User talk:NVO

• For the reference: Bibliography.
• You may contact me as usual at [email protected] but I don't check this mailbox daily, more like once a week.
• I won't respond here. The alt account, User:Antique Antics, is laid to rest too.

Hey NVO, what the hell is this retirement nonsense? What has happened to make this occur? --

If it's a Halloween occasion, yeah, very scary, boo... Please come back!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:26, October 27, 2009 (UTC)

I've considered it myself but found it not easy to do. NVO, hope all is well with you and nothing is wrong that really matters. Best wishes, DVD 22:39, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to this encyclopedia NVO. Take care and enjoy yourself. ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:15, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A request for comment that may interest you is currently in progress at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee 2. If you have already participated, then please disregard this notice and my apologies. Manning (talk) 08:35, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You received this message because you participated in the earlier ArbCom secret ballot RFC.

		The Righteous Sock Barnstar
		Awarded to NVO for meritorious socking at WP:Newbie treatment at CSD :) ϢereSpielChequers 19:09, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply ]

As you participated in the recent

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		For your outstanding work in rescuing Shkolnaya Street, I hereby award you The Rescue Barnstar. TJRC (talk) 00:26, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On 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 .

Materialscientist (talk) 18:49, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Community de-adminship/Draft RfC re: a 'Motion to close', which would dissolve Cda as a proposal. The motion includes an !vote. You have previously commented at Wikipedia:WikiProject Administrator/Admin Recall. Best Wishes for the Holidays, Jusdafax 07:48, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LilHelpa (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{

subst:User:Flaming/MC2008

}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

...in appreciation...

Well, it'd be swell if instead of the cheap-o compliments you'd just quit your "retirement" and returned to editing, but I guess I'll have to settle with

what's available (which is, by the way, cool beyond words—thanks!). Best of wishes to you in the New Year, and I hope that it's not the last time we see you around :)—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?

); 15:12, December 28, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for all your helpful comments. I have already followed up on some of them. See my explanations on the article's talk page. Ipigott (talk) 16:51, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NVO, I put in a stub, and you made it an article -- Anidolic lighting. Writing to say thanks, and stop by for lunch some time. Jerry-va (talk) 16:07, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I just posted on the

Hi. I would like to review the article, but I am also a little busy in RL at the moment as well, trying to organise things for university. However, I think I do know an editor who may be interested in reviewing the article and I could contact him if you like? Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 01:13, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

After tolling up the votes in the revision proposals, it emerged that 5.4 had the most support, but elements of that support remained unclear, and various comments throughout the polls needed consideration.

A finalisation poll (intended, if possible, to be one last poll before finalising the CDA proposal) has been run to;

• gather opinion on the 'consensus margin' (what percentages, if any, have the most support) and

• ascertain whether there is support for a 'two-phase' poll at the eventual RfC (not far off now), where CDA will finally be put to the community. Matt Lewis (talk) 01:03, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NVO. I just wanted to contact you to see if you were going to be returning to your review of the Horses in World War I article. It has been over a week since you last posted there, and in the meantime both Montanabw and I have responded to the remainder of your comments. There has also been further discussion on the talk page with two other editors who have provided more sources/input, and I have managed to find a bit more information on European/Russian cavalries and usage of horses. Thank you! Dana boomer (talk) 16:54, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I took the liberty of labeling your entry in this AFD as a comment, if that is not the !vote you intended forgive my boldness and correct it please.--RadioFan (talk) 23:02, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		How'd you find so much info for Bronnitsy (If I had found it at the town archives, it would have counted as original reaserch). Buggie111 (talk) 14:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and nominate it for DYK.Buggie111 (talk) 14:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes NVO, please do as Buggie111 suggests. Oh, and welcome back to editing here...well I hope you are back...it is good to see you again in this neck of the woods, and please do stay this time....no more holidays!!! --

I'm chanting as we speak 14:51, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Already did so. As in nominate it for DYK.Buggie111 (talk) 15:08, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind if I moved them to the new section that disregards previous debates, viz.,

• Do as you feel appropritate, I don't feel like diving into it again. Now don't they dare venturing into postimpressionist art or neoclassical architecture ...
  NVO (talk) 03:06, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply
  ]

OK thanks. I will move your comment down to the new section. I fully understand, BTW... --

clipman 03:19, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:

1. Proposal to Close This RfC
2. Alternate proposal to close this RFC: we don't need a whole new layer of bureaucracy

Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip 03:22, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, NVO! Just wanted to tell you that you are a horrible horrible liar (yes, I refer to that "no longer active" bit on top of the page). Well, that, and also another thing. I'm distributing a small stockpile of

• Are you planning a crusade against
  NVO (talk) 18:36, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • Darn, busted again :) In all seriousness, though, it's hardly an auto tool; it's merely something that saves a few clicks when dealing with obvious cases of vandalism (like this one, for instance). Anyhoo, if you ever change your mind, you know where to find me... Good to have you back on board, even unofficially, if you catch my drift :) Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); February 25, 2010; 19:25 (UTC)

Let me look at what I have mostly I have the French invasion and 7th coalition sources but I should be able to add something. Tirronan (talk) 21:12, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've finished this request except for the source section and below, to which I'll return at some point. Please review my changes and the three notes I left on spelling problems within quotes. They should be corrected or tagged with [sic]. Note that I am a beginning copy editor, probably not perfect. LilHelpa (talk) 16:52, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Great; I fixed the quotes - my errors.
  NVO (talk) 04:53, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply
  ]

I'll look into it over the next two weeks but not this one.

NVO (talk) 03:37, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks mate, also I stumbled across

I'm chanting as we speak 09:32, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

It's an old story (and screams for an AFD). The "historic building" was nothing more than a plywood barak, but placed in quite a spectacular setting. You can buy half of Queensland for the price of this lot. Wanna trade? OT, have you heard of the stuff that's eating up Russian wikipedia - more than all etnic/faith/fringe crap combined?

NVO (talk) 10:16, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Hi, you left some comments re the Russian regiments on the talk page. I'm not sure I understood what you meant, but I think I've fixed it so it complies. would you take a look? Auntieruth55 (talk) 17:07, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FYI. I adjusted

• I'll check it later, at home - have a few. Some, like Ukraine, Iraq are no-go - buildings completely obstructed from ground level. Turkey, on the opposite, is a very tall bldg in a very narrow lane (and 5x more security than Israelis).
  NVO (talk
  )

• may well be the case; must check on site. I won't blame the ambassador for moving, Derozhinskaya House is a much quieter place... (although overlooking the Palestinian embassy, but that's the price of living in the Embassy Row).
  NVO (talk) 05:12, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • That was gonna be my next question...what to call the article I am currently researching...
    I'm chanting as we speak 05:44, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • No photos on file (it's awkwardly placed, very imposing fence and must get up really early to catch sunlight - it's facing north-east).
      NVO (talk) 06:55, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      • Well, how about you put your alarm clock on for me? ;) --
        I'm chanting as we speak 08:33, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply
        ]
        • Have you no respect for old people ... as if my daily 5:30 was not enough. Incidentally, my alarm clock starts with an Australian CD, quite loud. CD as in
          NVO (talk) 09:46, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply
          ]
          • I assume that this is a compromise solution to you having to get up at 4am in the morning? Huh mister? :) --
            I'm chanting as we speak 02:01, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply
            ]

USS Vesuvius (1888)

Unfortunately, I no longer have access to the reference. I agree an electronic fuze is relatively unlikely at that date and suggest you modify the article to conform to your reference. My reference citation applied to the whole paragraph; and should be retained at the end of the previous sentence.Thewellman (talk) 16:57, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Let's say the word could not be used in contemporary sources, unconditionally. From
  NVO (talk) 04:42, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Orphaned non-free image File:Gillender building, April 28, 1910.jpg

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

).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a
  bot
  , and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:24, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Autopatrolled

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the

new page patrollers

. Please remember:

• This permission does not give you any special status or authority
• Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
• You may wish to display the {{
  User wikipedia/autopatrolled
  }} userbox on your user page
• If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it

If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! Acalamari 21:40, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Bolshaya kaluzhskaya 7.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bolshaya kaluzhskaya 7.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --—innotata 22:22, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nizhnyaya Toyma

It only took me a year and two months, but I finally figured it out :) I don't remember if I ever thanked you for the wealth of material you put into that article; if not, please accept my gratitude today. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); January 27, 2011; 21:03 (UTC)

