User talk:Russavia/Archive 21
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
The Signpost: 20 June 2011
- News and notes: WMF Board election results; Indian campus ambassadors gear up; Wikimedia UK plans; Malayalam Wikisource CD; brief news
- WikiProject report: The Elemental WikiProject
- Featured content: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: One case comes to a close; initiator of a new case blocked as sockpuppet
Hi,
we're doing this text in English now but I think that you may see it right now :) Lvova Anastasiya (talk) 10:32, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
- Коллега, не могли бы вы ознакомиться с этими двумя небольшими статьями, посвященными картинам русских художников Александра Семёнова и Николая Тимкова: Malaya Sadovaya street (painting) и Russian Winter. Hoarfrost (painting) и высказать здесь и здесь своё мнение по поводу целесообразности их удаления? Как я вижу, среди инициаторов удаления созданных 3 дня назад статей нет занимающихся русским искусством или хотя бы элементарно знающих язык. Статьи являются переводом статей, существующих в русском разделе Википедии: Малая Садовая (картина А. М. Семёнова) и Русская зима. Иней (картина Н. Тимкова) С Уважением, Leningradartist (talk) 21:46, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 27 June 2011
- WikiProject report: The Continuous Convention: WikiProject Comics
- Featured content: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Proposed decision for Tree shaping case
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
New Russian Ambassador in Austria
Good day, in Austria the new Russian ambassador on March 9, 2010. Regards Император (talk) 02:25, 30 June 2011 (UTC).
Could you please specify the deletion discussion where this page was originally deleted? -FASTILY (TALK) 06:53, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Proposed Tibetan naming conventions
A while back, I posted a new proposal for Tibetan naming conventions, i.e. conventions that can be used to determine the most appropriate titles for articles related to the Tibetan region. This came out of discussions about article titles on Talk:Qamdo and Talk:Lhoka (Shannan) Prefecture. I hope that discussions on the proposal's talk page will lead to consensus in favour of making these conventions official, but so far only a few editors have left comments. If you would be interested in taking a look at the proposed naming conventions and giving your opinion, I would definitely appreciate it. Thanks—Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 16:20, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Protests
You asked and I left his userpage, but he goes to my articles and edits! See Tyko Vylka history!--DissidentRUS (talk) 17:23, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
Drukair
Hi Russavia!
Firstly I notice http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Druk_Air&diff=next&oldid=326568201 The problem is that the location of the corporate/administrative headquarters is not the same thing as the airline's main hub. Each airline's lead needs to state where the administrative HQ is. While many airlines have the HQ at the same airport as the main hub, some have their HQs at different airports (Swiss International Air Lines), or in a city center (United Airlines), or in a city not considered to be a hub (Lufthansa).
If you are curious about the citation, from my understanding the lead is a better place for the citation than the infobox, and if a piece of info in the lead is not in the body of the article, it must be cited in the lead, even if it is non-controversial.
Also, after reading http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Druk_Air&diff=389719059&oldid=388305100 I think they could be useful. They may have things like information for nationals of a certain country regarding the airline, sale of tickets in local currencies, etc.
The website says that the agent's the only registered agent in the country of Singapore. Not sure if Druk Air's site has that info. WhisperToMe (talk) 21:39, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
Arbitration motion regarding Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Eastern European mailing list and Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Russavia-Biophys
By motion voted upon at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment:
The remedies of the Eastern European mailing list and Russavia-Biophys cases are amended to permit bilateral interactions between User:Russavia and User:Miacek.
