User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise/Archive 4

Archives
– July 2006 – October 2006 – November 2006

Speedy - Elmira Sanieva

Thanks for the edit to Elmira Sanieva. I felt the notability wasn't sufficient, but others may disagree. I will try and use Prod in the future. I am a little confused about the redirect page though. RichMac (Talk) 10:43, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Dear FPaS, Thanks for your explanations. Some times I confuse the templates. In this position which template is appropriate. Please help a little bir for user warning templates.
I dont understand the rules exactly some times; an anon user; suspected as sockpuppet, make personal attacks and immediately after unblock attacks to many page in a vandalist manner.Why we keep like users here.? Regards. Must^TC 19:47, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Kara Koyunlu

Dear FpaS, as you can see, there was a Turkish history template there. Iranian history Template which some users to use there is not relevant with article, any other Iranian history template may be relevant since the area is now Iran. To try the cancelling Turkish template, to add an Iranian irrelavant template is not good faith. Regards. Must^TC 20:00, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Coaching huh?

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, as you did to User talk:Mustafa Akalp, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.  :-) NikoSilver 20:02, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Why is it that every time I see "NikoSilver (Talk | contribs | block)" in an article history listing, my index finger starts twitching towards the right? Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:08, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Haven't been trying hard enough for you, huh? :-) NikoSilver 20:17, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps if we did a revert-war over me removing your warnings from my talkpage? Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:24, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

How silly. You won't stand a chance with all those different warnings out there. Αργία μήτηρ πάσης κακίας. We better start writing some article instead... (it's more likely we'll engage in revert warring this way). NikoSilver 20:29, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Cooperation board launched

A new (and overdue) Greek and Turkish cooperation and notification board has been launched here. Stop by, have a look and sound off! Cheers! Baristarim 07:19, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Abakwi language

Hi, I've written a note to you and Alan at User talk:Alan McBeth#Abakwi language. -- Ngio 09:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Salvator (horse)

Thanks, you did the right thing. Handicapper 17:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Elsi mate

Des to e-mail su... ;-) Khoikhoi 21:25, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

superconductivity

Hi, i checked the article. The page is related with a research group of Hacettepe University and their activities. As you said, direct copy. Regards E104421 00:10, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

• Note: I think Euthymios is Tekleni. He's stalking. What do you think? E104421 00:10, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

PMA

• Acting on the belief that Police one another is a necessary collolary of Defend one another, I have opened an RFC against PMA here. Thatcher131 01:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

for the unblock, hey if you see vandilism how do you take it off? --Blackshaq 04:33, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

/q/ and /k/

In Aq Qoyunlu, the q is the only correct spelling, because the White Sheep Turcomans were an ORIGINAL Turkic tribe, and q is an ORIGINAL Turkic sound (now only lost in Anatolian Turkish).

The name Alā ud-Dīn Kay-Kubād is Perso-Arabic: the first part, Alā ud-Dīn, is Arabic. The same spelling is also used in the article Aladdin (here as 'Alā 'ad-Dīn). The second part, Kay-Kubād, is Persian - the name of a legendary Persian hero of the Epic. Q is NOT an original Persian sound, it is Arabicized (Indo-European languages usually lack the /q/ sound). The name Kay Qubādh may be found in certain historical documents - traditionally written in Arabic - but his name was deffinitly Kay-Kubād - that's the correct Persian pronounciation.

By the way: a "k" with a dot below is - as far as I now - a normal /k/ sound. An "h" with a dot below (--> ḥ) means that the /h/ sound is not silent, like in "ḥoney" (unlike "hour").

I'd rather go with Encyclopaedia of Islam this time. Iranica is simply using the spelling of historical documents (that's also the reason why I put the Arabic spelling before the original Persian one in Ala ud-Din Kay-Kubad); the EI, however, seems to use the original Persian spelling. Another related Persian name is Kavadh.

Tājik 11:05, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm. But the original Shahname seems to be using کیقباد, with a qaf, or is that not the same guy? [1]. (Not that I can read a word of it, mind you ;-) Or what else do you mean by "original Persian spelling"? And one English translation of the Shahname even renders it as "Kai-Ghobad" [2], which also seems to be a spelling used occasionally by modern Iranians. - Anyway, we are not talking about the Shahname hero, but about the historical Seljuk guy, so the relevant data would first of all be how his contemporaries would have spelled his name, and what the conventions are for Latinizing that in the relevant modern literature. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:49, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I really do not understand the conflict, because both versions are right. The article itself says:

• Alā ud-Dīn Kay Qubādh I (actually Alā ud-Dīn Kay-Kubād; Turkish spelling: Alaadin Kaykubad), Seljuq emperor (1220-1237).

So, where is the problem? :)

Tājik 11:59, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

• Hi, For the 'Ala' ad-Din Kay-Qubadh (Kaikobad) issue, I propose using the name Kaikobad for the article and 'Ala' ad-Din Kay-Qubadh for the real name of Alaaddin Keykubat (in Turkish). Kaikobad gives the correct spelling for Kay-Qubadh. I already checked Britannica, there the name is written as 'Ala' ad-Din Kay-Qubadh, in addition to this Kaikobad is written in paranthesis. If the English Wikipedia is concerned, in my opinion better to rename the article as Kaikobad I. Tajik has advocated using a Persian title, he is not standing up for common English usage. He can call him whatever he likes on Persian Wikipedia. Here we should choose the common English usage. Regards. E104421 15:33, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

• I'm not edit-warring for the name. Tajik renamed the articles without any consensus. Furhermore. i just reflected what's written in Britannica. That's it. Anyway, i'll read the guideline. Regards E104421 18:27, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

• I read the guideline. As far as i understood, it's ok to name as 'Ala' ad-Din Kay-Qubadh, which is also used in Britannica. Regards to all. E104421 18:53, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

• The dh is more suitable cause the t is pronounced as d, just as in the case of mehmet and memed. Regards. 21:34, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The dh is pronounced like the English th. Tājik 22:32, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

AfD?

What's AfD? (edit: OK, i got it: articles for deletion) That entry is a hoax, BTW. (edit: Thanks for your help in nominating it for deletion) --88.149.168.128 10:49, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Help me

Hi, the mother of Blagoj Nacoski gave me a foto of him which is free of copyright, what license should I use? --Ditirambo 13:51, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi, the user ZoguShqiptar700 is vandalising the page of the Republic of Macedonia, what can we do? --Ditirambo 09:42, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey Syntax Error

Take a peek: User:NikoSilver/Nationality quiz. :-) NikoSilver 14:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

fr:Wikipédia:Demande de suppression immédiate

Hello FPaS! I've just nominated the unencyclopedic user page of User:Bestlyriccollection for deletion, but unfortunately he copied his stuff to the French Wikipedia (and other wikis) as well. Could you help me to make a speedy deletion request over there? Thanks in advance! Kimchi.sg 07:59, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but I have no experience whatsoever with frwiki, I haven't seen anything of this case, and I won't be around much during the next few days anyway, so I'm afraid I'd rather not get much involved with this one. Do you just need someone who writes French? Mine isn't too good. Maybe I should downgrade my FR Babel box? Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:08, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmm... downgrading is a good idea. :-P I shal look for someone else instead. Kimchi.sg 08:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Welcome + Kutavicius

Thanks for the welcome and the assist with the Kutavicius article. I am a fledgling wikipedian and look forward to learning and contributing more to this wonderful project.Canticle 12:51, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

my subpage

Dear FPaS, Sorry for inconvinience. It is a work,just to make list of categories which include Turkey/turkish related articles, to insert some templates them by using bot. regards. Must^TC 05:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Factanista

User:Factanista has just made uncivil comments about on his talk page. In Croatian, he said I consider that propaganda of yours[listing me under "Serbs" - which I do not really like]disgusting and regardless of your GreaterSerbian[a Serbian nationalist irridentist ideology - refer to Greater Serbia for details]propaganda. These are personal attacks. --PaxEquilibrium 21:36, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

This is really funny actually. The User:PaxEquilibrium is currently highly aggressive and offensive towards me. He even accused me of being a sockpuppet of some other user. He has made also several uncivil comments recently and some time ago about my "nationalistic" stance. Btw. if you wish I can translate you the discussion in Croatian(and Serbian on his part) on my talk page and you will see it has nothing to do with incivility. --Factanista 21:40, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I think that putting me in an ethnic group (to which I do not self-identify) and then generalizing it by "....your GreaterSerbian.." (identifying me with the rest of the nationalist extremist members of this ethnic group like Vojislav Šešelj) is highly offensive - also, I'm not the one that's been heavily disruptive to Wikipedia (earning 3 blocks) recently - nor have I been skirting 3RR violations. --PaxEquilibrium 22:12, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

First one needs to know the context of the discussion we led, do not spin my words around. Second it is your estimate that I am "heavily disruptive" to Wikipedia. One can look at my contributions and see that I have if anything heavily contributed to Wikipedia not the opposite. And last do not try to portray yourself as innocent as you are the one who initiated this, you made personal attacks towards me and whats more you accuse me of being a sockpuppet of some other user with absolutely no evidence. You also don't have quite an ideal record on Wikipedia. --Factanista 22:20, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

It is not my estimate - but the estimate of all the users that blocked you recently. Furthermore, yes, inspection of your contributions show a history of edit-warring and incivility (just like those admins said on your talk page).

