Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Shadowmorph (talk | contribs) at 23:12, 11 November 2014 (→Alexander the Great: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

New messages will appear at the bottom of this page.

This report

Macedonia (ancient kingdom)

I don't assume that you are in the "pro-Slavic" camp, but Stevepeterson does, that's why I had to specifically exclude you from the list of editors who support a WP:NPOV wording. My apologies if my wording was vague and my intentions unclear. --Taivo (talk) 13:20, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

No worries apologies accepted :) Luxure (talk) 23:05, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Regarding the change from Jewish to Zionist

Hi, I don't understand who my edit in Sabotage could be nonconstructive, I think that if the change was from Zionist to Jewish, it could be then be described as nonconstructive. Yes, the train line was sabotaged by Jewish forces, but they were doing so for the sake of Zionism. In addition to that, some Jewish groups reject the whole Idea of Zionism; so I think It is better to emphasize the idea that was the reason for the acts of these forces, not their religion. -- محمد أحمد عبد الفتاح (talk) 03:14, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

You didn't explain why do you think my edit "appeared" nonconstructive. Those forces were Jewish in majority, but they were also Zionist, weren't they? That is the reason they did what they did and that is the reason they came to Palestine in the first place, are you disputing this?--محمد أحمد عبد الفتاح (talk) 14:20, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

And American forces are capitalist forces, but we still refer to them as American forces Luxure (talk) 22:04, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

No, American forces are not capitalist forces, America as a state is capitalist. One could be a socialist and still join the American army, and one could be an atheist of Jewish ancestry and join the Zionist forces, that is why I think it is better to describe them as Zionist, as this was the common attribute among each and everyone of them. Would we be describing the colonial forces that came to America as just Christian forces, or we refer to them as colonial forces? I think the second is the correct choice; since they are there to colonize the place, not because they are Christians; many would say that they have done so because their religion asks them to do that, others of the same religion would disagree. So there are two reasons: 1. They were not all Jews. 2. Other Jews reject the Idea of Zionism, and so we mustn't associate the acts of a group of people to an ideology that is not agreed upon as the ideology that really drove those people.--محمد أحمد عبد الفتاح (talk) 00:39, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Ok, you put a good point in. Do you have any reliable sources to back up your claim that they were Zionist? (A simple Yes or No would suffice, preferably, if you can find sources, 3; one from an Arabic/Muslim site, one from a Jewish site and one from a Western/unallied site) The main reason I want sources is so another editor who views the article can see it is backed up by reputable sources and as such cannot remove it, as I have done to you. I would also like to thank you for arguing this peacefullyLuxure (talk) 03:11, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Alleged map of Kurdistan

Hi Luxure, you reverted my edit that deleted a map with no established references, except for what the Kurds claim for themselves. The map even exagerrates Kurdish-claimed territories to include Mosul, Aleppo, large areas west and southwest of Kirkuk, in addition to vast non-Kurdish areas in northern Syria. This map is OR, and leaving the map there might mean Misplaced Pages is recognizing those areas as being part of "Kurdistan". Cheers. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 01:11, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

I reverted your edit as many other countries also claim land, for example, Bolivia claiming North Chile, Macedonia claiming North Greece and SW Bulgaria. The image illustrates a point related to the Kurds claims, as do articles on the Pacific War in 1836 between Bolivia and Peru and United Macedonia. Hope I have explained this for you. Luxure (talk) 05:10, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Although you could argue that the IP added these images sneakily. I will investigate further. Luxure (talk) 05:18, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi again, I do see your point, but the situation here is different. Yes, Kurds are claiming lands in four modern-day states. However, this particular map has factual accuracy issues, as it obviously disagrees with established maps for Kurdistan and way exceeds established historical claims of Kurdistan (See this file for example). It's simply done by an amateur ultra-nationalist. Cheers. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk)

There seems to be no issue with the picture and its caption displayed a neutral POV even though the picture may have been made by an Ultranationalist User, but does the image also represent the views of the Kurds? (The Kurds- not a historian, Iraqi, Turk, but what Kurds themselves believe.) Another issue is your own POV, which I believe gets in the way of neutrality, mainly in part due to your Arabic backgrounds and natural bias to the Arabic view. I find no reason as to how the image is wrong and I applaud you for at least not engaging in an edit war surrounding the subject and dealing with it civilly. I would just like an answer to the question above before I come to my final conclusion Luxure (talk) 06:59, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, again the map exceeds even the Kurdish claims. See these maps for example. The map is based on blogs and personal websites (and sources are mirrors for one another), especially for the part in Syria. Please go through them and judge for yourself. I can draw a map and claim a part of another country, but how much credibility does that have? Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 19:02, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