For the Arbitration Committee, Salvio Let's talk about it! 01:05, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
The Russian consulate in the Hague
Hello,
I made a picture of the Russian consulate in The Hague, the Netherlands referring to your request on the Dutch Wikipedia in 2009. The consulate has changed its location from Laan van Meerdervoort 1 to Scheveningseweg 2. And I made an extra picture of the entrance sign of the Russian consulate in The Hague. {{SUBST:User:Janaa/Signature2}} (talk) 20:46, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 11 July 2011
- From the editor: Stepping down
- Higher education summit: Wikipedia in Higher Education Summit recap
- In the news: Britannica and Wikipedia compared; Putin award criticized; possible journalistic sockpuppeting
- WikiProject report: Listening to WikiProject Albums
- Featured content: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Tree shaping case comes to a close
- Technology report: WMF works on its release strategy; secure server problems
Comment to Noticeboard Post
Thought I'd post this here instead of at the noticeboard. I've had an IP vandalize my talk page once. Luckily King_of_Hearts happened to notice and revert it before I got to it a second later. However, thanks to this IP you are now qualified to use {{User:UBX/vandalized}} (a userbox) on your talk page. =) CycloneGU (talk) 19:34, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: Micro-airlines
Hello Russavia. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Micro-airlines, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7: Not an article about a website. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:10, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 18 July 2011
- In the news: Fine art; surreptitious sanitation; the politics of kyriarchic marginalization; brief news
- WikiProject report: Earn $$$ free pharm4cy WORK FROM HOME replica watches ViAgRa!!!
- Featured content: Historic last launch of the Space Shuttle Endeavour; Teddy Roosevelt's threat to behead official; 18th-century London sex manual
- Arbitration report: Motion passed to amend 2008 case: topic ban and reminder
- Technology report: Code Review backlog almost zero; What is: Subversion?; brief news
Help
Hello, Rusavia
I wonder if you can help me. I am presenting a talk on Wikimania on Flagged Revisions and I would like to have screenshots of English patrolling interface because I think the audience would be distracted by Cyrillic if I did them from the Russian Wikipedia.
I would like to have:
- An article where some changes are not patrolled;
- A stabilized article
- A bit of a watchlist where there is at least one unpatrolled article shows "!" signs.
My e-mail is mstislavl1atgmail.com
Orphaned non-free image File:The eXile logo.png
Thanks for uploading File:The eXile logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:40, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 25 July 2011
- Wikimedian in Residence interview: Wikimedian in Residence on Open Science: an interview with Daniel Mietchen
- Recent research: Talk page interactions; Wikipedia at the Open Knowledge Conference; Summer of Research
- WikiProject report: Musing with WikiProject Philosophy
- Featured content: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: New case opened; hyphens and dashes update; motion
- Technology report: Protocol-relative URLs; GSoC updates; bad news for SMW fans; brief news
Rough translation
Why did you do this? The content removed was a very poor machine translation, and tidying it without the original source would be very difficult, surely its better off stubbed and built up from that? Or are you planning on tidying it yourself?--Jac16888 Talk 16:33, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- I did this because the reference is clearly given, but the text is in need of accurate translation. This is noted by the template at the top of the page which makes that notice known. I don't agree with your machine translation, as there are also spelling errors in the English output. Either way, we don't work on a schedule, and the information can be fixed in due course by ANYONE. But as there is clearly a reference given in the article, the rest is merely marked for cleanup. And it should be treated as such. And no, I am not planning on tidying it up myself, but neither do I plan on simply gutting the article. --Russavia Let's dialogue 16:58, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- I didn't remove any reference, and I don't know what you mean when you say you disagree with my machine translation. Tidying a bad translation is very difficult, even more so when we don't have the original untranslated content. By removing the block of unintelligible content, it leaves a clear and understandable stub, which can be expanded upon much more easily. The removal of bad translations is a common occurrence, and one which is better for the project than leaving a block of what is basically gibberish--Jac16888 Talk 17:07, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Neutrality of Putin's Palace
Would you be able to share your thoughts at Talk:Putin's Palace, regarding the {{npov}} tag you applied? Thanks. —Akrabbimtalk 18:40, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Synthesis or deduction?
Hi Russavia! Hi are you doing? Could you please take a look at [(see the bottom)]. Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think my statement is synthesis. Take care! Denghu (talk) 06:53, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 01 August 2011
- In the news: Consensus of Wikipedia authors questioned about Shakespeare authorship; 10 biggest edit wars on Wikipedia; brief news
- Research interview: The Huggle Experiment: interview with the research team
- WikiProject report: Little Project, Big Heart — WikiProject Croatia
- Featured content: Featured pictures is back in town
- Arbitration report: Proposed decision submitted for one case
- Technology report: Developers descend on Haifa; wikitech-l discussions; brief news
Nomination of List of Ambassadors of Russia to Thailand for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Ambassadors of Russia to Thailand is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Ambassadors of Russia to Thailand until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.
