User talk:Alex Bakharev/Archive19

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 21:52, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear administrator, thank you for your recent action I have protected the article for a week (Bobanni's version). Probably you not note what "Bobanni's version" does not met [WP:sources]] rule - as for instance - During the period of Soviet occupation of Ukraine ??? While version before "Bobanni's version" reflect fairly representing all majority and significant-minority viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in rough proportion to the prominence of each view. Tiny-minority views and fringe theories need not be included, except in articles devoted to them. Thank youJo0doe (talk) 05:21, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, I had to stop the edit war and every version protected is by definition the wrong version to somebody. You have inserted a very long and probably biased toward the anti-UPA POV piece. It may break the structure of the article and upset the balance. Probably it is better to enter it into the article gradually piece by piece giving people time to accommodate every piece into the article structure and, if needed, counter the bias. Alex Bakharev (talk) 12:21, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your Holodomor-related correction to B. B. Janz, an article I started. I wrote this when I was a little tired and I obviously had a brainfreeze in including the link to Holodomor for the 1921 famine. I appreciate you catching this! Thanks, Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 06:27, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

... deserves a decent reply. This is mine.

In an ideal world, content would always take precedence over anything on the wiki. And as a long term content writer myself it usually does..... except when the cost of ignoring conduct issues is enabling other harm. Tomorrows editors may be deterred by todays, pick up role models of behavior from todays. We need those editors of the future. We need today's editors to act better now that Wikipedia is such a large community, and Giano has been told this more times than most can count and indicated none of these expectations of the community have importance to him. These new editors need to see Wikipedia is not just about people with old grudges being allowed to perpetuate them indefinitely whilst everyone looks on idly. But this is philosophy of the matter; the issue here is "arb ruling enforcement", where the concern is, a ruling said don't do X, and X was unnecessary but wilfully done anyway. The impact on the project of allowing some editors to do things whilst other editors can't would be what harms it more. The wiki became successful in its early days because people helped others. See my prior outside comment here.

Thanks :)

(Not watchlisted - please let me know if a reply's needed.) FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 04:39, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the

hi, I think i have the right to know why i was blocked for 2 weeks! you accused me of having a the socket puppet User:Neptunes2007 (which is another user) without justifying your decision (e.g user check). you answered user:Coren by e-mail[4] , which made me think that there is some thing fishy going on! i still disagree with your decision and ask for a review --Aziz1005 (talk) 11:22, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure Alex Bakharev (talk) 11:24, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for swift action against this user for it's vandalism. Much appreciated. And just by chance would you be able to help me make a user page? I dont have much of an idea of how to do it. AnnaJGrant (talk) 11:55, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Anna, sorry, I am afraid I do not have time to make you a user page. Anyway, a user do not have to have a userpage and at the time they got a useful wikitoughts to share they know how to put those thoughts on the userpage Alex Bakharev (talk) 07:51, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I was wondering if you could help me out with the Safe Auto Insurance Company. I created the page. The logo on the the page for some reason keeps messing up. Could you help me out? Thanks!--Cincydude55 (talk) 17:08, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• It seems to be perfect now. i guess you have fixed it Alex Bakharev (talk) 07:53, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just want to express my gratitude for quick action against an anonymous freak, who has been changing Stefan Banach, Mark Kac and others. This problem comes and goes, and the anon always does the same thing after some time of silence. Thanks again. Tymek (talk) 18:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• No problems. Anytime Alex Bakharev (talk) 07:54, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I know you were involved in editing that article at one time, and I was wondering if you can help settle the revert war that seems to be going on there. Please have a look at the talk page, maybe you will have some way out of this. I am getting tired of the never ending disruptions of the article. Thanks in advance. --Hillock65 (talk) 21:38, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Hillok, I will try to help, but I am very busy in RL and WL. Maybe you, guys will try to find an agreement yourself? Alex Bakharev (talk) 08:03, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have you any idea how to identify any othe rooms on theplan here [5] It's noyt a great plan, but it is impossible to describe such a huge place without one, in such a short space as a Wiki-page. I have to re-dras the hermitage as it is out of proportion, and many of the rooms, I could only find a 1760s plan, si have had to improvise for the things that have changed since then, but at least it gives people an idea.