This looks like another skirting 3RR to me: 20:58, 1 December 2006, 21:10, 1 December 2006, 21:30, 1 December 2006, 21:56, 1 December 2006. --PaxEquilibrium 22:59, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

As I said you don't have quite an ideal history yourself. And funny you link to that page since it can be seen that you too are edit-warring and also skirting 3RR with unlogged revert. --Factanista 00:37, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Really? Diffs, please. --PaxEquilibrium 12:30, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Kaltsef blocked indefinitely

After having to block Tureg2 (talk · contribs), Tureg3 (talk · contribs), and UOGORTH (talk · contribs) tonight, reverting userpage vandalism, etc. - I have honestly had enough of this user. Therefore, I have decided to be bold and ban him myself. Please let me know if there are any objections. Khoikhoi 10:00, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Your cover has been blown. You may want to hide your face with a Kaltsa now. (I hear it comming: "put a kaltsa in it") :-) NikoSilver 18:54, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

You forgot "schizophrenic web vandal". ;-) Khoikhoi 23:47, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism on my pages

Thanks for reverting that! They'll probably strike again in about 45 minutes, so if you're online then (I wont be), please watch out. Thanks! Nwwaew (Talk Page) (Contribs) (E-mail me) 14:29, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Turkic peoples

• Hi, Please check this and this out. Cheers! E104421 20:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Hmm. Was your edit [3] a revert to something earlier or an original rewrite by you? Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:08, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Hi, i only wrote a couple of words from the sources i provided to this version, cause of this. I also did some minor edits. Regards. E104421 20:22, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
      • Yeah, noticed it now. I was confused because with the shuffling around of the images the diff showed so deceptively large amounts of red. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
        • As much as I want to revert this article, sadly i should try to keep my promise. Unfortunately, i confronted the same person again on two history pages but now decided to keep myself away. Regards. E104421 20:37, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
          • Heh, it's impossible to stop cunning and stalking. Anyways, i noticed that many physics articles need attention. These physicists are quite accurate, no controversies, no pseudo-historians, no rats...etc. Cheers! E104421 20:49, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
            • As i already mentioned above, no way to stop cunning and stalking. Tomorrow, i shall start from physics stubs. Good night! E104421 22:57, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
              • Before turning off my computer, one simple question: Why did this person want unprotection only for Timurids? There are many articles protected just because edit/revert wars. Why Timurids not the others? Cheers! E104421 23:10, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Turkic peoples

It was not me who had edited a "massive revert", but the ones who edited the article before me (just go through the article's history). By now, Khoikhoi can be regarded an expert on Turks-related article. He was already into editting those articles before he became admin.

What I did was reverting to a version that was already there before certain nationalistic-motivated changes were forced on the article (claiming that Mughals were "Turks" is pure nonsense and contradicts the article Mughals and Babur, as well as Akbar).

This is what User:Sikandarji (himself an Oxford academic specialized on Central Asian history) says:

• "... Oh Christ, not here as well. See the dispute on the Talk:Babur page - you can't describe the Timurids as "Turkish", that's simply idiotic. ..." [4]

• "... How can a dynasty belong to a linguistic family? In any case by the time of Akbar the Timurids only spoke and wrote in Persian (Akbar had to have Babur's memoirs translated from the Chaghatai because he couldn't read them). If you must give them an ethnic label (and I think that's a bad idea) then call them Turco-Mongols, but they represent such a mixture of ethnicities and languages that it doesn't make a great deal of sense. ..." [5]

Tājik 20:39, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Makes perfect sense to me - just please make sure you communicate concerns like these in a constructive way, especially when you're opposite another user you have so strained relations with. Just my advice. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• Noone calls them Turkish but Turkic dynasty, that's why Mughals were mentioned in the Turkic peoples article. Sikandarji read the Turkic as Turkish. Here what Britannica states:

Timurid Dynasty: (fl. 15th–16th century AD), Turkic dynasty descended from the conqueror Timur (Tamerlane), renowned for its brilliant revival of artistic and intellectual life in Iran and Central Asia. After Timur's death (1405), his conquests were divided between two of his sons: Miranshah (d. 1407) received Iraq, Azerbaijan, Moghan, Shirvan, and Georgia, while Shah Rokh was left with Khorasan. ... The Mughal dynasty was founded by a Chagatai Turkic prince named Babur (reigned 1526–30), who was descended from the Turkic conqueror Timur (Tamerlane) on his father's side and from Chagatai, second son of the Mongol ruler Genghis Khan, on his mother's side. ...

Yeah, okay, but I must agree with Tajik here, Sikandarji's well backed-up expertise ([[6], complete with very relevant specialist literature) really trumps this, in my opinion. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• Nobody is against this, but the information is correct. Babur was Chagatai Turkic. The Timurid dynasty was Turco-Mongols. For this reason, these should be mentioned, not removed/deleted/disputed. The paragraph related with Mughals are deemed appropriate for the Turkic peoples article. For me, etnical labelling is not necessary. However, in my opinion, it's worth noting the language spoken by both the elite and the people, in addition, the language of literature. Since these contitutes an important part of the culture. Regards E104421 21:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Just a note, Khoikhoi reverted the vandalism here, not the paragraph. The paragraph related with Mughals was already deleted [7] before Khoikhoi. E104421 22:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

No it is NOT relevant. First of all, Babur was not a "Chaghatay Turk", he was MONGOL. That's why his descendants became known as "Mughals" which is just the Persian word for "Mongol". The only thing that was Turkic about Babur was his Chaghatay language. However, since Babur's descendants were NOT Turkic-speaking anymore (his grandson Akbar did not understand Chaghatay and was forced to translate his grandfather's Baburnama into his own Persian mother-tongue), the Mughals were NEITHER Turkic in origin (they were Mongols, of coursed mixed with various other peoples - from Central Asia to India) NOR Turkic in language (except for Babur, ALL other Mughals were first Persian-speaking and later Urdu-speaking; Bahadur Shah II is considered one of the greatest Urdu poets in history!). Britannica is not an authoritative source and contradicts itself in many articles. This is what another article of Britannica says about Babur:

• "... The first Mughal, or Mongol, emperor of India (1526–30) and founder of the Mughal Dynasty there was Baber. ... As ruler of the principality of Fergana in Turkestan, his birthplace, Baber first tried to recover Samarkand, the former capital of the empire founded by his Mongol ancestor Timur Lenk ..." [8]

The most authoritative source available on Timur is the article in the Encyclopaedia of Islam, written by Prof. Dr. B. Manz, the leading expert on Timurid history in Central Asia [9]. In that article, she makes it very clear that Timur was a MONGOL, and that his MONGOL origin from the MONGOLIAN Berlas tribe was - in his view - his legitimacy to rule. The claim that he was a "Turk" is a recent phenomenon of Turcohile writers and Turkish nationalists. And besides that, the MUGHALS were a totally different dynasty who lived in a totally different time.