The Signpost: 08 August 2011
- News and notes: Wikimania a success; board letter controversial; and evidence showing bitten newbies don't stay
- In the news: Israeli news focuses on Wikimania; worldwide coverage of contributor decline and gender gap; brief news
- WikiProject report: Shooting the breeze with WikiProject Firearms
- Featured content: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Manipulation of BLPs case opened; one case comes to a close
- Technology report: Wikimania technology roundup; brief news
Orphaned non-free image File:Sevenair logo.png
Thanks for uploading File:Sevenair logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:42, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Translation needed
G'day, can you swing by IrAero Flight 103 and read the Russian sources to see whether there were 12 deaths or 12 persons injured? Thanks and cheers YSSYguy (talk) 08:03, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
- 12 persons injured, there aren't deaths. Lvova Anastasiya (talk) 09:47, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
Assessment
Hello! You are assessing new WP:RUSSIA articles, but could you add task force parameters as well? Perhaps they should be added to AssessorTags. GreyHood Talk 11:04, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
Free Image Question
How is [1] any more free then [2]. They are both non-free covers of a product label? — xaosflux Talk 02:56, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
![[1]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Stolibottle.PNG){kind=link}
![[2]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Stolichnaya.jpg){kind=link}
The Signpost: 15 August 2011
- Women and Wikipedia: New Research, WikiChix
- WikiProject report: The Oregonians
- Featured content: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Abortion case opened, two more still in progress
- Technology report: Forks, upload slowness and mobile redirection
Perth meetup
|
Perth Meetup
Other events:
|
 | |
There is a meetup happening this weekend in Perth, if you're interested. (You're in Category:Wikipedians in Perth.) — Sam Wilson ( Talk • Contribs ) … 07:58, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I am just wondering why you have removed Air China Cargo from the category Cargo airlines please? Thanks --JetBlast (talk) 19:23, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
- Hi, sure, because the articles are already categorised into Category:Cargo airlines of China, which is part of Category:Cargo airlines. The same goes for Category:Transport companies of China which has as a subcat Category:Cargo airlines of China. It is over categorisation to have all of these categories on articles; categorisation should be succinct, which the full range of articles now is. Hope this helps. --Russavia Let's dialogue 19:37, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 22 August 2011
- News and notes: Girl Geeks edit while they dine, candidates needed for forthcoming steward elections, image referendum opens
- WikiProject report: Images in Motion – WikiProject Animation
- Featured content: JJ Harrison on avian photography
- Arbitration report: After eleven moves, name for islands now under arbitration
- Technology report: Engineering report, sprint, and more testers needed
AE request
Submitted [3]. --Martin Tammsalu (talk) 07:41, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
- Isn't it just wonderful to see artificial battleground creation on WP, what after WP:EEML one would have thought such tactics would have ceased. How fucking wrong I was. So one has to be thankful for such requests and just hope that some admin out there will see what such editors are doing and allow that big ol' WP:BOOMERANG to hit them in the arse, nice and fucking hard. --Russavia Let's dialogue 08:05, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
- Please see this suggestion by Tammsalu that might allow his AE complaint about you to be closed with no action. I am hesitating to proceed with this because I am not convinced that other editors want the article tagged with either Category:Far-left politics or any related one. (You removed the category on August 12). I've left a note for Tammsalu asking him to explain why he thinks other editors support applying this category. I guess your restriction does not allow you to speak to him directly, but I'll report back if anything becomes clear. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 01:28, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the note Ed, I will write up my response to it over the next 24 hours and place it at the request. Cheers, --Russavia Let's dialogue 05:37, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
- The AE complaint against you has been closed with no sanctions. In the Result section I've explained how I think the interaction ban should work. Note that there is a different way of setting up interaction bans proposed by T. Canens. I am not sure if that other approach might be easier to live with. It is something that might be considered for the future. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 04:34, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the note Ed, I will write up my response to it over the next 24 hours and place it at the request. Cheers, --Russavia Let's dialogue 05:37, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
