political violence, or Zionist Terrorism, extended throughout the British Mandate of Palestine period and into modern day Israel. Initially it was aimed mostly at Arab civilians, from 1940 and particularily from 1945, it was aimed at making the functioning of British rule difficult and restriction of immigration impossible. At various times it has included attacks on Jews. Terrorism in the regular sense decreased sharply after the 1948 War of Israeli Independence but isolated incidents continue" PR 12:29, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

López Peña

Hi Lihaas.

Thanks for your note on my talk page. As I said there, I dont know which infobox could fit better, but there is possibly one for militants.

As for the new one you are using, is as disatisfying as the previous one. There's no war going on, nor López Peña is a member of any military.

I agree with you in that an infobox is a good idea, but not at any cost. It is better to have none than having the wrong one.

I will have to delete this one also. I hope you understand that it is not my intention to frustrate you, but to stay true to facts.

Best regards. Mountolive group using a loop of another pop group 20:55, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

No idea as to how create one infobox. I still suspect there is one handily...well, it should! As for Bin Laden and López Peña, you know that saying: two wrongs dont make one right. In other words, if they are misusing the infobox at B.L. article, that is not enough grounds to misuse it at L.P.
Sorry. As I said, I only want to stay as close to the facts as possible. Mountolive group using a loop of another pop group 23:28, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Sorry if it took you some time to retrieve the info again. But, in any case, all previous versions are saved in the "history" ticker, which means that you only need to go to an older version of the article and retrieve by copy-pasting whatever was there.
Hopefully we are done with it by now. Thanks. Mountolive group using a loop of another pop group 23:46, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

infobox

{{helpme}}

I was reading how to create an infobox, which I think i'm getting quite well. But I can't quite understand one bit. I was wondering how and where do I save the infobox template to us for future? I got till here http://en.wikipedia.org/Template:Start_infobox_page, but then I don't know about the alignment and the saving documentation stuff.

Thanks, Lihaas (talk) 00:21, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Re:Infobox

Lihaas, Infoboxes are stored in the Template namespace. If you are planning to create an infobox that does not exist yet (see Infobox templates), then these links will help:

Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 03:21, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Just create a page with a name like "Template:Infobox XXX". Once you've created the page, ask me for help if you need help to get it working the way you want, and I might be able to help you. If you can't create a page, tell me that you can't create a page and what name you want it to have, and I'll create it for you. Coppertwig (talk) 01:01, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Sa Re Ga Ma Pa Challenge 2009

This is related to your note about 'citations needed' on the page Sa Re Ga Ma Pa Challenge 2009. Could you please tell me where all would you need citations? Since it is a TV Music Competition reality show, most of the information is actually from the show. The only citation I can probably provide at the moment is the website, which I have already added in 'External Links'. But since this is a fairly new show, I will add references to any articles as they are made available. Thanks ! Wikizen07 (talk) 03:55, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Re:SABMiller

I removed a joke edit. This had apparently gone unnoticed by you. A cursory Google search revealed no connection between anyone named Lumburgh and SABMiller. That, combined with the fact that Lumburgh is a common misspelling of Lumbergh, and the fact that the previous edit from the same IP address also involved Office Space, made me think (as I still do) that it was a joke edit. Dr. eXtreme 00:54, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Just read your note a little more carefully. I don't know anything about the company, or any of its operations; not to mention, the correct info is in the infobox to the side. If you want to add it in, that's fine; I think it would be redundant/unnecessary. Dr. eXtreme 00:57, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

No worries. I probably should have said something like "reverting joke edit" or something anyway. Thanks for bringing your concerns. Dr. eXtreme 01:01, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Sa Re Ga Ma Pa Challenge 2009

Thanks for your response. I wasn't keen on adding a reference to just one artist but since that reference link only involves her, there was no other place I could think of. I can probably move it to the section that talks about contestants. I'm hoping to work on this article as I collect more references. Wikizen07 (talk) 15:34, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Indian Media

I was categorising Indian media, then I ran into an issue, which was that the pages in the Indian Media category arejust too many.

What is the norm for categorisation? cascade to a higher category or add all categories? e.g. abc is newspaper of india, newspaper of delhi, newspaper of mumbai & Indian Media. NOw Indian media is also a superset of all media. TV, radio et. al. ChiragPatnaik (talk) 08:38, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

mendoza

she is in the article called white latin america please stop removing that in the see also section being she is white latin american this way people can click that portal and learn about the european population of latin america--Wikiscribe (talk) 16:02, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

if you would like i could provide further evidence of her being white from numerous youtube videos of her,if the phtotgraph seem inconclusive to you,but if she was miss usa and her last name was smith i dont think you would say she was anything but white--Wikiscribe (talk) 16:12, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

phentotype tells who are if you look white you are and the estimated munber of white venzuelans is at 20 percent many of this white population immigrated there right after world war 2 from spain germany portugal etc--Wikiscribe (talk) 16:21, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

the president of brazil is white and so is the president of argentina,just because they dont have the see white latin america at the bottom of the page you are fighting me on a women who clearly of european descent,i think you are little confused about ethnicity and race look at below