There is absolutely NO point in mentioneing the Mughals, who were Persian-speaking Mongols, in the Turkic peoples aticle. Tājik 22:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• This your pov-fork. That's it! E104421 22:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

If that's all you have to say ... Tājik 22:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey guys, I really don't need you two continuing your fighting on my talk page for the rest of the evening. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:41, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Byzantinistik

Hallo, and many thanks for your note! As for the debate - yet another go-around on the subject, "Who did the Byzantines think they were"? (Personally I've always suspected they were Aztec, but I'm waiting a few years before I go public with that one [insert appropriate emoticon here]). In any case, casualties were light. --Javits2000 00:05, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Aztecs, huh? Good idea. It will certainly improve our chances of finally getting Mel Gibson to make a movie about them. Fut.Perf. ☼ 00:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

"Angry Bahraini"

Thanks for the explanation re the Angry Bahraini. Best regards, --06:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi

Do you think you could unprotect my talkpage. I was discussing this with Khoi the other day - I don't think talkpages should be s-protected, as I remember a time when I had opened a new account (something I very rarely do :p) and was not able to edit a talkpage; it was very frustrating.--Euthymios 11:06, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I know it shouldn't be done lightly. Okay, I'll unprotect yours, if you don't mind having your page history cluttered with the junk all the time. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Do you think you could block and delete the created articles [10].--Euthymios 11:16, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, could you unprotect my userpage - I'm enjoying all this attention ;-) --Euthymios 11:33, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Mine too bitte. It actually helps filling up this cat, which BTW needs the attention of a sysop to block all these (they are reverters of the cabal texts in all our talkpages). NikoSilver 11:39, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay. I'm not sure if we need to bother any longer keeping track of all the IPs. They are throwaway dynamic IPs from Greece's largest DSL ISP, as far as I can see, which means they only need to be blocked briefly the moment he uses them - once he's got a fresh one he probably couldn't go back to the old one even if he wanted to, so it's no use blocking afterwards. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:05, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks from semiprotecting my page, Future Perfect at Sunrise;-). (the bad thing is that i liked it when i saw 'I have one new message'...). Ciao Hectorian 11:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Umm... FP, how about unprotecting our (my and Niko's) userpages?--Euthymios 12:16, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, while you're at it, could you also unprotect Bulgarian Human Rights in Macedonia (you may want to leave it s-protected for obvious reasons).--Euthymios 13:11, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

You sure about the userpage? It's only going to create more work for everybody reverting the junk... Well, okay, if you insist. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:14, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Secure Computing

Please explain your opposition to a disambiguation page between the articles "Secure_computing" and "Secure_Computing", especially when one is a redirect to something by a different name. P41 00:34, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, it doesn't do much harm, but what good does it do? Ask yourself who is ever going to see that page. Let's say somebody types "Secure computing" into the search box. Let's say there's a 60% chance he really wants the general concept and a 40% chance he wants the company. With the solution I propose, this user now has a 60% chance to immediately find what they are looking for; in the other 40% they need exactly one further mouseclick. On the other hand, if they are first led to the disambiguation page, then everybody will be slowed down by that extra click. Dab pages like that are really only useful if there's more than two entries. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:08, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

User:Stathis Psaltis

Well, I suppose, although this user's pushing of the article Errrrr didn't help. Thanks, NawlinWiki 17:36, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism on my user page

Thanks for reversion and semi-protection! Can you please also semi my User talk:Nwwaew/Archive 1 and User talk:Nwwaew/Archive 2 if possible? Thanks!
Oh, and if you're wonderirng who keeps vandalizing my userpage, its a couple of kids at my school who discovered my editing Wikipedia one day, and decided they want to "take me down". So far, they've used numerous sockpuppets and usually fill my page with so many barnstars it slows my computer down. Nwwaew (Talk Page) (Contribs) (E-mail me) 02:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok

οκ σταματαω, αλλα γιατι πρεπει να διαγραφει το template αυτο? Και η δανια εχει αντοιστιχο αλλα κανεις δεν λεει τπτ --KaragouniS 14:01, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

ok pal, I just informed the other Greek users about the delete proposition. We should have been asked before they propose it. Anyway... --KaragouniS 14:08, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Ne

Hahaha, yeah, I guess you're right. :-) It just means that Wikipedia distracts me from Wikipedia. Khoikhoi 19:14, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Question

Αν βρω μια εικονα στην ελληνικη WP και την κανω upload εδω, τι lisence tag πρεπει να βαλω? Mitsos 10:31, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

In principle, the same license they had over at el - but check whether that license is correct and plausible. You could also consider uploading it directly to commons.wikimedia.org, so that it will be accessible to all projects automatically. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:37, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but I can't see a lisence tag in this image. Mitsos 11:07, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Den katalabenw giati den bgainei to link. H eikona sto arthro gia to Griva einai. Mitsos 11:09, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Ah, problem. I guess the only way is to go and ask the original uploader on el: where he got it from. You need both a source, and a license. For licensing, you might be able to argue "fair use" - since the guy is dead, old copyrighted photographs are the only thing available; if we can't possibly replace it with a truly free photo, fair use for illustrating the Grivas article should be okay.

BTW, the link was broken because of the pipe character ("|") at the end. You don't use that for html links, just for wiki links. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:13, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks... and I have no idea!

Thanks for unblocking my IP, and for softblocking it so that such things can't happen again. In response to your queries, I have no idea, but am getting rather annoyed by these vandal accounts. It is possible that the IP address is 'shared'. ><RichardΩ612 ^ER 11:26, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

It is a BT connection from home, and there is no chance that anyone could have hacked our network. I know of nobody [literally] who would want to put attacks here, so it probably is coincidence, or someone is spoofing the IP [can you do that?]. I wouldn't worry about it, now the IP has been softblocked, it should all stop. ><RichardΩ612 ^ER 14:30, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Go ahead, I don't mind, but I doubt that they will find anything because we already know what IP these are coming from. Even so, it can't hurt. ><RichardΩ612 ^ER 20:16, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Request

Can you semi-protect my talkpage and my userpage? It gets vandalised all the time. Thanks Mitsos 11:31, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Oghuz Turks

• I reverted only 2 times, the 3rd time was not a revert but an edit.
• I asked him to provide sources and to use standard English splling and not the Turkish spelling he is using (even contradicting Mahmud of Kashgar).

Tājik 17:18, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Sharif Linux

Thank you for expressing your opinion on that article. Could you please unprotect that page which was protected in an unfair manner beside these articles: Zahra Kazemi, Mohammad Ali Najafi, WikIran? As you know better than me protected pages are harmful for wikipedia. 18:46, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Hm, I'm not totally at easy unprotecting so shortly after the protection; especially now that I'm "party" to the debate; Khoikhoi evidently had reasons for putting the protection in place. For the Sharif Linux page, let's first see how the other side reacts, we need to be sure it won't immediately go back to revert-warring. I haven't looked at the other pages yet at all. As for WikIran, forgive me but that page is such an ugly mess I'm loath to touch it even with a five-foot pole... Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:54, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you anyway. I was becoming hopeless from English Wikipedia (At least for Iran related articles) but your comment made me all hopeful again ;-) Hessam 20:03, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

hello again

you may remember User RunedChozo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). he was recent blocked again for three days for persistent edit warring. he has just returned from his block and has resumed wholesale reverting yet again [11]. ITAQALLAH 19:05, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

For the moment, I've rather protected the Muhammad as a diplomat page - there seemed to be rather intense revert-warring going on from several sides, and RunedChozo was not alone against a consensus apparently. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:09, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

The consensus was actually 4 to 1 against itaqallah. The other Muslims who reverted for him showed with their edit summaries and silence on the talk page that they have no idea what is going on. Arrow740 21:41, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

my points on the relevant talk page have been met with a peculiar silence. try continuing the discussion there instead of here, Arrow740. i see the above comment, and this, as little more than provocation. ITAQALLAH 22:15, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations on being nothing more than a tool. I reported Itaqallah for blatantly lying in his edit summaries, not that it seems you care. RunedChozo 19:24, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

USER:Tajik Vandalism

User:Tajik has a "barnstar" attributed to me that I did not put there, and he refuses to remove it. Now, instead of telling me not to "vandalise" his page, how about figuring out what exactly is going on here? Technajunky 23:14, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Huh? You did put the barnstar on his page ([12]). If you changed your mind three days later, okay, you could have asked him politely to remove it. Attempting to remove it yourself without asking first ([13]) is a bit borderline, but I wouldn't have said anything. Changing it into a blatant personal attack ([14]) is right out. BTW, Tajik has by now removed it himself, which is certainly the best solution. Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:23, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Heh, Technajunky wants to remove the barnstar attributed to himself but the user opposes the removal. The barnstar is still there. Things getting funny? or crazy? E104421 14:29, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

D'uh. These days everybody, especially me, seems to be reading diffs wrong. Okay, Tajik did not remove the barnstar. Formally, he's well in his rights, I'd say. There is, of course, no fixed "rule" on how to dis-award (is there such a word) a barnstar. Once it's there, it's there. As I said, he can try asking Tajik nicely to remove it - let's see if he manages to do that without engaging in personal attacks though... Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:42, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Hahaha... I think we need a new wiki-rule on dis-awarding. Especially for the ones still keep on cunning! E104421 20:18, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Armeniapedia on deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Armeniapedia. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. metaspheres 08:28, 12 December 2006 (UTC).