- Please see this suggestion by Tammsalu that might allow his AE complaint about you to be closed with no action. I am hesitating to proceed with this because I am not convinced that other editors want the article tagged with either Category:Far-left politics or any related one. (You removed the category on August 12). I've left a note for Tammsalu asking him to explain why he thinks other editors support applying this category. I guess your restriction does not allow you to speak to him directly, but I'll report back if anything becomes clear. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 01:28, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
Bolded NATO names
I know that the bolding of NATO names for Soveit/Russian aircraft is a an issue with you. However, The aircraft stlye guide now mandates that we need to bold those names. This change was made because the WP MOS states that alternate names should be bolded, and WPAIR was forced to change the previous quotes format to bolding by the MOS-"enforcers". I'll try to find the discussion for you to read, and so you'll know where to contest this if you want to. But please don't remove the existing boldings fromthe title lines of aircraft articles until the WP MOS is changed to allow it to be unbolded. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 21:16, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
I did find the relevant discussion, but it seems I "mis-remembered" the details of the discussion. The discussion is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft/Archive 24#NATO reporting names in Russian military aircraft articles, and the MOS-enforcers were not involved. (I was thinking of other disputes where they were involved in enforcing MOS guidelines.) The discussion should be self-explanatory, and of course you're free to raise the issue again at WT:AIR if you desire. - BilCat (talk) 21:50, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Need Clarification
Hi Russavia.. I noticed you making some changes to Asin Thottumkal 2011.jpg pic.. Can u explain me why and what was that.. What am i supposed to do?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vijay536 (talk • contribs) 13:00, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
- Hi Vijay, you don't need to do anything, I have xferred the image to Commons, so that all projects can use the photo. It is now located at commons:File:Asin_Thottumkal_2011.jpg. Tx --Russavia Let's dialogue 13:02, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
Oh thank u.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vijay536 (talk • contribs) 13:09, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
Alpha Delta Crest Speedy Deletion
I believe this image to be non-free content that has significant rationale for being on the page.
Also, what are the chances that this article would be deleted? I would not want to see it deleted and would like to know what I could do to preserve it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Straight.edge3kk (talk • contribs) 16:06, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
Talk back
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Alex discussion ★ 21:16, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
Hey, I replied you some time ago...
- Question: This website does not contain © Copyrights (All rights reserved), and therefore I would ask you: May I use this picture for illustrating my recent article under free license? Alex discussion ★ 22:21, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
My opinion
Even Libyan thematic is currently more actual, the Congolese entity left also the great consequences in history of its state. I supports equality in this case. Alex discussion ★ 14:39, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
- Hi Alex, you don't have to convince me on anything here, it is the rest of the community who are editing that you have to convince. You may want to follow the instructions at WP:RM. However, as it stands now, I honestly don't think you will be successful in the move request, as if you look at Google for "National Transitional Council" the majority of web results, news results, book results and scholar results will indeed be referring to the Libyan entity. You may also want to peruse WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for more info as well. --Russavia Let's dialogue 17:49, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
I would still listen to any ideas you may have that allow you and the EEML people to avoid running into each other and produce less drama overall. From the discussion at AE and at User talk:T. Canens, I sense you are indignant that anyone could see you as being at fault. (Well in this particular case the other guy made a personal attack, so forget that for a moment; I'm referring to you and Tammsalu getting along in the future). I'm not sure the overall problem is anyone's fault long term, but any small flash of creative suggestion would not be amiss. EdJohnston (talk) 02:37, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks Ed, I will formulate a response to you and I will attempt to address some of the things you have brought up. I won't be dealing with the issue of personal attacks, as they are plain to deal with. Hopefully there is some way to look forward so that editors are able to edit on content (which is why we are here after all), without restricting editors too much. I will be posting on my talk page if that is ok with you. Will likely be in a couple hours, or perhaps tomorrow. Cheers, --Russavia Let's dialogue 03:07, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
My thoughts
Things to consider from the outset
Ed, before one can discuss things like this, we have to acknowledge why it is we as editors are even present on the project. As I state on User:Russavia, and which I will repeat here:
My presence on English Wikipedia is for one purpose and one purpose only. To participate in a collegial environment, with the community goal of building a free Encyclopaedia.