Neither "Hispanic" nor "Latino" refers to a race, as a person of Latino or Hispanic ethnicity can be of any race. Like non-Latinos, a Latino can be of a single race of the following racial categories: White/Caucasian or Black/African, Asian, Native American, Arab, Persian, Asian-Indian, or Pacific Islander. Again like non-Latinos, some may identify with more than one race, such as Mestizo (a bi-racial person of White/Caucasian and Native American descent), Mulatto (a person of White/Caucasian and Black/African American descent), Zambo (a person of Native American and Black/African American descent) or any other race or combination.--Wikiscribe (talk) 16:34, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

your confusing possible non white admixture with being mestizo(mixed race) you are making a racist sterotype that all latin americans are mixed, i would not say there is not a possibilty of admixture just as i would not say there is not a possibilty that Mariska Hargitay or Jamie Lynn Spears white americans may have possible admixtures who knows race is a phenotype not a genotype--Wikiscribe (talk) 18:19, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

can you prove that she has substansial native american or black african ancestry because her phenotype would say other wise i think the burden of proof is on your shoulders like i said if the picture you look at is not sufficent i will link you to youtube videos that have many more pics of her like i said you are trying to put a to heavy of burden of proof like family tree as proof of her racial purity you seem like this could have some racial overtones or you are a non white hispanic and are being ethnocentric,because you are only makeing an issue of this because she is from latin america and i provided information that there is a white population in venezuela--Wikiscribe (talk) 18:46, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

well thats because many arabs but not all many are white they just dont look white in paritcular arabs from lebanon syria and jordan there are many white americans with these background,those other latin americans you mentioned i ansrewed yes they look white and there for they are white the president of argetntina is on the White Latin American article her picture was there to but it got removed because there is a large majority of whites in argentina so another editor took her picture down because the article had to many argentines--Wikiscribe (talk) 19:14, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

there is a picture of her husband nestor on kircher article,but yes you are right that in general broadest of terms of cauacasian it includes all arabs like people from saudi arabia yemen oman qatar etc--Wikiscribe (talk) 19:34, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

yes there are many white afghans and also many white iranians also look here Copts look in the collage photo of egyptian coptic meriam george she is north african --Wikiscribe (talk) 19:43, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Oil price increaces

Hi, I wanted to tell you that your addition to oil price increases since 2003 was a good find. I did however make some corrections to your post: . The biggest issue was that two of the refs you listed didn't point anywhere, and so I've commented them out. Cheers. NJGW (talk) 21:13, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

LS constituencies

Hi, reg. your pages on Gauhati (Lok Sabha constituency) and Jalandhar (Lok Sabha constituency), I had deliberately left these pages because I wasnt sure about the spelling Guwahati/Gauhati or Jalandhar/Jullunder. Since you've created them, its fine for now, but it shouldnt be an issue later. Salilb (talk) 12:03, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

No worries, I've done the redir page for Jullundur Salilb (talk) 15:54, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Am working on Bihar as of now. Yeah, its cool if you do Karnataka and MP next. But we must cross out the states on the main page when we finish each state. Salilb (talk) 08:31, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Reg. Lucknow - thanks. The Lok Sabha page I was refering to has a lot of misleading info. Salilb (talk) 07:03, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Am done with Bihar. Taking a break now before I start anything else. To be completed (besides the ones you've taken up): Kerala, TN, WB Salilb (talk) 07:50, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Was using the LS page because it is much faster to refer. Also using the EC page now so giving both references. In case of ambiguities, will obviously refer to EC because it is more accurate.

The speedy deletion issue has been sorted out. They had a problem with my rapid creation of a large no. of pages without references. They've been told that its a part of the WikiIndia project. Salilb (talk) 05:52, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

No one is solely responsible per se, so you can edit it as you want. To co-ordinate, you could ask users Shyam and Ganeshk since they've done the maximum work on the portal. Salilb (talk) 11:22, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi Lihaas

Welcome!

Hi, and welcome to the India WikiProject! We're a group of editors working to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of India.

A few features that you might find helpful:

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

  • Want to know how good our articles are? The assessment department is working on rating the quality of every India article in Misplaced Pages.
  • Can you code? The automation department uses automated and semi-automated methods to perform batch tasks that would be tedious to do manually.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! -- Tinu Cherian - 07:30, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Exercise Sea Breeze

Can you link the Russian sites that refer to this exercise?, then we can use machine translation (carefully) to extract content from them. Buckshot06(prof) 04:35, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Roma are not Romanians

the census counts 19.000.000 romanians not roma Rezistenta (talk) 08:42, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Reply

Ok don't worry, I tought you did that on purpuse. Sorry if I was a little bit rude with you on the other page Rezistenta (talk) 19:02, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Sa Re Ga Ma Pa References

Hello Lihaas, I have added as many references needed to provide credibility for the Sa Re Ga Ma Pa Challenge 2009 page. Could you please review them and remove the tag that says "References needed"?. Thanks. Wikizen07 (talk) 20:04, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Osmanistan

Hi . I saw your message on the India notice board. Osmanistan was just one of 12 Muslim states envisaged by Chdr. Rehmat Ali. There isnt an article about it(Im not sure Ill have to look around for it). Why not create a single article for it? Take a look at this: --Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 04:27, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

What do do about vandalism.