Wlliam Whitaker's Words

Hi, you have speedy deleted Wlliam Whitaker's Words (it should be William Whitaker's Words) after someone has started to give arguments for not deleting that article. In fact this piece of software is such relevant, that it has it's own page in the Latin Wikipedia: la:Words. Please help me to understand. --Roland2 18:54, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, there was still nothing in the article that established notability. Please see Wikipedia:Notability (software) - the article must at least make some plausible claim that it comes somewhere close to those criteria, and the arguments brought forward by the author didn't really point in that direction yet. By the way, the {hangon} message itself clearly states that the hangon is not binding and not a guarantee against deletion. But you are free to re-create the article if you have information improving it. Let me know if you need access to the deleted text as a basis to work from. -- Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:58, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

The person who has argued for the article was not the author of the software but an administrator of the Latin Vicipaedia, see la:Usor:Ioshus Rocchio. The author is Mr. Whitaker and Ioshus said, that he will ask the author for more facts about the software, which he and many others are heavily using. Maybe at that stage of development the article did not tell much about the relevancy of "Words", but it is rather strange that you, as an la-2, did speedy (!) delete this article. You understand my confusion? - Ok, so what shall we do? --Roland2 19:47, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

This is one of the reasons I keep out of the english wikipedia... What's the bloody use of a hangon template if people won't hang on? You could have responded in the talk page, or on my talk page. We could have had a dialogue about it which might have taken a couple hours to sort out, the thing really needed to be speedily deleted? Deletionists seem to be a little trigger-happy. Could you please provide me with the text on my talk page, that I might "recreate it in a more encyclopaedic fashion".--Ioshus^(talk) 20:38, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Help needed

Dear FPaS,

will there be copyright problem, if I scanned a photo from a daily newspaper? Regards. Must^TC 19:09, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Normally yes, I'm afraid, unless you have a very good case for "fair use". The image copyrights lie with the newspaper (or the news agency that licensed it to the newspaper). And since these guys sell their photos to make money from it, they wouldn't be too happy about us stealing their images. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:14, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks.Must^TC 19:31, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Battle of Mesopotamia

Im not too sure what to call it either tigran the great entered the kingdoms and won there respect by fighting maybe something like you wrote is fine so if you want you can change it.Nareklm 19:51, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Also for the urartu page can you delete it my article. Nareklm 19:52, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Yao Ziyuan blocking

Hello, thank you for your comment at Yao Ziyuan's user page. Is it clear, however, that he is able to post on his talk page while blocked? In some blocks, this is not possible. Badagnani 22:49, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, unless his talk page is protected he can edit there. I don't think there are technical exceptions to that. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:51, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

The Ten Lies of Macedonism

Care to do the honours? - Francis Tyers · 23:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok, we'll get round to it at some point. - Francis Tyers · 23:04, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

E104421

Could you please User:E104421 not to vandalize Turkic peoples and Hephthalites with his nationalistic nonsense!?! Thank you! He had been already told by User:Sikandarji in the Talk:Hephthalite page that his claims are WRONG - in BOTH cases. Tājik 00:24, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

As for the Mughals (whom E104421 wants to classify as "Turks") Sikandarji already told him: "... In any case by the time of Akbar the Timurids only spoke and wrote in Persian (Akbar had to have Babur's memoirs translated from the Chaghatai because he couldn't read them). ..." [15]

Now he is once again at it, pushing for his nationalistic POV version. (and in this case, it IS nationalistic!) Tājik 00:28, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I reverted to the Sikandarji's compromise version but the user pushing his own way. What to do? E104421 00:30, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

First of all, you are once again stalking. Secondly, your POV edits totally contradicts the articles Mughal Empire and Babur, both article being partly written by User:Sikandarji (whose name you are abusing for your own POV). Besides that, you are the ONLY person who calls that a "comprise version". I told you ask Sikandarji whether he agrees with you! But you are still pushing for your own POV. Just stop it! Tājik 00:34, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

These pages are on my watch-list. Tajik is using Sikandarji's name/status as if it was an argument for giving some version of an article special authority and as if it was done with Sikandarji's permission and contribution. Sikandarji made a compromise but Tajik disputed his version. You can see this clearly from the edit history/summary. Regards. E104421 00:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

You are pushing for POV, as always. It is YOU who is using Sikandarji's name ... in fact, you are absuing his name for your nonsense. He has contradicted and rejected your nonsense many times - just check the Talk:Hephthalite page. And he has rejected your nonsense about "Mughals being Turks". You are DEFFINITLY pushing for a Turkish nationalist POV, and your recent edits are a clear proof for that ... and the fact, that you have actively removed scholarly sources - including 2 articles of the Encyclopaedia Iranica - in favour of your own nationalist nonsense underlines your evil plans in Wikipedia.

You have once again violated the 3RR, and you have once again created a parallel-article to an already existing article, containing your own pseudo-scientific nonsense. I have reported you to admins ... But I guess you know that already, since you are stalking. Tājik 01:47, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey, Sunrise, ich versuch's mal auf Deutsch! Kannst du mal bitte diesem Spinner erklären, dass er mit seinen Spinnereien aufhören soll? Was soll das eigentlich?! Alle 3min wird irgendjemand bei Wikipedia ermahnt, freundlich und zivilisiert zu bleiben, während irgendwo anders irgendwelche Spinner ihre blödsinnigen Theorien verbreiten. Ist das der Sinn von Wikipedia?! Dieser Typ vandaliert jetzt schon seit Wochen, entfernt absichtlich wissenschaftliche und hoch annerkannte Quellen, ersetzt sie durch irgend einen Blödsinn und wird dafür auch noch von möchtegern-politisch-korrekten Admins in Schutz genommen. Das kann doch keineswegs der Sinn von Wikipedia sein! Darf ich daran erinnern, was die letzten Male passiert ist, wenn man Spinnern zu viel Freiraum und übertrieben Freundlichkeit entgegengebracht hat?! Du bist doch nicht blöd ... check doch selbst die angegebenen Quellen und lies' selbst nach ... notfalls frag User:Sikandarji, der diesem Spinner nun mehrfach versucht hat zu erklären, was Sache ist ... Ich hab' langsam keine Lust mehr ... letztens habe ich in Spiegel Online gelesen, dass Akademiker und Professoren langsam Wikipedia meiden, weil das ganze Projekt zu einem einem Zusammenkraueln von Spinnern geworden ist, die mit ihrem populisten Blödsinn die "Weißheit der Masse" durchsetzen wollen entgegen der "Weißheit von Experten" ... langsam verstehe ich das, und - ehrlich gesagt - gebe ich den Admins 90% der Schuld. Weil sie sich lieber hinter Kleinkram und Pipifax verstecken, anstatt die wichtigen Sachen anzupacken! Auf Khoikhoi, der selbst Türke ist (soweit ich weiß) und entfernt mit diesem Unsinn sympathisiert, vertraue ich nicht ... seine parteiische Haltung ist in letzter Zeit mehrfach aufgefallen ... und andere Admins halten sich feige aus solchen Diskussionen raus uns verstecken sich lieber hinter Kleinkram ... lieber ermahnen sie irgendwelche User, sie sollen sich doch bitte freundlich verhalten ... es macht nichts, wenn sie Pseudowissenschaft, Rassismus und Völkermord propagieren ... hauptsache sie tun das alles in einem freundlichen Ton. Da kann ich mich absolut nicht anschließen! Wenn jemand die Wahrheit sagt, dann soll er das auch so sagen dürfen wie er das will! Wahrheit bleibt Wahrheit! Also lass dir das mal durch den Kopf gehen! Tājik 02:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Arrrrrrrgh. :-((

First of all, I've blocked both of you - you've both been asked to keep away from each other, you've both been revert-warring again, and it's an ugly, sterile, unproductive, stubborn sort of revert-war on both sides. E also broke the letter of the 3RR, Tajik didn't quite, as far as I can see, but that's no excuse.