• I have put some thoughts on the page Alex Bakharev (talk) 07:55, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't bother with the external links, I have found some much fine watercolours all out of copyright

talk) 09:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Ok, I just thought that putting external links for our own refs maybe handy. Let me know if you need help with any illustrations or info Alex Bakharev (talk) 09:14, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I linked to them on the page (project not talk) The hermitage site is so good, we have to make this page very different, steal their non copyright stuff, but try and be subtly different - I have to stop noe and work properly (earn money) They are The Edwatd Dau Water colours - I have only uploaded the Church - is it a church of a cathedral? Bak in a couple of hours

talk) 09:18, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

These are amazing there are hundreds, I think we could end up identifying many of the rooms, even the ones without numbers.

This is looking good, very good in fact, I'm starting to get a feel for the place, and understanding it from reforming the original plan, I can understand nowm how vaulting the ceilings during the re-building gave them the cance to make some Gothis interiors etc. Did you see in the warercoulours there are lots of rooms identified as "of the war gallery" onviously the Military Gallery, I wonder which ones they are? - also perhps we can identify some of the private rooms etc.

talk) 12:24, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Thats great! There were two rooms with the military paintings. The Miltary Gallery (number 12) and the Gallery of War Paintings (number 19). The second is actually an enfilade of 4 rooms. The first one is quite a famous place, the second is now something else (a part of the regular Hermitage exposition) Alex Bakharev (talk) 12:39, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I left you a message about the corner drawing room, I hope we are not muddling floors up, the windows should be larger to match the windows of the grander rooms - we can easily add a not to explain if this is the case, it will be easier than having three plans of three floors with just a few rooms on each - probably no problem anyway, it was common in the smaller rooms to use mezanine floors and have windows smaller in the indside than on the outside - just tio match the external faceades. The page is taking shape, I think we should concentrate on the Imperial Palace aspect, which leaves the Hermitage and museum side to be explained in the correct place on the

talk) 13:28, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Where's 42?:-)

talk) 12:58, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

OK I found it, my cache had not refreshed, and I was still looking at the old plan, whe we have all the rooms I will reallt tidy the lan up and make the numbers a litttle more ordered. I am Hopomg we can have the links clicking from the rooms themselves, but there is a long way to go yet.

talk) 13:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Signpost updated for March 31st, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 14	31 March 2008	About the Signpost

Wikimania 2009 to be held in Buenos Aires	Sister Projects Interview: Wikisource
WikiWorld: "Hammerspace"	News and notes: 10M articles, $500k donation, milestones
Dispatches: Featured content overview	WikiProject Report: Australia
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Single-Page View	WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the

Alex, I was looking at setting up a feed for new Ohio articles for WikiProject Ohio and really think I might break something if I touch it. Would you mind setting it up for me? Thanks so much! §hep • ¡Talk to me! 00:21, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• I have transcluded the feed on your project page. If you want to put it somewhere else please free to do it Alex Bakharev (talk) 01:32, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! §hep • ¡Talk to me! 22:29, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did an IP check on this anonymous user and this anonymous user because they keep reverting the same edit [6] [7] [8] [9], and both addresses come from France, ILE-DE-FRANCE, PARIS.--

• Well, it is not a violation of any rule to edit from a dynamic IP or from two different locations. On the other hand there seems to be an edit war on the
  Ukrainian-German_collaboration_during_World_War_II and it is very difficult to check for the 3RR compliance if anonymous edits are present. Thus, I have semiprotected the article. The anonymous can can get him (or her) self an account. IMHO we should encourage new people to make noncontroversial edits via anonymous account but all controversial staff should be made from main registered accounts Alex Bakharev (talk) 01:23, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]

lol... I got blocked for disrupting this article? check your block log you may find out that you've been blocked more times then those which you reclaim, your edits were removed by the admins first not by me, you've persisted in your ignorance and got Blocked Stop lieing and make a fool out of yourself anyone which is looking in that article history and talk page can easily make your accusations look ridicoulous. "the thief is yelling thieves"..lol Rezistenta (talk) 15:24, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. you have a little message from an admin on your talk page .. I told you stop making a fool out of yourself ;)Rezistenta (talk) 15:25, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you add a semi-protect to Kazakhstan in the Russian Empire? It's having the same issues as at Russians in Kazakhstan. Thanks. Otebig (talk) 09:39, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alex,