If you notice a user who is _clearly_ engaged in vandalism, free free to add one of these warning messages on their talk page. Once they have received several warnings, admins will come and block them (usually temporarily). - TheMightyQuill (talk) 17:30, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

'cityvalyu' reply

  • grammar:

i feel i have no business to give a pragmatic lens to dispel the myopic view that "lesser commas being better english"..so may i point to you that as long as "lies" are not reinserted (that too without reference and 'en bloc'), i would be happy to contribute to wiki FACTS facts AND more facts...i am referring to your act of reinsertion of a lie about somnath "claiming" something without giving any citation..! i would also like to enlighten wikipedians that there are many versions of interpreting english grammar depending on whether you are in usa / uk / asia with significant perceptual differences on what is "ideal"..feel free to correct grammar mistakes ..but may i suggest you to NOT REINSERT ENBLOC "lies" ..vandalism is not encouraged!...facts are better than lies if both dont have references!! Cityvalyu (talk) 14:14, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

  • may i suggest you to NOT REINSERT ENBLOC "lies" ..vandalism is not encouraged!...please compare your edits and why i have expunged them..please see discussion page of UPA article.wikipedians can also notice YOUR disregard for putting citations for the ILL MEANING LIES ON SOMNATH'S REPUTATION and REPEATED inability to practise what YOU preach OTHERS (may i request you to see YOUR EDITS and compare my edits with reference to the phrase : "uncited, and original research"..then do compare YOUR reinserted version full of lies. may i clarify that my present version is not uncited unlike your lies. please also notice that i have not called you a "liar" because you may have been naive/ obsessive while reinserting the lies about somnath chatterjee ... hope you can see reason...i dont do 'original research for information' although i 'search for original information' and update them for wikipedia WITH CITATIONS..So please dont lie about me .. Cityvalyu (talk) 09:27, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Reply to comment on my talk page (Canada eager for nuclear cooperation with India (?))

In general, I prefer to discuss questions like this on the article's discussion page, for all to see. In this case, if the source does not support the claim, you have no solid basis for making it. If you want to assert that Canada is eager to engage in nuclear cooperation with India, you need a citation that links this to a Canadian source. NPguy (talk) 03:02, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

RIRA

Try adding pretty much any content to an article of interest to or with large amounts of work done by WP:IR members, and you'll find its very hard to make it stick. The general pattern is to revert as uncited. Find references, you'll be asked for direct quotes. Have those, and you'll just get a particular editor repeating himself over and over and not actually engaging in dialogue, just appearing to. See Talk:Great Famine (Ireland) for an example of this. And of course there are enough of them for them to avoid a breach of the WP:3RR. Bastun 07:30, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Bangalore Blasts

was just kidding abt the wikipedia ref. have been around the armed forces for nearly 30 years. I can rattle of these crests by pure instinct. :)

Ooops?

It appears that the changes made here: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=2008_Ahmedabad_bombings&diff=228472859&oldid=228472437 were over-written in the next edit to 2008_Ahmedabad_bombings which I think was by you. I suggest to "restore" those changes, unless it was intentional to "erase" them. Mike Schwartz (talk) 21:31, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Roma & crime

I'm all for discussion of the section, but that person simply included a rant against government political correctness and roma crime, with no reference to the article. There's a large notice at the top of the page that the talk page is for discussion of the article. I felt (and feel) that justified removal. Maybe the distasteful point of view encouraged me to act, but that doesn't make it wrong. - TheMightyQuill (talk) 22:18, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely... I hope I didn't come off as gruff. I would say you are right to be concerned when anything is removed from the talk page, so I don't fault you for commenting, but I think it was worthwhile in this case. - TheMightyQuill (talk) 22:27, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Textbox

{{helpme}} I was wondering how do I edit Template:"socialism expanded" a text box (you can see it fully at Socialism)? Thanks, Lihaas (talk) 22:37, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

India US nuclear agreement

I have suggested an article split proposal on the article talk page. Could you pls throw in your opinion. thanks. Dock 04:25, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Basque referendum

I would appreciate that you refrain from name calling when modifying edits. We can go over my edits and you tell which one is jingoistic, and more in tune with the purpose of Misplaced Pages witch one is untrue. Then we can call for mediation if we still disagree:

The referendum is a two question non-binding one. I just don't see what you have against that. The referendum is not directly about Basque independence (that is what Ibarretxe, the PNV, The Spanish government and everyone involved proclaim). You don't like loosely substitute for a similar adjective. I don;t get what is wrong either with stating that the Lehendakari is (president of government of the Basque Autonomous Community in Spain), you realize this is a Misplaced Pages for English speakers don't you?. WhenI say Eventually in his plans, if his party still hold government, another referendum in 2010 would then decide the final status of the Basque Country. is because before that date there are elections in the Basque Autonomous community and all the other major parties have said they will not conduct that referendum, so it depends of his party (PNV) winning the elections again.Again I don't understand why that borders you or how it is jingoistic. Then you erased a direct translation of the question preferring an all edit that is a interpretation of them, how is that a better option for anyones knowledge escapes my logic but to my sounds like censure.