After doing some research, the image in question, matches many other images on wikipedia claiming Kurdistan, so the image is somewhat correct and as such will be there to stay on the article. The only problem is the issues you have brought up concerning Syria. The map does seem to include large swaths of Syria not claimed by the Kurds, but viewing the history of the image the user that created it does not seem to have Kurdish bias. If you would like to edit the image so it only includes the claimed parts, not the whole northern part of Syria. I can do this as well if you want me to. Cheers Luxure (talk) 20:32, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

I think that would make sense to make it match something like the CIA map of Kurdish inhabited areas (which BTW still include nonn-Kurds as well)Cheers. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 14:07, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Rollback

Hi Luxure. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Misplaced Pages:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! —Tom Morris (talk) 18:42, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Misplaced Pages:Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
• Misplaced Pages:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Misplaced Pages:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. —Tom Morris (talk) 18:42, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Regarding my change to Pomplamoose

The discography section of the Pomplamoose page was very disorganized. There were some albums placed arbitrarily in the "other albums" section. Don't Stop Loving Me was placed under EP's with 2 songs on it although it is a single. There was a very unhelpful list of 10 of their music videos although they have about 70 music videos. I added the corrected track list of many of the albums and created a more consistent layout in general. I'm very new to editing wikipedia so did I do something wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carterjeyy (talk • contribs) 07:49, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Ford Sierra

Hi there.

With regard to this edit, I've removed your template warning the new guy. There is no way such an edit can be considered test or vandalism, and slapping him with a warning template is not likely to encourage new editors to stick around. WP:AGF and WP:BITE apply here. Chaheel Riens (talk) 08:40, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

October 2014

Luxure, I've just taken a glance at your edit history. You really need to reconsider the way - and speed with which - you're using Stiki - a vast percentage of those edits you're reverting either don't need to be reverted, or even if they did fall way short of being considered test or vandalism.

I've left a talkback on Tom Morris' page as well - being an admin he may be able to suggest either a mentor, or a better methodology for how you edit - but for the time being, please slow down and think more carefully before reverting everything in sight. Chaheel Riens (talk) 08:49, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

My recent editing using STiki was an accident because the program lagged/slowed on me, and it was not responding to my input, and as such, I just continued to press the vandalism button until it changed, and then I realised that it changed rapidly, but I could not revert my edits because a strong storm went through where I live last night and there was a blackout.

Sorry for the inconvenience,

Luxure (talk) 23:29, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to STiki

Hello, Luxure, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Information about STiki, including: Using STiki and its hotkeys Comparison with other tools Information about vandalism on Misplaced Pages Here are some pages which are a little more fun: The STiki leaderboard - See how you are faring against other STiki users! Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes! We hope you enjoy maintaining Misplaced Pages with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (developer) and Widr (talk) 18:21, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

My recent editing using STiki was an accident because the program lagged/slowed on me, and it was not responding to my input, and as such, I just continued to press the vandalism button until it changed, and then I realised that it changed rapidly, but I could not revert my edits because a strong storm went through where I live last night and there was a blackout.

Sorry for the inconvenience,

Luxure (talk) 23:28, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Who's Who in France

Hello Luxure. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Who's Who in France, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 11:35, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

AN Discussion on Macedonia (ancient kingdom) RFCs

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:26, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Please also see https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement

Was this a mistake?

Hello Luxure. WIth this edit on October 20 you removed a bunch of text from the middle of Talk:Macedonia (ancient kingdom)/Archive 7. It is unusual to remove text from an archive, and should have a good reason. The cut was so abrupt that you cut off the previous text in the middle of a sentence. Was this action on purpose, or was it a mistake? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 15:26, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

@EdJohnston: I wouldn't even say it was a mistake, I had no clue that I did that, I just wanted to put the {talkpagearchivenav} template in. Sorry for the inconvenience. Luxure (talk) 00:41, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Test of Sig

Luxure Σ 04:00, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

It looks good :-) Neatsfoot (talk) 11:02, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Luxure Σ 01:37, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

No thanks.

Sorry, but I won't listen to you. You can't say that I don't have enough proof because Microsoft said it themselves.

Kylesy20. (talk) 19:59, 7 November 2014 (PST)

Alexander the Great

See my reply in my talk. Sorry for the delay, not logging in frequently lately.Shadowmorph 23:12, 11 November 2014 (UTC)