User talk:Otto ter Haar/2007

Archive 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014

CCR POV Issue

I posted this on the discussion page too:

Ok, First of all, calling something "Left-wing" or "Right-wing" is NOT POV. For instance, to say that Pres. Bush is on the "right-wing" is not POV, it's a statement of fact. Just like saying that former Pres. Clintion is on the "left-wing". Furthermore, saying that an orginization is on the left/right-wing is not POV. For instance, to say that the ELF (environmental liberation front) is on the "left-wing" is a statement of fact and is not POV. Otto..just because an orginization states on its website that they are "Non-partisan" does not mean that they are, in fact, non-partisan. For instance, since you seem to be a left leaner...I'll use an example that will hit close to home. Fox News claims that they are "fair and balanced". By your logic, people should take this statement "as is" and not question it. Now, judging by the massive ammount or rancor on the Fox News wiki page...its "fair and balanced" claim is in dispute. Is this POV? NO! It's fact. Just like here...saying that a factual statement calling the CCR "left-wing" is POV is simply incorrect. CCR IS left-wing...regardless of what they say on their website. Chairman Meow 18:03, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Otto

About Ayman al-Zawahiri, some fan of his was giving him the title "Sheikh" and describing him flatteringly as a writer and poet. I deleted "sheikh" and I revised the writer/poet bit to clarify what kind of writer of he is :) It's fine with me if we delete all mention of Zawahiri's literary stature. Zawahiri's so-called poem was in a video he released recently in which he crabbed about Hamas compromising with Fatah and Israel. Those Qaeda videos are not easy to document by Wiki standards. LDH 23:08, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi LDH, I like such information. An occasional wit makes such a controversial topic more readible. Otto 00:11, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Spyware

You are doing wrong here (Spylocked)

First of all, you are removing my desire links secound, what are you doing here? You are doing spamming here, because bleeping computer is providing clear instruction to remove the spylocked, whereas you are showing to this link "*Solution for removal of SpyLocked <- this is for spydawn not for spylocked" instead of " *[www.bleepingcomputer.com/forums/topic85376.html - SpyLocked] " what is your motive to do so? its means you want to show that your links "spywaresignatures" are best than others. Other thing that, what is your motive to put the last link of SpyLocked company, please see very carefully , -> *SpyLocked The company where the malware redirects to. What is the meaning of that ? You have its answer, try to find out that one. If you removes my desire links, i will remove yours. Thats it. (not signed by Mike1d)

I respond on the talkpage from spylocked. Otto 07:12, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

RE: You are doing wrong here (Spylocked)

Hello Otto, respecting Wikipedia's policies here are some points covering your querries with Spylocked Page.

I have been posting links to SpywareSignatures Tool which removes spylocked, THat tool really works well and is even being recommeded by MVPs in the One care and Microsoft Support forums.

Here you might want to see it

http://forums.microsoft.com/TechNet/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=1426598&SiteID=17

The page from where it is downloaded has more than 15K hits in last couple of months.

Moreover its a popular download on Download.com

http://www.download.com/Free-SpyLocked-Removal-Tool/3000-8022_4-10667426.html?tag=lst-0-1

This software is downloaded over 3000 times since 9th May.

I would suggest you to download this tool once and test it against spylocked as you did with CounterSpy.

On Another note. I have never removed any link For bleeping computer nor any other that you pasted reading your comments at the talk page. But the other user was constantly removing all the links and i kept on pasting your links back as you did the first time. Thats how we didnt get to know that it was taking to SpyDawn and not Spylocked because it was never touched.

And also I never posted link to spylocked(dot)com

I hope it helps.

Please let me know if the links i posted were SPAM, and i would quit posting.

Best Regards ES101

I respond on the talkpage from spylocked. Otto 17:12, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

YES OTTO, I am the same user as 122.66. etc.

Please check this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DrAntiSpy

Spyvampire

There are many things that people might consider useful that I don't believe belong on Wikipedia. Feel free to remove the notability tag if you are convinced that it is notable. I disagree that every malware product deserves its own page, but I won't edit war over it. --OnoremDil 16:58, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for keeping SpyVampire On

Otto, Many thanks for keeping my post about SpyVampire On and convincing Onorem.

I'm convinced of nothing. It still needs information about what makes it notable. I just don't care enough at the moment to pursue it. --OnoremDil 18:34, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Let this page come to google Onorem, Then if you can notice the number of clicks it gets, that would answer all your doubts of notability. its a dangereous worm and if the cure is at wikipedia that serves information to it.. whats bad in that?

He wont listen

Mike1D wont listen. He continues to delete the links to the free tool... so do i to his till he does.. anyway out? does re respond to your messages?

Antivermins Stub

Hello Otto

I noticed that Antivermins was declareda stud and moreinformation was asked for

I have added a lot of information, referecne URLs, charecterstics and screenshotsto it.

Please check

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AntiVermins

Best Regards ES101

pcontech.com link on SpyLocked page

Hello Otto, the mike1d user posts a link to pcontech site which links to a Software called SpyHunter which was previously listed on Rogue list.