Thanks--Neveryou (talk) 13:27, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Invitation

Introducing WikiProject United States Government...

Hello Lihaas,

Are you interested in Politics, Law or the United States? Do you enjoy expanding, creating or maintaining articles relating to those subjects? Or do you enjoy the small stuff? Or maybe you like learning about the United States Congress or the Commander in Chief.

Well, wait no longer, because we have a project for you! WikiProject United States Government is where all the cool Wikipedians who watch C-SPAN hang out! Join the project today and help us get it off the ground and flying.

Thanks in advance, « Diligent Terrier Bot (talk) 22:29, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


This message has been delivered by Diligent Terrier Bot on behalf of WikiProject United States Government.
You have received it because you are a member of a related WikiProject or you have said you are interested in your userspace.
Message written by Leonard^Bloom and Diligent Terrier.

Help us get the project off the ground and flying.

Roma people

Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Misplaced Pages, as you did to Roma people, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. The Business Week article you removed here is a reliable source. --Kozuch (talk) 10:43, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

nazism

I edited it that way because there is no debate that the Nazis privatized public ownership and refused to Nationalize industry but there is also no debate that they exerted state control over the economy and limited free market competiton. There are not two sides to the same story, they are compatable. The current edit makes it look like it's a debate. Also the atricle didn't have the "temporary" part in it's history. Other user put it there when I decided to change "...and while it incorporated some elements from the political left, it formed its most solid alliances on the political right." to ...and while it incorporated elements from both political wings, it formed its most solid alliances on the political right." Bobisbob (talk) 16:05, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Personal atacks.

Yep fair enough i was being a bit cheeky. Go through the talk page and you'll see many more instances like this from a multitude of users. It basically boils down to arguments between Western users who report what we get from our media and Russian users who report what they get from Moscow. Although I agree that both sides should be definitely told, it gets frustrating trying to explain again and again that the Russian Ministry of Defense website is not a reliable source when trying to gather information on Georgian troop movements. I'm sure you yourself can see that this would cause conflict all over this article. The word "propaganda" has been thrown around that much it's unbelievable.

I appologise for being a pain.Andrew's Concience (talk) 05:43, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Talk:2008 Summer Olympics

Lihaas, I understand what you are trying to say. I think it would have been more courteous to leave the posts on the talk page and simply add the not a forum template and maybe a new section at the bottom asking people to refocus their attention. - Eron 13:23, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

On my talk page, you wrote "Previously I had thought the same too. But on another article when I queried the relevance it was just outright deleted with citations for wikipedia policy." Now I don't know what talk page this occurred on so I cannot check, but I have to say this reads a bit like "This was done to me somewhere else, so now I am doing it here." If that is the case, I would respectfully ask you to review WP:POINT.
Please understand that I do not think your edits were disruptive nor would I suggest they were carried out in bad faith. But I don't think the removals were strictly necessary. I won't revert them, but I would ask that you not delete any more of that talk page content. I think your point has been made. - Eron 13:35, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

George Friedman advertisement?

{{Help}} I was wondering if this qualifies as an advertisement? It is not contributing to the article but is showing what the person has written beyond. It seems like he created the article? http://en.wikipedia.org/George_Friedman#Articles_by.2C_and_interviews_with.2C_Friedman Lihaas (talk) 19:13, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

United Nations Security Council Resolution 47

Hey, I saw that you tagged an article I wrote as unsourced. If you look down at the bottom right you'll see that there is actually a link to the text of the resolution on wikisource. Mind if I take the tag off? - Schrandit (talk) 03:48, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. - Schrandit (talk) 09:40, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Omagh Bombing Anniversary Memorial Service

I'm sorry that you deleted my words about this touching occasion. Are you doubting the validity of my source, The Irish Times? As for the grammar, I'm a bit surprised at your comment. Goodness me, there are a shocking number of entries in Misplaced Pages with appalling spelling, grammar and punctuation. Yet they are allowed to stand. Anyhow, who are you to criticise my grammar? Millbanks (talk) 12:53, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

agreed on somnath

yes, i guessCityvalyu (talk) 15:34, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

August 2008

Warning
Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing at Dayana Mendoza. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Angelo De La Paz (talk) 18:48, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

N. Ireland

Yup, poke me once you have the article created, and we can gangbang it over the next few days to make it as complete and detailed as we possibly can. Sherurcij 03:13, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Lihaas. You have new messages at Beeblbrox's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Re: Question

Hello - thanks for the message. Warning: honesty and a short rant ahead, but it's not all bad. :-)

Yes, I think your first response after I protected the page was uncivil. It's not the worst I've ever seen, believe me, but it did not help your reputation or the article.