• I don't like this rename. You took this "inhabited locality" craze too far. And the new name does not fit the contents. It does not discuss the selsovet at all! "The selsovet is built of driftwood, flotsam and jetsam. It perfectly blends into scenery owing to an ingenious (or indigenous?) paint scheme. Some[
  NVO (talk) 08:13, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • Well, I'm sorry to hear that (and kudos for being funny), but technically I'm not quite done yet. The article currently discusses whatever little pertains to the modern selsoviet, and quite a bit that pertains to the old volost. Ideally, most of the content should go into an article about the volost, with the modern aspects remaining in the article about the selsoviet; I left them bunched together as the first approximation because, really, apart from the Soviet re-categorization, it remains pretty much the same territorial entity. What most certainly does not work as a title, it's "Nizhnyaya Toyma". I can understand this form may have been used to refer to a specific historical area, but in this case the vague historical area matches quite closely with the area of the specific volost. It's just a matter of being precise. It's not good when the lead says that the entity covered by the article "is a village" and "is not a village" in the same sentence, wouldn't you agree? Especially when it's definitely not a village.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); January 31, 2011; 14:41 (UTC)
    • Never been there, have no firm opinion of what it is today. But then all города лагпунктовой (или, помягше, "слободской") организации (планировкой это назвать нельзя) like
      NVO (talk) 16:31, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      • I've never been there myself, but it doesn't matter one bit—we have sources confirming it's a selsoviet, and we have sources confirming it used to be a volost. Same goes for Prokopyevsk and Naziya—it doesn't matter how they look in reality; what's important is that they are incorporated as a certain unit with a proper name, and that unit/name is what we use to establish the article's title. Prokopyevsk is officially classified as a city and Naziya is officially classified as an urban-type settlement. The name "Nizhnyaya Toyma", on the other hand, is not even mentioned in the documents pertaining to the administrative-territorial structure of Arkhangelsk Oblast (it's just the name of a river), but "Nizhnetoyemsky Selsoviet" is, and "Nizhnetoyemskaya Volost" used to be. It's only when the historical area of significance does not match either a historical or a modern administrative division when we create a separate article just about that region (cf. Guslitsa). The practice saves everyone time in the end, and one doesn't have to guess what it is the article is really about.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); January 31, 2011; 16:47 (UTC)
        • Listen, I don't have any stake in this matter - if you want to write about the selsovet, or any other administrative abstraction - it's your choice.
          NVO (talk) 18:09, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply
          ]
          • Well, you sounded pretty upset just a few paragraphs above, so I thought I'd explain. I am not promising to fix it all today, but I'm confident that within another year and two months I'll get to it :) Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); January 31, 2011; 18:36 (UTC)

Joe Baugher

The issue of whether or not Joe Baugher is a

WP:RSN#Joe Baugher. As you contributed to the original discussion at WP:RSN, now archived at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 21#Joe Baugher, I am informing you of the re-opening of this issue. You are welcome to comment in this discussion. Mjroots (talk) 09:59, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

• Oh well I missed the swordsfight again. No thanks, I'm trying to keep together the remnants of my sanity - staying off wikipedia ;)
  NVO (talk) 16:58, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Wrangel Island

An anon has questioned the translation (transliteration?) ' "Zapovednik" (a "strict nature reserve")' in the intro to Wrangel Island. Google translate does not think Zapovednik is Russian, but it presents its suggested alternative in Cyrillic, so I still need a transliteration. Also is the sense of a "strict nature reserve" correct, or is it simply a reserve? Thanks Dankarl (talk) 12:41, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Give me a day or two, I'll check legal database - just how many options are out there.
  NVO (talk) 14:25, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• In the meantime Ezhiki has gotten on it, maybe no issue.Dankarl (talk) 16:37, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Vvedenskoye - Nikolai Koltsov closeup 2.jpg)

Thanks for uploading

You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "

talk) 04:16, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply

]

Pavlovsky Posad

Could you check please, did I get things right here? YLSS (talk) 01:16, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current

review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

File:Nikolaev commune 2008 stairs 01.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Nikolaev commune 2008 stairs 01.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:03, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Yakimanka (Moscow Metro) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Yakimanka (Moscow Metro) 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/Yakimanka (Moscow Metro) 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Ymblanter (talk) 08:58, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FAR for El Lissitzky

featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:44, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Category:Russian and Soviet military radars has been nominated for splitting

Category:Russian and Soviet military radars has been nominated for splitting. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you.  —Michael Z. 17:58, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]