My interests, and where much of my editing is focused, is on the following topics:
- Aviation
- Foreign relations of Russia, including
- Category:Diplomatic missions of Russia
- Category:Diplomatic missions in Russia
- Category:Ambassadors to Russia
- Category:Ambassadors of Russia
- Category:Bilateral relations of Russia
- Any other topics which relates to how Russia relates to the outside world, or how it is perceived, etc. Therefore, any article which even mentions Russia, is of possible interest in relation to my editing.
In terms of Russia's foreign relations and its place in the world, one can't consider the foreign relations of Russia, without considering Estonia-Russia relations, which then has to consider many factors such as Occupation of the Baltic States, Russians in Estonia, human rights in Estonia, and down the chain it goes. Or let's look at Russophobia, which is a major part of how Russia is seen in the world. One can't consider modern Russophobia without considering Poland-Russia relations, or the Great Game, or the Testament of Peter the Great. It is impossible to only edit on the current, when the history also has to be taken into account.
But if you were to look at my contributions, you will see that in addition to editing almost anything to do with Russia, I also do a lot of the following:
- Fixing bits and pieces of articles from front page, or at Portal:Current events
- Categorisation
- Work with images - moving to Commons, tags copyvios, etc - in addition to placing images I upload on Commons in relevant articles - not including {{CWC}} images, I have uploaded some 2,000 images to Commons since the beginning of the year - they have to go somewhere.
So my editing is all over the place, and doesn't really follow any set pattern.
You can also see a big list of articles, in various stages of development, that I am working on (some of them it seems I've been doing so forever) at User:Russavia#Currently_working_on.
Current problem and possible solutions
Ed, in relation to this on your talk page, I have scrubbed almost all of what I was going to write, as it was going to be the end result of what I was going to suggest. I will say that "dividing up Estonia" would not be a solution that I would go for, because as far as both myself and Tammsalu are concerned, to do so would be detrimental to both myself and him, due us both being in good standing, with the only restriction being the interaction ban. Detrimental as it would prevent article development and improvement on articles clearly within our editing interests, which could be off limits if Estonia was carved up.
So long as interactions were concentrated on content, and comments by either editor were only on content, with commenting on editors themselves (in any way shape or form) still being prohibited, I would have no problem, as stated several times, to the lifting of the interaction ban albeit with "a content only" specification. Additionally, it may be worthwhile in having a WP:1RR limit placed.
Also, I would support the lifting of the interaction restriction in relation to myself and EEML, with the exception of User:Vecrumba and User:Volunteer Marek, whom I would not feel comfortable in having those bans lifted due to obvious events.
Comments welcome. --Russavia Let's dialogue 08:43, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
- This sounds like a good solution. Forcing the editors to focus on editing and talking about content only would prevent them from fighting each other and still allow Wikipedia reap the full benefits of their useful work on the project. Edit warring has also often been a problem, so a 1RR restriction would be a good idea as well, with the additional note, that any tag-teaming to circumvent 1RR would be looked upon harshly. Nanobear (talk) 13:06, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 29 August 2011
- News and notes: Abuse filter on all Wikimedia sites; Foundation's report for July; editor survey results
- Recent research: Article promotion by collaboration; deleted revisions; Wikipedia's use of open access; readers unimpressed by FAs; swine flu anxiety
- Opinion essay: How an attempt to answer one question turned into a quagmire
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Tennis
- Featured content: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Four existing cases
- Technology report: The bugosphere, new mobile site and MediaWiki 1.18 close in on deployment
Angel Air Records
Maybe you should look at the edit history of this article, before doing the drive-by tagging on my talkpage. User:E-Kartoffel is who you need to speak to and he's over there -----------> Lugnuts (talk) 13:41, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
RCC
- You have new messages at Russian Center of Science and Culture's talk page.