The responses of other editors to the page protection are typical - we even have an essay about it, because it happens with astounding regularity. I can tell you haven't seen that kind of stuff before now because of your response, which was based on personality, not the article. Also, you completely missed the point of WP:SILENCE, which is about consensus, not ignoring the opinions of anonymous editors. In the case of the discussion page of a protected article, we want lots of opinions.

Now the good news: your second post was much better. It repairs some of the damage, and it sounds like you took some time to think about what should happen next, which is good, and you can convince other interested editors to come to the table.

It's been less than 48 hours since the page was protected and tempers may still be a bit hot. Wait another 18 to 24 hours or so. If no one has posted a response to your questions on the article talk page by then, make another try at engaging them. State one or two of your positions about the article and invite comments and criticism. Maybe a short note or olive branch on the user talk pages of the most involved editors would help.

I'll stick my head in to see how the discussion is going over the next few days, but all I can do is encourage participation. The other editors will either join in the discussion or they will wait until protection expires and resume the edit war. Dispute resolution may be the next step on the path, but just keep trying to engage everybody in a constructive debate and be flexible yourself. Good luck, and let me know if you have questions. :-) KrakatoaKatie 21:38, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

more

Hi again - Okay, let's look at it. Now, while I'm talking here, I am chock full of goodwill, I have a smile on my face and I'm here to help. And don't worry about offending me, because I am an American woman who works as an RN in a trauma center, so it's very difficult to upset me with words. So let's chat. :-)

You're right, it is the first sentence that's the problem. After reading your most recent message to me and looking at it with fresh eyes, I think it's a misunderstanding stemming from the way you used English. Step back a little, if you can, and look at it with fresh eyes too.

First, I will forward the two of you to the wikipedia reles WP:AGF and WP:NPA, following this you can go to WP:Civility read that and then come back here, in a manner more appropriate to discussion.

'Forwarding' means showing or sending something to another person in a different location or place. For example, you would forward an email. Don't use 'forwarding' if you want someone to go somewhere themselves. I'm guessing 'reles' is a misspelling of 'rules', but it took me a bit to figure that out. Maybe you should use spellcheck. :-)

Next, there's "you can go to WP:CIVIL, read that, and (return)". In America, when someone tells a foe or opponent that they "can go to" something, it's usually "you can go to hell." "You (or they) can go to (whatever)" is a phrase used in anger or disbelief.

To sum up: saying you're going to "forward the two of them", along with the 'reles' and the "you can go to" sentiments, led me and others to believe you were threatening those other editors with some kind of sanction, maybe from the "reles". Then the last sentence, the one about WP:SILENCE, only reinforced that misconception because it indicated a reluctance to communicate with those who did not meet your preconditions.

You actually meant, "Go read AGF and NPA and CIVIL, then come back when you've calmed down and let's talk about this like adults." That sentence would have been fine. But the message they got, unintentionally, was, "I'm showing this and you to the people in charge, and they're going to take care of this problem, and then I'm going to ignore you. So there."

Hey, everybody messes up and says things that are misinterpreted. Just take this one and use it so it doesn't happen again. It's corny and old-fashioned, but remember the Golden Rule, and ask if you'd like to be the recipient of your own message. If not, reword it or don't send it. Life is too short to hurt others unnecessarily.

You asked me about responding to someone who attacks you: I sometimes respond, but most of the time I simply ignore them. Sometimes I remove an attack or rant from my talk page, but at other times I'll let it stay. It just depends. As I said earlier, it reflects more poorly on them than it does on me, so if they want to act like children, I say let them.

Lastly, you should take a look at the history of the article's talk page, because someone has removed some of your comments and rearranged some others. Restore them (if someone hasn't already) and warn the person who removed them with an appropriate message. Remember to read the templates and know how to use them and what they say and mean before you work with them. Hang in there. I'll be watching. :-) - KrakatoaKatie 04:32, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

pok/azadk

i am assuming that you could be a muslim/ moderate pro pakistan view(apologies if i am wrong)..in that scenario, can you post your views on tackling the problem of reverting to "pok" ONLY title(long timeback) and presently to "azad k" ONLY title(past 2 days)..can you present your view? please visit POK articleCityvalyu (talk) 01:11, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Purity Ball

A link to WP:EL is not a substitute for a rationale for removing those specific external links. WP:EL does not read "all external links may be removed for any reason". Please explain why you removed/wish to remove those links at Talk:Purity Ball. Thanks, Whatever404 (talk) 13:37, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Oil prices

Lihass, your last edit was very suprising. What you claim has not been discussed is in fact discussed in the talk section, and the reasoning is laid out very clearly there and in the edit summeries. You also have restored a blurb about McCain which is identical to a blurb about Obama which you removed. This suggests a POV on your part, which is not helpful in reaching a good article. You also restored information which had nothing to do with the section it was placed in. You have also restored a link to price gouging in the see also section. This is another highly POV link to have in that section; it may have a place in the article if a well sourced section on price gouging were to exist, but as you can see by comparing it to the rest of the See also section, it does not belong. You have also reverted more than 3 edits of mine in one fell swoop with no discussion, which is a violation of wp:3rr. 98.235.103.32 (talk) 17:34, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