Tajik, your personal attacks are unacceptable, and writing them in German (i.e. behind the other guys' backs) doesn't help. Please also stop accusing E of stalking, it's certainly not stalking if he comes here after you bring up his name with accusations against him. And, as Khoikhoi told you the other day, stop calling other people's edits "vandalism".

As for Khoikhoi, there's something deeply ironic in you accusing him of being anti-Iranian and pro-Turkish, and turning to me for help as being more sympathetic...

E, please stop creating that White Huns article. Your own statements on its talkpage show it is a POV fork and as such illegitimate. I don't have the time to check in all details how much valuable independent material that page contains; whatever there is should be merged into the Hephthalite article.

To prevent outbreaks like this in the future, I'm going to ask a few other admins for a consensus on holding both of you to an informal "1RR" on those particular articles. That means, zero tolerance towards further revert wars, blocks possible even well below the normal 3RR threshold. It's a bit on the WP:ROUGE side, but let's see if other admins agree. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:46, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Template talk:Turkic-speaking

Hi Future, can you spare some time having a look at this please. The template is for Turkic speaking entities, Greek editors want TRNC placed in brackets because it is not "official". The template clearly says "entities", not recognised states. I'd appreciate your input. Thanks, --A.Garnet 00:59, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Sir, this person is playing games with words. He thinks that adding the word entity allows him to assume that the TRNC should not be in brackets. But this entity is defined by international law as a separatist part of the Republic of Cyprus. His defenses are null. International law is real and therefore notable. The international view = ROC covers all island with both communities + "TRNC" is a part of the Republic of Cyprus that is separatist (only turkish illegal occupying forces). In addition, there are Turkish Cypriots in the areas controlled by the Government and many of "TRNC" people have Republic of Cyprus passports and therefore citizenship, which is their birthright. I am merely providing a counter argument supporting the opinion of international law.(UNFanatic 01:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC))

Hey, we have Wikipedia:Greek and Turkish wikipedians cooperation board now, lets carry the case there! Cheers. E104421 01:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Anti-Greek vandal

Thanks for the tip. I'll keep that in mind the next time I come across the vandal. - Aksi_great (talk) 11:32, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Template

Dear FPaS, some of the articles under category is directly relevant with Ottoman history, Barbarossa etc, that is the reason I put WPTR template. Regards. Must^TC 15:30, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Your comments needed.

Dear FPaS,
Thanks for your good faithfull commends.
You are right, there is no enough number of editor which deals with these kind of works.
I undertake a project (One contributor, me) to organize categories,templates,images and articles.My first job is to collect related categories,organizing,renaming and cleaning of them.That is reason why I have a subpage "deneme", I created a new article.There will be another one; "List_of_Turkey-related_categories(by topics)".I think, many categories was created accidentally, and needed cleaning and reorganizing. Also I will create a Category tree and user manual in WPTR. I hope in the future other/newcomer user will use categories in proper way. This project will take a big time of course( all linked articles are needed to scrutinized one by one), all helps are welcome. I need some bots to handle so huge number of articles, is it possible? Thanks a lot. Regards. Must^TC 15:57, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Anatolia-Anadolu

Ok. No further movement to Anadolu at this time. Sorry. Regards. Must^TC 16:00, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

Dear FPaS, Please consider that I respect seriously to your personality.
May be you are too busy, You deleted "List of Turkey-related categories(A-Z)" without informed me by a word. This work took my a lot of time and I have no any copy.
Your reason is;(WP:CSD A3 - no article content, this shouldn't be in article space. Userfied version already exists.)
Here policy;CSD A3 No content other than external links of whatever kind, or an attempt to contact subject of article.
Sorry, I cannot see any relevancy. My work is a humble work for better wiki and to avoid future spoils/disputes due to wrong categorization and tags. As you can see; I putted related cats to the only related articles under cat "Titular sees in africa" and no more need to tag whole cat with WPTR.
This article never spoils/disturbs any other part of wiki. Please consider all and undelete if possible. Regards. Must^TC 17:36, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Tajik and E104421

I would support it, but on the condition that the 1RR applies only on the articles they've been reverting each other recently. Would that be ok?

Yeah, and I noticed that I was a "sympathisiert". Of course at the same time, I'm also a biased pro-Tajik admin, according to AN/I. Khoikhoi 03:10, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Macedonian (Slavic) language

• Siehe: hier

Warum haben Sie diesem Artikel gespert? --Woman+man 15:22, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

The Wrong Version, needless to say. Duja► 15:24, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Just because I was on the run, and I had to stop you all from plunging into a revert war and using up your 3R before I could join in the fun... :-/ Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:35, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Question

How can I nominate an article for deletion? Mitsos 21:29, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

1. If the page fits one of the Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion, tag the article with one of the {db-...} templates described on that page.
2. If it doesn't but you believe it's nevertheless an obvious case and nobody is likely to object to deletion, tag the article with {{subst:prod|Your reason...}}.
3. In all other cases, tag the article with {{subst:afd1}}, and then follow the instructions given in that template filling in a [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/...]] page.

Any further questions? Let me know what page you have in mind. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:11, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Looking at your contributions, I suppose you mean Athens Pride. You'd need to go for an AfD in that case. Please don't blank pages, it's never the right way to delete a page. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:30, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

OK I tag the article with {{subst:afd1}}, and then what? What am I going to write in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Athens Pride? Mitsos 14:08, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Once you've done it, you'll see some links at the bottom of the afd template, which you follow. It will lead you here. There you just fill in your argument for deletion. At last, you go here and say {{subst:afd3|pg=Athens Pride}}. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:29, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I haven't thought of that. So what am I going ot do now? Simply merge? And what about the AfD? Mitsos 16:45, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I'd say, just clarify your position a bit on that AfD page, and then let's see what the others say. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:46, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Deletion

Hi, could you delete Image:Knowledge Romanian Eastern EU.png (not the talkpage though). It’s an image that exists on commons and has not been uploaded to the English Wikipedia. A user accidentally edited the page [16]. //Dirak 22:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

PS finally I can edit your talkpage. WTF do you s-protect it for? //Dirak 22:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Anti-X'ism articles

I normally respond at my talk page, but I'll make an exception this time:

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For your exceptionally insightful and careful wording of the Anti-X'ism deletion proposal, to which I can nothing to add or remove. Duja► 11:03, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey FP

Was that an empty threat? Next time I'll know. NikoSilver 20:29, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Another case of me being away for a few hours, and somebody else destroying Wikipedia in the meantime? Thanks for the heads-up. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:54, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, we all chicken out sometimes. :-) Heads up! NikoSilver 21:25, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I have merged

Athens Pride with Gay rights in Greece. What will happen to the AfD now? I also nominated Dimitris Kousouris for deletion. Mitsos 14:02, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

When is the AfD going to close????? Mitsos 09:57, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

PMA and Block logs

I have spotted another dubious block by PMA dating back to April. Chicocvenancio (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), an editor who has returned and made a few comments on the Che Guevara article recently. Regarding these blocks, especially the one highlighted, would it be possible for an admin to make a comment on the block log that the previous block was in error etc. Otherwise it leaves an unwarranted black mark on an innocent editor's record which isn't right. --Zleitzen 18:30, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

As you haven't responded I'll take that as a "no comment", and will ask someone else to do this.--Zleitzen 17:28, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Tājik

Des to e-mail su... Khoikhoi 23:19, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Dear FPaS, how are we close this. Please help. Regards. Must^TC 11:50, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Ah, thanks, I closed it. Had to find the right templates first. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:01, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Please see List of Turkic states and empires.. I am having problems on the exact wording of "words".. He insists on replacing "Turkic generals" with "slaves".. Isn't there anything that can be done? Please also look into its history and see my edits, I have been trying to make it so that the list is more informative.. [17], and the AfD for that article that has turned out to be a farce. Tajik is constantly accusing other users of pan-Turkism, nationalism, racism based on false premises. I simply had enough of him reverting even the smallest of my edits. I tried to add Anush Tigin Garchai, the founder of the Khwarezmian Empire, and he simply deletes it and replaced others by "slaves". Baristarim 22:06, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