Check the site advisor details here

http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/pcontech.com/summary/

It is fed by Enigma Software

GoodLuck!!

Estonia

Jüri Uluots

June 2007

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Jüri Uluots. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Digwuren 07:39, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I have motivated my edits at the talk page Talk:Jüri_Uluots where the discussion should take place. Please respond there Otto 08:12, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

There are many options here, Otto. If the article has become a major problem, you can request mediation or even open up a Request for comment for other users to participate in. It seems you have warned users about incivility, but unsurprisingly, it hasn't helped. I personally think mediation is your best option here, since there appears to be some sockpuppetry (I saw some RFCU made against Digwuren) and a lot of name-calling. Nishkid64 (talk) 21:28, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I suggest you read that RFCU to the end before making slanderous statements. I was one of the alleged sockpuppets(or rather I was accused of being the puppeteer...). The case was dissmissed and the only reason for the original confirm was the fact that I share an ISP with some users and even then since Digwurren is on a different ISP he was never confirmed.--Alexia Death 06:15, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

RfC User:Digwuren

You suggested a RfC on User:Digwuren. It seems it is finally time to act. (Well, maybe we should have acted long ago.) See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Korp! Estonia on wheels. -- Petri Krohn 14:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

After your numerous accusatory stories of WP:CANVAS, don't you think it would be a little ... hypocritical ... of you to do this? Digwuren 20:04, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

No, this is not canvasing. Otto asked for my support in RfC against you three weeks ago. Until now I have declined. -- Petri Krohn 04:11, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I gave my support at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Independent_view Otto 19:25, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom

You might want to comment at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Digwuren. -- Petri Krohn 03:55, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

WP:RFC/U on Petri Krohn filed

You might be interested to know that Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Petri Krohn has been filed. Digwuren 20:09, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Your comment on Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Petri Krohn hs been moved to talk

There are rules as to how objections must be place in RFC/U-s. Please familiarize yourself with them then file it again.--Alexia Death 20:54, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, my mistake. Put it back, but still needs a form review.--Alexia Death 21:10, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Puppet state

• Thank you Otto for sharing your opinion at the Talk:Estonian SSR page and hello to you in Netherlands. Since you think a term puppet government is a POV and not encyclopedic, I have a question if I may. As there is a mentioning of puppet governments of certain France, Denmark and Norway during occupation at History of the Netherlands (1939-1945). Please let me know, how come mentioning of a puppet government in Estonia's case is not encyclopedic but on the Netherlands page it is? Or else your intentions are to edit the Netherlands page and make it in your opinion: encyclopedic?

Thanks--Termer 09:31, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

PS. the mentioning of the puppet government of Denmark during the German occupation on Netherlands page is factually incorrect BTW. In Denmark the legal Danish government (puppet or not) and the parliament the Folketing were allowed to remain in session until 1943. The German demands eventually became intolerable for the Danish government and it resigned in 1943 and Germany assumed full control of the country.

Hi Termer, I think the term puppet government is always bad. In France you had Vichy: a French government what made concessions to Germany that occupied most of the country; Netherlands was occupied, Arthur Seyss-Inquart was an Austrian appointed by Germany who didn't pretend to be representing the Dutch people. I really have no time to check all those lemmas. I encourage other people to improve them. In this case occasionally I did it. Otto 16:28, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Otto for not applying double standards for the matter. That makes it possible for me to respect your opinion regarding the issue. Although I reserve an opinion for myself that the mentioned governments during the WWII were puppet aka marionette indeed. As were the "governments" of Estonia during nazi and soviet occupations in my country. Further on, a fact: since the term "puppet government" has entrances in every major encyclopedia and dictionary in the world, listing states as having such a form of "government". Therefore in my opinion you have no basis whatsoever, claim like you did that the term is not encyclopedic once used in Wikipedia in context with the history of Estonian SSR.

The fact is: the "government" of Estonian SSR was not a sovereign subject. The fact is: it was under the control of another power -USSR. Therefor stating it as a marionette aka puppet government is a historical fact, not a "term of political criticism" like you have claimed.--Termer 05:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Termer, my talkpage is for personal messages. Discussions about lemma's should be placed on the corresponding talkpage. Now I am discussing the matter only with you and other editors are not aware.Otto 08:02, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Puppet state problem is solved. Standshown=Smerdyakoff?Stagalj=Velebit (checkuser) (Stagalj is banned)

In Balkan articles we are having 2 know are "dangerous" banned users. First is Afrika Paprika which is writing how Croats are good people and Serbs are evil. Second is Velebit which is writing how Serbs are good people and Croats evil. They are problem because they always create new puppets which are using different evidence to explain arguments.--Rjecina (talk) 10:56, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

There are far more bad dudes in the Balkans than you actually think. There are also User:HipiZhdripi and User:Bormalagurski. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 11:31, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Gorbachev

My appoligies. I have changed his title. Happyme22 22:21, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. Otto 18:59, 9 October 2007 (UTC)