The large number of edits you saw were by editors which mistook the initial edit for vandalism, not by editors who wanted to discuss the changes. As you can see, they have not been back to discuss the issue (despite the fact that they have been active on other pages), so you can safely assume that they have no interest in the article content itself. It seems to have been a misuse of Huggle (which is not to be used for content issues). I started the discussion section because it seemed those editors would not leave until that technical fact had been taken care of (not that I think my edits are necessarily controversial, but what ever it takes to get rid of those who are obstructing constructive contributions...)
The comments by Gwydion5 can probably be ignored... he has stated he has no interest or time discussing the issues.
As for the content itself, no one has explained why a list of Congressional bills which have nothing to do with market speculation should be the center point of a redundant section on market speculation. 98.235.103.32 (talk) 18:58, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
What's wrong with starting a discussion section? I started it, the Huggle users went away! And by the way, unconstructive contributors are gotten rid of all the time. It's called vandal banning. Gwydion5 has taken himself out of the equation with his own remarks, and has is obviously not interested in discussing the issue at stake now anyway. The Huggle users used an automated program to search for IP accounts removing information and replaced the information with out looking at it. Now that they have seen that that there is no wp:vandalism occuring, they have moved on. You and I could discuss the issue though. What is your take on the content? (should probably answer that at the talk page) 98.235.103.32 (talk) 19:38, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
Who's calling who a vandal??? You said editors can't be gotten rid of and I pointed out that it's built in to the Misplaced Pages policies in general. You keep reading into my words way more than I'm saying. But in this instance I meant "Starting a discussion section was all it took to drive the Huggle users away." Highly unintuitive and extremely bizarre, I agree, but obviously it worked. 98.235.103.32 (talk) 05:11, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Just noticed your note to me (it doesn't tell me automatically when I have a message). What stuff were you referring to? 98.235.103.32 (talk) 17:53, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Dear Lihaas

Dear Lihaas Namaskar,

I am just wondering, why did you remove quite a lot of the external links of the Swastika article? I also do not like the bad use of the swastika by the Nazis etc... but is it not better to have as much references to the subject in the Misplaced Pages, as it can?

Thanks in advance,

--Universal Life (talk) 06:17, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Your edit to Qu'ran

Hi. I have reverted your edit to Qu'ran because it removed a lot of content. It looked to me at first like vandalism, but I see your edit summary said "Websites and online publications should be listed in the "External links" section". That may be, but you should not simply remove content, and even if you planned to replace it in a different section, so substantial a change should be discussed first on the talk page. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 19:26, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Biblical canon

Hello. You may not realize it, but by having four links to Christian views of the canon, and by deleting the only link to the Jewish view of the canon, you have introduced a POV to the section. If you're concerned about too many links, why not replace one of the other links with the Jewish Encyclopedia link? There are two links to the Catholic Encyclopedia, for example. — ] (] · ]) 20:13, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. — ] (] · ]) 21:26, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Wine

Please stop edit-warring on Wine to blank an entire section - those links are to reliable sources, it's not advertising. I see you've been doing this on many articles lately. I urge you to slow down and when reverted, take it to talk. - Merzbow (talk) 04:05, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Pseudo-photograph

Hi Lihaas

About your edit that added the unreferenced tag to Pseudo-photograph, you used this edit summary: "(is this WP:OR?)"

Did you click the links to the two UK laws in the article? If you had, in particular the page at Protection of Children Act 1978, you would have seen that the term is used in British law in a specific way, and you would have known that it's not original research.

Also, those articles about the laws have references in them. Why tag an article as unreferenced, when you could easily copy over the references that already exist and improve the article directly?

By the way, I don't know if you noticed, but the tag you added was dated incorrectly. You added this:

{{unreferenced|article|date=July 2008}}

But we are now in September, not July. It's important that the tags are correctly dated, so people don't think they've been there for longer than they actually have been.

Thanks and best regards --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 22:14, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

--Jack-A-Roe (talk) 22:31, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Where are the references for this article? There were none of the page and thus the tag has to go on. Perhaps someone else or me would come back at a later date to add the references. The onus is on the article creator to add citations.
btw- also for the other article you could probably use the sand box instead of so many edits. just for future reference. Lihaas (talk) 22:20, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
As I wrote in my comment on your talk page, there are references in the linked articles, including the text of the laws from the UK that use the term.
I was not suggesting you are not allowed to use the tag to request sources, I was simply pointing out that it's not always best to take the easiest way and expect others to do the work. A few clicks could have given you the references you wanted, then you would have improved the article rather than just pointing out a problem.
Also, you used the wrong date in the tag. You did not say why you did that. I suggest that you either leave out the dates from tags and let the bot add them, or, if you add the tags yourself, then use the current date, so people know when the reference request was made.
Regarding the idea of using the sandbox, no, generally I don't think that's a good method, because it's valuable to see individual edit summaries indicating the purpose of the changes. --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 22:31, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Wrong date was my bad (think i copied it off an old template of mine). But anyway's the unreferenced tag does go on when there's no reference so someone can get it together. It doesn't matter who, but someone can get to it. I could do it in a bit. Lihaas (talk) 22:35, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
OK, that's cool. The article can use references, we agree on that. --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 22:37, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