There was a self-revert at the end, after repeated warnings. And then came this with comparing a wide range of Turkish editors to "sick pan-Slavs or pan-Germans" [18].. Baristarim 22:22, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I am particularly concerned with him repeatedly, and without giving up, accusing a wide range of Turkish editors with statements like "After more than a year of constant fights with nationalistic Turkish Wikipedians and their POV, I do not expect any good faith from them ... there are only a very few neutral and open-minded Turkish Wikipedians who are not biased with the usual Pan-Turkist propaganda of the post-Atatürk era." This is really unfair and really not helpful for creating a non-hostile working environnement. What should I do? The moment I, and others, edit an article, the insults and sick comparisons start flying, with insults to pretty much everything Turkish. Baristarim 22:25, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I am going to desist from getting involved with these articles for a while since they simply resemble some sort of mine zone. I might as well be walking down the highway between Baghdad and Baghdad airport. Baristarim 22:37, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

User:58.147.4.20

Dear FPaS, This anon user is making constant reverts and attack to many article. It is probably a suckpuppet. I posted a warning template before in his talk page but it continue now its reverts. Regards. Must^TC 23:30, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying me - seems to have been an open proxy, and as such clearly abusive. Fut.Perf. ☼ 00:06, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

If nobody can make something, can I cursing to him?He stole our one hourMust^TC 00:10, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

No need to curse, at least not openly on wiki... :-) Open proxies just get blocked, finished. Unfortunately it's not technically possible to find out whose sock it was through checkuser, although we can of course guess a few things. Fut.Perf. ☼ 00:15, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Did you see this [19]? I suspect this user to be a sockpuppet of a regular contributor to Wiki, I will email you and Khoikhoi about this, let me finish my research. I found some interesting stuff. Baristarim 00:19, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

He is the same one that had an edit war on Accession of Turkey to the European Union article last night. You can have a look at its history. And check this by the same user [20] I have a pretty good idea who this is. Baristarim 00:20, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok, no worries.. I will put another longer post to you later since I have to actually go out soon for lunch. For the meeting however.. So what is the secret handshake? :) Baristarim 10:44, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi there. I think that when I sign my comments, my user name fails to show up as a hyperlink, even though I add with 4 ~. Any suggestions? Thanks. Politis 15:38, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

It's a setting in your user preferences. You must either uncheck the box that says "Raw signature", or you check the box but insert the link code (like "[[User:Politis|Politis]]") in the box immediately above under "signature". Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:41, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi

Hi FP, I was wondering if you would like to help me with the Kurdish article. I kind of understand the turkish objections, I mean if I had been brought up in a world where I was taught that Turkey could do no wrong (as is the case in turkish schools I gather), I would also be devastated to find out this wasn't the case. Baristarim does have a point however; my creating that article was linked to the Pontus article. When one searches for sources regarding Turkey and genocide you find a lot of that kind of thing - the sources I used in that article merely turned up in my research. One of the better sources on the topic I found was this [21], which I found while looking for the Pontus incidents, but seems to focus more on the Armenian and Kurdish cases (you need certain access permissions to access it though, which I and Francis have). I can't access it now, as I am on a very slow connection, but in the weeks to come I'll see to it. Good luck in babysitting us :-) Regards. //Dirak 18:20, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm, I'm not sure whether my obligations in preparing the cabal's end-of-year board meeting will allow me much time for editing over the next days... ;-) Try not to frighten away too many babysitters while I'm away... Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:34, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

) Tājik 00:22, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Tajik's block

Hi, re. your block of Tajik: Being the admin most involved with this dispute so far, I had the impression this thing was just now steering towards a somewhat more civilised state. Since we instated the 1RR restriction on Tajik and E104421 the other day, these two users were civilly discussing things for the first time in weeks, just yesterday. So at this moment, the block might be a bit counter-productive. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:15, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your explanatory note. I've unblocked (obviously, from the message just above). Best wishes, Firsfron of Ronchester 00:44, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks re hyperlink! As you can see, it works. Politis 12:55, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject History of Greece Newsletter - Issue IV - December 2006

The December 2006 issue of the WikiProject History of Greece newsletter has been published.

You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link.

Thank you.--Yannismarou 15:01, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

By the way, where is this beautiful Greek poem you had in your user page?! You replaced it with a German one?!! This is a disgrace!!! Marry Christmas!--Yannismarou 15:10, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

My Request for Adminship

Future Perfect at Sunrise/Archive 4

---

Thanks for your support on my successful Request for Adminship (final result 78 Support /0 Oppose / 1 Neutral) I have now been entrusted with the mop, bucket and keys. I will be slowly acclimating myself to my new tools over the next months. I am humbled by your kind support and would certainly welcome any feedback on my actions. Please do not hesitate to contact me. Once again, many thanks and happy new year! All the best, Asterion^talk 13:29, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

---

Happy New Year! E104421 13:00, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

PGG

First off, your comment is not fair, and I urge you change it accordingly. If you want to split votes by nationality, you better study the nationalities of the voters before you throw out words such as "all" and "only". Second, as a party admittedly completely unaware of the discussion that followed, maybe you should have chosen to let someone else close it (or maybe you should decide to have an opinion by taking part in the vote, which largely started due to your "hostage" comment)... NikoSilver 18:34, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Ahem... sorry, but I think I'll stand by what I wrote. Nationalities? Okay, I overlooked Eupator and Chaldaean. Those deceptive Greek-sounding names. Any others? In any case, their presence in the vote doesn't really change the overall picture too much. As for the rest, it's not as if I had been "completely" unaware of the discussion that followed - I said I didn't read all of it. What I did browse through was enough for me to determine what I said: that the debate is still open enough that one must come to the conclusion that the RfC has not so far led to a rapprochement of opinions, let alone to a true consensus. Hence, it would be unfair at this point to pick out the straw poll numbers (being only one subordinate part of the overall RfC procedure) as if they represented such a consensus. Only thing I'm asking is that people shouldn't be quoting that strawpoll result as if it constituted a binding decision for the future, because that would be misrepresenting the actual situation of dissent. -- That of course doesn't change the fact that as long as there is no consensus for the other side there will be no other choice than to leave the article where it is. Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Then at least move "all" to "oppose" right before "Turkish", because that is the case for all 4 votes there, apart from maybe User:Hornplease. Third parties are two to one (not zero to some, as you made it sound). NikoSilver 19:02, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

User:Khoikhoi

Do you remember me? If not you should remember User:Khoikhoi. See what he wrote on my talk page: [22]. It's amazing to get KIR (means penis in persian) from "Wik‌‌IR‌an"! See the power of Imagination! Sending a message in persian from that Admin on english wikipedia is worse than anything else. I don't want to say anything more just know who he is. Hessam 08:50, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Sigh... this looks like a great big ugly breakdown of "Assume Good Faith" on several sides. You write your note to Zereshk, accidentally(?) including zero-width non-joiner Unicode characters (U+200C) around the "kIR" part of the name and using wrong capitalisation on the "R". Presumably, on Zereshk's computer (like on mine), these hidden characters come out as vertical bars. Zereshk sees that as a not-so-hidden message, "wi|kir|an", which he claims means "we fuck it" in "Fingilish" [23], and complains to Khoikhoi about it. Khoikhoi believes Zereshk and reacts with a warning to you. To show off his Persian or perhaps in order to give the note a more personal touch, he writes in Persian. You interpret that as another aggressive act, I'm not sure why. What exactly did Khoikhoi tell you? I can't read Persian. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:10, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

You know about unicode more than me. It's not a visible character normally. I do this for not making it available for search engines. If I wanted to write WiKIRan I'd write it with no mistake. They should use their power of imagination somewhere else. And you know the differnce of what Zereshk says as a user and what khoikhoi says as an admin. Now he is directly involved with all these conversations and he should not use his admin power in these cases. See this for example. Trolling again?! I didn't do anything more for External Links. I just reported it on admins notice board[24]. And they blocked User:Khodavand and nominated WikIran article for AfD again. That's why they are unhappy! Hessam 09:33, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

More personal-attacks and vandalizm by User:NisarKand

Since Khoikhoi seems to be "off" for a while, I also want to notify you about this:

Please see this recent comment by NIsarKand: [25]. It's a reply on the Talk:Afghanistan page to User:Tombseye. I think it is really time for you to react ... this is your job as an admin. And he has also once again started to write racist stuff, and he claims that such racist comments are based on historical docuemnts (for example, he claims that Babur considered the Tajiks "dogs", and that this is the reason why he vandalized my talk page: [26]).