It is commonly named Russian Cultural Center (see category:Russian Cultural Centers). There is no source that provides official translation. But, center of same kind is in Washington, and it's called just RCC. Alex discussion ★ 12:31, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
WP:AE#Vecrumba needs a closure
I've put off proposing how to close this AE request in the hope that you and I would reach agreement. If you no longer wish to pursue lifting one of the interaction bans, then I'll go back to Plan B, which most likely would be a topic ban from certain Baltic issues. A ban would apply to you, Tammsalu or both to reduce the possibility that the two of you will be editing the same articles. If you still want to pursue lifting the interaction ban, then I need your response to the proposed wording at User talk:EdJohnston#Draft amendment. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 13:56, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
I was going by the fact that more sources seem to spell her name Elena in English and imdb also spells it like that. Can you translate the filmography from Russian wiki, it also has her stage performances.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:53, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
A request to lift your interaction ban with Tammsalu has been filed
Please see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment#Request to amend prior case: Russavia-Biophys. You are invited to add your own statement there. Since we have discussed this previously, my assumption is that you would favor lifting the ban. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 18:48, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
Required photos - Moldova
Hi, I noticed your request for a photo of the Russian Centre of Science and Culture in Chisinau, a building I frequently pass by when in the city. The guard was kind enough to let me into the fenced area and make a pic that is now available here. Judging by the size of the articles this photo is requested for, I rather doubt it will be of use anytime soon, but hey. --illythr (talk) 21:41, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
- Thank Illythr for getting that pic. I have added it to the RusCentre under development article. But it will also come in handy on the Moldova-Russia relations article in the future as well, once that is expanded. Thanks again for getting that pic, it's appreciated. --Russavia Let's dialogue 22:07, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
DYK for Lesotho–Russia relations
 | On 5 September 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lesotho–Russia relations, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Lesotho–Soviet relations suffered a setback after the January 1986 overthrow of Basotho Prime Minister Leabua Jonathan by Justin Lekhanya? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lesotho–Russia relations.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 05 September 2011
- News and notes: 24,000 votes later and community position on image filter still unclear; first index of editor satisfaction appears positive
- WikiProject report: Riding with WikiProject London Transport
- Sister projects: Wiki Loves Monuments 2011
- Featured content: The best of the week
- Opinion essay: The copyright crisis, and why we should care
- Arbitration report: BLP case closed; Cirt-Jayen466 nearly there; AUSC reshuffle
Lokomotiv crash and lifenews.ru
I was in the midst of protecting Ruslan Salei and reverting to pre-crash version due to conflicting reports when another editor used this link to cite that he has died. I figure you might be a good authority to determine if this site is reliable or not. Thanks, Resolute 15:08, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
- The source is a reliable one, HOWEVER, MChS has announced that they have only recovered half the bodies, the rest are "missing", and nothing official confirming who is dead, missing or survived, has yet been made, so therefore, we should be very careful not to break WP:BLP by announcing someone dead, when their body may not even have been recovered as yet; regardless of what news sources may say on a prelim basis. --Russavia Let's dialogue 15:15, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
- Agreed completely. I've been watching various articles, including Deaths in 2011, and in that case, added Pavol Demitra only because his agent has specifically confirmed he has died. [4]. Otherwise, I suspect we will have to make liberal use of semi (or full) protection until further, specific, confirmations come in. Thanks for the answer, Resolute 15:18, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Question
Are you online? I'd like to chat if that's ok. - Canadian Bobby (talk) 17:53, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
- I am online, but I am busy uploading stuff to Commons, and also writing emails to get permission for photos and the like. If you have anything in particular you would like to ask, feel free to do so here k. Cheers, --Russavia Let's dialogue 17:55, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
Re
Guinea-Bissau's recognition of Kosovo
Whilst there is definitely doubt over Oman's recognition of Kosovo, it is very clear that Guinea-Bissau recognised. We have seen the note verbale. No doubt whatsoever. Therefore it should not be moved to the Disputed Recognition section. Bazonka (talk) 08:08, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