User:Nocturnalsleeper

What exactly is the problem with this editor? Seems pretty good to me Peter Damian (talk) 18:45, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Lihaas, when you posted the warning template on Nocturnalsleeper's talk page, you forgot to sign, which is important so people reading the page can understand the full conversation. I suggest that you re-edit the post to add your signature. Thanks. --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 20:41, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

External Links on Orissa communal violence

Please refrain from deleting the entire external links. Discuss which links are a violating policy. Recordfreenow (talk) 20:09, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Anwesha Datta Gupta

You added a warning on the Anwesha Datta Gupta page with comments 'there are whole sections withou sources'. We would be grateful if you could mention which section you are referring too, because all the info in this article is substantiated by references(total 17 in number). Krisgane (talk) 21:36, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Orissa violence

That Mrs. Steines publicly forgave is not relevant except perhaps to emphasise that the Missions are all forgiveness and compassion. Such insinuation seems uncalled for. Jobxavier (talk) 01:22, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for mentioning. I was puzzled myself. However, the user was not an admin. I did contact admin and saught their opinion. It was a wiki commons image and as such should not have had that tag. I have also communicated at commons licensing admin and the needed steps for copyright release have been clarified. Again, thanks! Recordfreenow (talk) 04:18, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the clean-up. It looks much better. Recordfreenow (talk) 03:38, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

I know that you put efforts into your edits for the background but as I mention in discussions, this could lead into a huge volumnous information on the different POVs about the background. I suggest we make a seperate section for that. Thanks for your inputs. Recordfreenow (talk) 04:27, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

EL on Hmong People article

I thank you for taking the initiative to trim the links on the Hmong People article. However, Dr. Yang's website is really a great and unique resource (even though it is a geocities site). She is a professor at UC-Fresno and her website offers several articles in three different langagues (English, French, and Hmong.) These include essays and scholarly articles relating to Hmong history and culture (as well as photos, art, and poetry). If you really think the link doesn't belong on the article, I'd be happy to discuss it further on the Hmong people talk page. Thanks. --Nposs (talk) 03:02, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

I invite you to return to the ongoing discussion on the Talk:Hmong_people page. Thank you. Nposs (talk) 18:48, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

RCC

Hi Lihaas, I want to thank you for your valuable copyedits and help on the Roman Catholic Church article. I want you to know that the article is undergoing a peer review and I am actively trying to trim it where possible. It seems that after several FAC attempts and two peer reviews, most editors want more content not less. Efforts to trim in the past were met with dissatisfaction from many editors who then reinserted what was trimmed. SandyGeorgia has agreed that the subject matter of this article warrants a longer page and that it is not the longest article on Misplaced Pages, there are several FAC's that are longer than RCC. I do not think the tag at the top makes the page more attractive and I would like to ask you to reconsider its removal in light of the article's past and current peer review. Thanks. NancyHeise 00:35, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Also, not sure if you knew this but the actual page size is 76KB of readable prose - this is what the FAC director will look at when determining if the page is too long. This calculation eliminates references and images. NancyHeise 00:38, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Lihaas, I am not sure if every single Misplaced Pages article that is undergoing a peer review before being presented to FAC has to have the current tag you have placed on the page. I think that every page in Misplaced Pages should have that tag unless it has reached FA status. Please reconsider the placement of the tag. I think it is very unnecessary and provacative. NancyHeise 01:11, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Lihaas, the RCC article is not undergoing a major reconstruction as the tag suggests. It is one of the most well-cited articles on Misplaced Pages. Right now it is in Peer-Review because that is where an article goes before it it nominated for WP:FAC. A peer review gives the article's main editors a list of generally minor improvements or suggestions to consider before nomination. Some peer review comments are not considered if consensus of editors decides against a suggestion as happened in a past peer review of this page. The tag is very inappropriate to the article and is generally used for articles that would normally be in danger of speedy deletion because of the obscurity of the subject matter. The Roman Catholic Church is not an obscure subject that is going to be in danger of deletion if we don't edit it. Please reconsider your tagging of the article. NancyHeise 01:38, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

I appreciate your superior copyedits and thank you for improving the RCC page. NancyHeise 01:18, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Rehnquist

I wasn't being selective. States' rights are under the federalism section. They didn't need another mention. I am removing uncited statements as I am trying to work up to Good Article status, and I've cited everything that was uncited already. RafaelRGarcia (talk) 21:14, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

ORISSA VIOLENCE

Press protest against Italy intereference in Khandmal. Daily Pioneer Editorial dt 30th August 2008.

Go to Daily Pioneer Scroll down to Archive Search. Use the counter to the right. Search date 30 August 2008. Go to Edits. Click 'Insult in Italian'. You can check the article easier this way.

The Address Link of the article works, but takes time.

In any communalism debate in India after 1984, the Sonia Factor cannot be ignored. 1984 was the year in which her husband became PM and she finally became an Indian citizen.