He is really vandalizing (he removes entire sourced passages without any reason, he removes tags without discussion, he uses more than 5 sockpuppets [27], etc etc etc) Afghanistan-related pages with garbage, and he says himself that he does not accept any sources - not even reliable ones - if these sources contradict his own made-up POV ... he believes that he "was born with extra knowledge" (see the comment to Tombseye):

• "... I don't have time to read your lame sources ..." [28]

Please also have a look at this comment to the Encyclopaedia Iranica and Prof. D. Balland (whom NisarKan considers an "idiot" without even having read his articles).

Tājik 14:52, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Gave him another warning. The way he talks about his previous vandalism sprees without a hint of regret or remorse is truly disgusting. About the content, I cannot judge - and I'd ask both of you to be careful not using the word "vandalism" in vain when describing each other's edits. Always remember: as long as there's a chance the guy honestly believes what he says is right, it may be disruptive POV pushing or whatever, but it isn't vandalism. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:18, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

More name-calling by NisarKand:

• "... YOU AND YOUR ENTIRE FAMILY ARE LOW CLASS. Pashtuns are Kings and Emperors ..." [29]

He is also removing sourced information, only because that info contradicts his POV: [30]

I will rvert all of his changes, because the article was already an FA before NisarKand started to push for his POV.

Tājik 20:45, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

To administrator....if you gonna take sides of one user only then I think I am going to have to report this incident to many other administrators so they can see who is at fault. User:Tajik has many alias sock acounts (User:Ariana310, User:Tajik-afghan, User:Beh-nam...and many others. You are taking the side of someone who is already a violator of Wikipedia. I suggest you realize who is doing wrong things before you make threats against civilized and peaceful Wikipedia editors. Your judgement is totally unfair and I will take this matter further to higher administrators if I have to.--NisarKand 21:20, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

About Emperor Babur calling Tajiks Sarts <-----click here and read what the word Sart means.--NisarKand 21:25, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

User:Tajik is now removing my well sourced edits on "NAME" section of Afghanistan...he is also removing a map of Univerity of Pennsylvania showing 16th and 17th century of Afghanistan. He claims that Pashtun people are invaders of Afghanistan when there is no such thing any where in any encyclopedia or history books. He also claims that Persian Empire never invaded Afghanistan, when in fact they invaded the country many times and not once.--NisarKand 21:30, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Despite the warning, NisarKand has once again used foul language, and he has once again called my edits "vandalism" [31]. He is also - once again - making wrong accusations, although I have already told him that he should ask admins for an IP-check (in fact, he DID ask admins for an IP check and was confirmed that I do not use any sockpuppets; User:Ariana310, User:Tajik-afghan, and me - we all live in different countries).

As for Sart, the article was written by Oxford academic User:Sikandarji, an it clearly says: "... In the post-Mongol period we find that Ali Sher Nawa'i refers to the Iranian people as "Sart Ulusi", and for him "Sart tili" was a synonym for the Persian language. Similarly when Babur refers to the people of Margelan as "Sarts", it is in distinction to the people of Andijan who are Turks, and it is clear that by this he means Persian-speakers. He also refers to the population of the towns and villages of the vilayat of Kabul as "Sarts". ..." The article also clearly explains: "... "Sart" seems to have originated as a term used by nomads to describe settled people and town dwellers, from the Indic root Sarthavaha meaning a merchant or caravan-leader (related to the modern Hindi word Seth). It probably entered Uyghur from Soghdian in the 8th or 9th centuries AD. ..." Yet, NisarKand claims that "Babur called Tajiks rats", just as he himself did. In my view, this is another racist attitude and should be notice as such by admins.

NisarKand does not show any regret, he even denies having insulted me (although his edits are saved on Wikipedia servers: [32][33][34]). Now, he has even started to insult YOU - FPaS - on his own talk-page:

• "... I don't know if you are drunk or normal, but those references of my message written to User:Tajik does not say anything bad at all. There is no personal attack anywhere in it. But I know what you are doing here is a violation and I can report you for this. ..." [35]

Tājik 22:12, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay guys, I really really don't care much what some obscure central Asian word means or what words some guy in the middle ages used to describe their neighbours, so please don't go on posting about that here. Saying that "X said that Y are rats" is not a personal attack. Saying that you yourself believe that Y are rats is a personal attack. Saying that other people are "born stupid" is a personal attack. Implying that I was drunk writing my warning is a personal attack.

NisarKand, Tajik is right about the sockpuppetry allegations, they are obviously baseless, please stop them.

Tajik, I have the impression your decision to simply roll back all the edits Nisarkand made was not the most constructive of things to do. Please, you both need to adjust your attitude about cooperative editing; if you both persist in simply declaring your own versions right and the other's versions completely wrong and vandalistic, you aren't going to get anywhere. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:42, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I disagree with what you think is personal attack. Calling others (not naming anyone in particular) "is not personal attack". Asking a question if you're drunk or not "is not personal attack". Making a simple typing mistaking between Sarts and Rats is not personal attack. If you think everything is personal attack then I rather not type anything to anyone because they might find ways to make it personal attacks towards them. I am from America and we have a thing called "FREEDOM" which allows us to express our personal feelings. In many countries of the world, they don't have such previliges. This means you have no rights to force me to not believe what I believe. You said to me STOP thinking that User:Tajik is socketpuppet of User:Ariana310, User:Tajik-afghan and others. This is one thing you can't stop me from doing and that is my thinking or feeling.By the way....you said about me "The way he talks about his previous vandalism sprees without a hint of regret or remorse is truly disgusting"....now this is 100% personal attack in a bad way. Whatever happened in the past is squashed...why are you bringing it again? I was punished for those acts already and served my sentence. You brining it back is called "Double Jeopardy"...meaning to punish someone twice for the same acts of violation. As you can see...I am entitled to major law suit now. :)--NisarKand 02:05, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Aegean Sea

Hi there! How do you pronounce "aegean"? :) See? Apart from that, Ae is definitely the correct transliteration of "Αι", because it derives from Latin (αι->æ->ae). See also Transliteration_of_Greek_to_the_Latin_Alphabet --   Avg   . 00:26, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Pronunciation in English or in Greek? If you want a phonetic rendering of the Greek name, it would be [ejeo] - the first [e] is exactly the same sound as the second. And for transliteration, <ae> is never used for Modern Greek, as the page you reference clearly shows too. Fut.Perf. ☼ 01:52, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Kalymnos

*Sigh*, I've left a comment on the talk page... File:Cry-tpvgames.gif Khoikhoi 11:10, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Future.

With regard to this edit some time ago http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Turkish_Republic_of_Northern_Cyprus&diff=94672477&oldid=94609618 can you tell me who you consulted with in agreeing to remove the tag. I ask because Dirak and Nikos are trying to reinstate it. Thanks, --A.Garnet 23:05, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Pff... we (or at least I) have concerns with the neutrality of that article, and it has been discussed for months. I repeat I was not consulted (I was away at the time, and still am), but I recall the minutes correctly, the tag was to be removed on that article on the understanding that something would happen on another article (the tag would be removed if there was no realistic possibility of a rename - the tag can't be there forever). So if it's a bargain enforcement you're after, then tough luck... //Dirak 23:10, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

To tell you the truth, it was not as if I got some kind of formal agreement, let alone bargain, from anybody. I was having a chat with Niko, if you must know, and a bit earlier with Dirak, and from some signals in what they said I took it there wouldn't be much resistance if I removed it. I was aware Dirak was already thinking in terms of reciprocity with the "genocide" article. I'm not personally a big friend of cross-article bargains like that, they always feel somewhat POINTy, but it remains nevertheless true that a similar logic should apply to both cases. Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:26, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

If you start thinking POINTy, then unwind the whole POINTy ball of thread, and start from where the tag was POINTy placed first (despite consensus, repetitive mediations, etc). NikoSilver 23:36, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Pointy balls? Huh? Of thread? Unwinding? I don't know where our broken metaphors are going to lead us now, but if you start thinking Ariadne, remember it can sometimes lead to rather lamentable situations... (including people being fed to fish...;-) Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:25, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

This conspiracy theory of A.Garnet that the months long and well founded TRNC title dispute was cooked up merely as a counterbalance to the PGG title dispute is laughable. Greek and Turk users have been POV pushing at that article since before Garnet even found the PGG article. --anon 12:37, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Pontic genocide poll

Hi and a happy new year! I just wanted to tell you that I disagree with your decision to close the poll as no-consensus. When there is a 4-1 ratio for the current title, I'm inclined to believe that there is a consensus. The "real consensus" you ask for is almost impossible to be achieved in such controversial issues. If we accept your idea of "real consensus", then Raul in WP:FAC should promote no article to FA status, because almost no article achieves it! I think the essence of consensus is a bit different. Now, the argument that the distinction between "yes" or "no" is based on nationalist lines is neither convincing. During the discussion third parties also participated: you, Wandalstouring. Eupator is a voter. Now, if you and Wandalstouring decided not to vote, this is not a problem of the huge majority vote. In the way you have stated your "raisonné", a neutral reader gets the idea that a most powerful (?!!!) Greek nationalist clique imposed itself on another weaker Turkish nationalist clique, and, therefore, the poll should close as "no consensus". But this is not the case. Third party that followed the whole debate could prevent consensus (which for me exists) by endorsing the "oppose" vote. The abstention is also a decision some of the involved third parties (Wandalstouring, me [although not a third part]) decided to adopt. I do not understand why this choice should work to the detriment of a (rough maybe but obvious) consensus.