- There is of course still doubt. Same thing occurred with Abkhazia and Vanuatu. Even with the note verbale from Vanuatu, this was not enough for it to be reincluded in the article until a week or so later. Actual clarification from NEUTRAL, reliable sources is required. Even with the scan of the note verbale, there is still questions from Serbia as to the legitimacy of GSB's recognition. Hence, it is still very much disputed. --Russavia Let's dialogue 08:15, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
Boris Berezovsky (businessman)
Please join in the discussion and avoid drive by reverting that increases the disruption - thanks - Off2riorob (talk) 19:52, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
- It wasn't a drive-by revert, I was in the middle of adding sources for information, when you have locked the article. It isn't acceptable for editors to simply wholesale remove information from an article, when the sources are generally reliable. As I mentioned, POV needs to be fixed, but gutting an editors entire edits to the article is in itself disruptive. --Russavia Let's dialogue 20:10, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
- Replacing POV additions is unacceptable - It was a drive by revert - it wasn't locked but it is now - there was discussion at the BLP noticeboard. Rubbish opinionated attack content is just that and editors are requested to remove such additions - the fact that a few additions were acceptable is not requesting good faith users to filter them all out one by one. Off2riorob (talk) 20:17, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
- Off2riorob, be very careful in talking of "good faith" editors, because I read that as an insinuation that Deepdish7 is not editing in good faith. And having looked at the edits made, there is nothing wrong with them, except for some POV fixing. Gutting other people's edits in their entirety because of some minor POV issues and because they can't be arsed simply making some minor changes, is disruptive. --Russavia Let's dialogue 20:33, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
- Editing from an opinionated position against NPOV is the only problem here, all else is a result of that. Please don't replace such policy violating content again. {even if you were going to correct it - correct it in your userspace and replace it then) - Thanks Off2riorob (talk) 20:38, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
- It's funny, because it seems that editors are trying to claim that Paul Klebnikov is not a reliable source for information. Can I ask, are you remotely familiar with the subject at hand here? --Russavia Let's dialogue 20:42, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
- I am familiar with encouraging discussion when content about living people is disputed, rather that stuffing int back into the article with the position that it is POV but we can correct that. - correct it first and then replace it please. Off2riorob (talk) 20:47, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
- It was actually your edits, Off2riorob, and Kolokol1's that are completely off POV. I've added detailed description of my edits aiming at achieving NPOV. Please join the discussion at the discussion pageDeepdish7 (talk) 06:14, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
- It is discussed on Boris Berezovsky page right now, whether editors would like admin to be changed. From your comments I understood, that you are not happy with admin blocking the page and your changes not going through. If yes then can you please come to discussion page and also say that you'd like admin to be changed, because now it is being discussed. Black Kite is happy to leave the page as far as editors other than me ask him to. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deepdish7 (talk • contribs) 06:20, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
- It was actually your edits, Off2riorob, and Kolokol1's that are completely off POV. I've added detailed description of my edits aiming at achieving NPOV. Please join the discussion at the discussion pageDeepdish7 (talk) 06:14, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
- I am familiar with encouraging discussion when content about living people is disputed, rather that stuffing int back into the article with the position that it is POV but we can correct that. - correct it first and then replace it please. Off2riorob (talk) 20:47, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
- It's funny, because it seems that editors are trying to claim that Paul Klebnikov is not a reliable source for information. Can I ask, are you remotely familiar with the subject at hand here? --Russavia Let's dialogue 20:42, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
- Editing from an opinionated position against NPOV is the only problem here, all else is a result of that. Please don't replace such policy violating content again. {even if you were going to correct it - correct it in your userspace and replace it then) - Thanks Off2riorob (talk) 20:38, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
- Off2riorob, be very careful in talking of "good faith" editors, because I read that as an insinuation that Deepdish7 is not editing in good faith. And having looked at the edits made, there is nothing wrong with them, except for some POV fixing. Gutting other people's edits in their entirety because of some minor POV issues and because they can't be arsed simply making some minor changes, is disruptive. --Russavia Let's dialogue 20:33, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
- Replacing POV additions is unacceptable - It was a drive by revert - it wasn't locked but it is now - there was discussion at the BLP noticeboard. Rubbish opinionated attack content is just that and editors are requested to remove such additions - the fact that a few additions were acceptable is not requesting good faith users to filter them all out one by one. Off2riorob (talk) 20:17, 4 September 2011 (UTC)