That all the appointments made by her have been Christian as far as she could find any, is significant. Her posting of AK Anthony known for his lack of administrative ability, and ignorance of anything except Kerala, as Defence Minister is one. Earlier, she had Hormis Tharakan as RAW Chief for the first two years of her administration.The list is fairly long including that of making Rajashekhar Reddy the CM of AP. The article speaks of anti-Christian violence during the past decade. It was after she became Leader of the Opposition in 1999 that the Bishops' Council of India began to openly be hostile to other communities. It would not be 'bent' to bring in Sonia into the discussion. Jobxavier (talk) 00:09, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Roma people

I added the references for every single "OR and novel syntheses". Cheers.Licor (talk) 00:20, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Many things are not sourced. I live in Portugal, I know. Licor (talk) 00:26, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

No Joke

It's sad that you are unable to appreciate the changes I made and have elected to support the abysmal offerings currently there. the roof of this court is too high to be yours (talk) 19:36, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll cast my pearls elsewhere. the roof of this court is too high to be yours (talk) 19:48, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
"Because they have no changes, therefore they fear not God" the roof of this court is too high to be yours (talk) 19:55, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Ana Ivanović

Just exactly which guidelines are you quoting when you remove those completely legitimate links from this page? LeaveSleaves (talk) 20:21, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Please...

  1. Adding Welcome-templates to the talk page of somoene who's been making thousands of edits here for 4 years, is just silly and makes you look really ignorant.
  2. Are you really claiming that nobody has credited Tim Berners-Lee with inventing the WWW? Have you even read the article? You are free to dispute that he did invent it (is that it?), but disputing that he has been credited with it just seems ridiculous. All the titles and awards he has won are from people and institutions who credit him with inventing it. They credit him with inventing it. And that's what the sentence says. It's blatantly obvious that the statement is true.
  3. Please read Misplaced Pages:LEAD#Citations, we generally want to avoid filling the lead sections with citations unless they serve to back up controversial statements. That many people and institutions credit Tim Berners-Lee with inventing the WWW isn't a controversial statement, so we save the citations for the article body in this case. Shanes (talk) 07:56, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Distillation grammar

Hello,

I know its minor, but the phrase: 

 By repeated vaporization-condensation cycles within a packed fractionating column.

Is an incomplete sentence, it is what it known as a "dependant clause" (or so my book tells me). Splitting the sentence before the "By" introduces an artificial pause that does not belong. Between the clauses. :) User A1 (talk) 10:15, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism on Orissa violence

Thanks for the suggestion. Please see for page protection requests. I suggest you also add your request here. Thanks again for discussing and being patient. Recordfreenow (talk) 11:17, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. However, you may want to undo or fix the reference tags as there is code spilling in the Reference section. Thanks for your hardwork. I know it takes time and effort. Recordfreenow (talk) 18:12, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

What do you think are aspects that have a very Christian POVs. I will try and change but this meaningless edit wars are just frustrating. Thanks for discussing and cooperating. However, I will not let this be a article be on conversion. There has been violence and I would like this to be just on violence. Recordfreenow (talk) 18:29, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Basque referendum

Maybe you were right after all with the duplicate. The thing is that we shouldnt let one thing duplicate (the Constitutional court appeal) and then not duplicating the response to it. So I just merged both in one section. I think it looks better now. Thanks and sorry if I overreacted. Mountolive deny, deflect, detonate 20:20, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Too hasty revert in Abortion debate

Dear Lihaas, I see in the Abortion debate you have removed considerable content without much rationale. Because a reference does not back up every point is no reason to take out all the points, unless you really believe them to be untrue, in which case you may argue that. As far as removing my addition, which you insinuate is a point of view, let me emphasize that I was not adding a point of view to slant the article, but was simply adding one argument among many, since it had been forgotten by previous editors in the list of positions that people take. Therefore I am reverting your 2 reverts, and please discuss if you still disagree. Thanks for your consideration and efforts. Korky Day (talk) 20:59, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

September 2008

The recent edit you made to Dayana Mendoza constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thanks. —Angelo De La Paz (talk) 21:26, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Dayana Mendoza

Regarding your edits to this article - the template is highly relevant because Miss Universe is one of three pageants owned and operated by the Miss Universe Organization and the three titleholders share their reign, live in the same apartment, make appearances together etc. Please let me know if you'd like this clarified further, but do not remove the template. Cheers. PageantUpdater talk • contribs 08:35, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Romani people distribution

You made this edit saying that there was a consensus with your preferred version:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Roma_people&diff=232986137&oldid=232888423

If there was a consensus I am sorry (though still consider Kuaichik's version better), but where was the consensus reached, cause I can't find it in the discussion?!? AKoan (talk) 12:13, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Didn't vandalize?

Was browsing wikipedia and got a message from you, Lihaas...saying I messed with Wine? Some guy messed with wine a few days ago, changed the opening word from "Wine" to something else (I forgot)...I tried to change it back to wine.

But, umm, if you're going to accuse me of vandalism I might as well not try to be helpful at all on this site.

Excellent work at alienating someone who just tried to help —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.19.22.124 (talk) 05:42, 21 September 2008 (UTC)