Anyway, the whole discussion maybe philological, since "support" or "no consensus" have at the end of the day the same outcome, but the reasoning is also important; especially for those involved in this heated debate. I thought I should expose to you my view on this matter. Once again χρόνια πολλά. Regards!--Yannismarou 14:22, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Ethnic discrimination!!! A breach of the European Convention of Human Rights and the Universal Declaration on Human Rights. On a different issue, when is the tag going to be removed, could you issue a roadmap? --anon 14:28, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh pleaaaaase.... open proxies? Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:28, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Yannis, with all respect for your opinion, I still think it was the right thing. The main point is really that the RfC up to now had shown no signs of rapprochement. The debate is basically stalled, with fixed "frontlines" and no substantial progress. That's why I think calling it a "consensus" would be a euphemism. But you're right, it's basically a moot question because either way the effect is to keep the status quo. - By the way, I didn't participate in the debate because I was really away during most of the time. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:28, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

You had more time to vote than to close it. (And yes, the previous edit summary said Ariadne, but the finale should be the death of Minotaur, not of Aegeus.) NikoSilver 15:53, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Open Proxy

No one maintain open proxy project anymore? Is there any tutorial on the methods they use to identify OPs? Hessam 15:40, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

They use primitive methods such as searching for the IP in Google and if it turns up in an open proxy list, it is treated as an open proxy. --anon 15:44, 7 January 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.231.187.48 (talk • contribs)

Hah, yes let's try.:

211.231.187.48

user

talk

edits

log

RBL-google-whois

block-log

Bingo! Primitive, yeah... Care to find a few more for us to block? ;-) Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:50, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you both for your practical teaching method! Hessam 16:04, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I can try. --anon 15:54, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

No that's not what is done at all. —Centrx→talk • 18:03, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

List of important operas

Hi. Have a look at the Talk page for the List (and at the AfD discussion if you can stand it), but also at the preamble to List of major opera composers and at its talk page. In short, it's become necessary to try to arrive at an NPOV List of Important Operas of reasonable length for Wikipedia, and some members of the WP:WPO are working on this. What we do about historically important operas like L'Arianna, or Peri's Euridice is still to be decided, but we need to find some NPOV way to do that too. Any help you can give will be much appreciated. --GuillaumeTell 16:21, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Ooops, I didn't even notice there was a debate or anything controversial there. My addition was basically just a cheap way to get the opera people's attention to "my" new stub article. Feel free to remove it if it doesn't fit the page's policy. I mean, it would probably be easy enough to find sourcing for Arianna's status as "historically important", if that's an issue. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:29, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your attention

Thanks for your help with my proxy situation. I appreciate it. --Shiznick

The "wrong Version"?

See User talk:NikoSilver :) - Francis Tyers · 16:26, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Neutralism

Hey! My opinion is that you should be more neutral in the arvanites discussion. Instead of that you let a guy calling the Arvanites to join Albanians (he used the word "genocide" as well) and insult a whole nation (Greeks). Now I'm sure that everyone who reads the article and the discussion will form the idea that Arvanites are pure Albanians (by refusing to intermarriage with Greeks over the centuries) and that they know nothing about their history and origin. There are few arvanitic populations that have a strong arvanitic origin and conciousness but the rest have a distant arvanitic origin. This is what should be cleared in the article. If what I have said means nothing to you it's ok then. Thank you! Sthenel 16:47, 9 January 2007

Heh, I couldn't possibly be more neutral than I am :-) I'm just politely asking everybody to shut up. Asserting over and over again how Greek these guys are is just as useless for the improvement of the article as asserting over and over again how Albanian they are. In addition, I'm politely asking people to stop reading things into the article that aren't there, or speculating about what others might falsely read into it; instead, you guys might consider actually reading the article and noting what it actually says. Or even better, read the literature referenced there.

As for levels of intermarriage, we unfortunately have no literature that I'm aware of, so it's no use speculating. About those guys awareness of their history etc., a good start is the study by Botsi (unfortunately in German), and the classic older studies by Tsitsipis, Tzaveras etc. As for the national myths περι Πελασγικής καταγωγής κτλ., the new study I mentioned the other day about 19th century ideologies is really good. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:26, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Να τα πούμε;

Καλήν ημέρα άρχοντες και αν είναι ο ορισμός σας
Χριστού τη θεία γέννηση να πω στο αρχοντικό σας
Χριστός γεννάται σήμερον, εν Βηθλεέμ τη πόλει...

Τέλειε Μέλλοντα, pse e fshive këtë diskutim [36] dhe pse i bllokon IP adreset e mia? Ndoshta je anti-grek? Ndoshta punon për qeverinë e IRJM-së? Edhe User:Francis Tyers-i për atë punon. --anon 17:06, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Παλαιημερολογήτης, ε; Και πάλι όμως, δεν άργησες λιγάκι με τα κάλαντα αυτά;

Και τί ΦΥΡΟΜ ΜΥΡΟΜ, εγώ μόνο από CIA και από ΚΥΠ τα παίρνω. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:36, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Ας τα αυτά! Ξέρουμε ποια είναι η πραγματικότητα (μπορεί και να τα παίρνεις από την τουρκική ΜΙΤ). Αλλά, γιατί δεν απάντησες την ερώτησή μου; Γιατί είσαι ανθέλληνας και καταδιώκεις εμένα; --anon 17:52, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Also, check my IP, I am from a very cool country :) --anon 17:52, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This was very funny. LOL:) Hectorian 02:07, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

User:NisarKand

Why are you threatening me when I am trying to stop someone from removing sourced information from Afghanistan article? Here is your message to User:Beh-nam on January 6, 2007 Beh-nam, on the obvious assumption that the anon 65.94.216.72 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is you, I am blocking you for 3RR violation on Afghanistan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). You have apparently made 2 reverts under your account and 3 anon within the last few hours. I consider the evidence of the anon being you fairly obvious, if you can explain to me how this was not you, let me know. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:17, 6 January 2007 (UTC) ([37]) You don't think User:Beh-nam removing sourced information from the CIA Factbook on Afghanistan article is vandalism? ([38]).--NisarKand 08:42, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

No, it isn't, it's a content dispute, and you both need to apply proper Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:48, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Altaic again

Hi, after a long time, the controversy was carried to the Turkish people article. You're cordially invited to join the discussion here Best wishes and regards. E104421 08:48, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Loutrochori, Pella

Hi, I see you solved the problem with the map yourself. I introduced the automatic map feature in the infobox, using the Lageplan template and the coordinates given in the box. If the coordinates are not numeric (the minutes were gives as "43'24"), the template doesn't work. If you see more problems with the Infobox Town GR, let me know. Markussep 18:17, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Using this Lageplan template we have all maps in the same style, which looks more professional I think. Before I discovered this template (it comes from German wikipedia), I made maps (same style) for the prefecture capitals, which was pretty tedious work. But, if you think it's better to offer the possibility to show dedicated maps, it's not so difficult to include that as an option. Markussep 18:25, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

User:PBurns3711

With respect to the discussion at [39], you suggested that "a stern warning would be in order" and another admin agreed. But no one has done this. I wonder if you could? Thanks. 82.28.43.244 08:58, 12 January 2007 (UTC)