Misza13 recently did a great job creating the Wikinews Importer Bot to import items from Wikinews into Wikipedia portals and articles. Another type of bot portals could really use would be one that can update DYK sections. I was wondering if the AlexNewArtBot could be set up and/or tweaked to do that. Using selection criteria on the categories for the bolded article to add hooks to a specific DYK list was the general approach I had in mind. What are your thoughts and suggestions for a bot like this? Thanks for your time! :-) RichardF (talk) 18:25, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• That is a good idea, I will do it when I have some spare time Alex Bakharev (talk) 09:53, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks! Please let me know what I can do to help and/or try it out. :-) RichardF (talk) 13:39, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Update: A discussion at

• I really don't know what no reply here means, so I'll just assume you're not all that interested in pursuing this any time soon. Thanks anyway. RichardF (talk) 14:29, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Richard, I am really sorry for not answering. I have a good news and a bad news. The good news is that a lot of code of the bot can be reused to update DYK for the project (as well as, probably, deletion sorting, GA and FA nominations, etc.). I am interested in this work. The bad news that I am busy in the real life and in three days I will have 2 week vacations in Thailand. So I cannot tell when I will be able to start the project but it would be certainly after the first week of May 2008. Alex Bakharev (talk) 02:22, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, Alex, I call that all good news! Time is an illusion anyway. ;-) Have a great vacation! :-) RichardF (talk) 03:18, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the

]

DYK for Blank family

On 12 April, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Blank family, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page .

--Bobet 22:52, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See my talk page (as a reply to two people). Orderinchaos 02:41, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alex, could you please politely explain to

Hello admin. It has been now more than 3 weeks since i last contacted you [10] and practically i have seen NO sign of respond. Is this always the case with you my dear active admin? i think i deserve more than the word 'SURE!' [11]. I look forward for you clarification!--Aziz1005 (talk) 18:49, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1. My advise is to edit through a single account only. As you might guess I do not intend to explain to you how I have found the account Neptune to be the second one of yours. If you want a review of my block please find an involved admin an I would Email him or her my reasons. Alex Bakharev (talk) 04:23, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well done. SlimVirgin ^talk|edits 00:44, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The

• Your opinion on the helpfulness of the block seems not to be supported by the majority of the participating editors Alex Bakharev (talk) 02:53, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The self-selected group on Giano's talk page? A 46-minute discussion on a user talk page will always be biased in favor of people who have the page watched and happen to be online at the time. — Carl (
    CBM · talk) 03:14, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • Versus a five minute IRC chat on the #admin channel that as shown Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/IRC is hardly a neutral media with respect to Giano. I would also think that the people watching somebody's userpage are often those who disagree with the owner (e.g. have given the owner warnings at some time) \ Alex Bakharev (talk) 04:00, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • The arbcom sanction against Giano is clear enough about what the criterion is for a valid block; IRC is a red herring. The discussion on the talk page seems to completely ignore Giano's ongoing disruptive behavior. Anyway, if he recommences after he returns, he'll simply be blocked again. — Carl (
        CBM · talk) 04:21, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
        ]

echo Slim - well done, and thanks, Alex... Privatemusings (talk) 12:36, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Alex. You did the right thing. IRC have made their last block like that, they want a fight, now they have one. It is up to us all now to ensure the channel is closed.

talk) 13:12, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

• I believe that this unblock was inappropriate as Giano had violated a civility parole issued by the ArbCom. No need to reply, just registering my disagreement.
  talk) 14:42, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Sigh... looks like I am once again asking you to semilock the article... --

• I would not do it at that time. So far the anonim seem to behave rationally and I am reluctant to keep him off Alex Bakharev (talk) 04:02, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to tell you that, rising above the welter of mindless bot-making, of bloated disinfoboxes and preposterous categories that litter encyclopedia pages, your New Article Bot quietly sifts and collects the cream of the new articles. I use it every day, to clean up and add references to new articles, before they get posted on the Main Page. So, thank you! Your bot has made me a much more efficient editor, and that's just what a bot should be doing.--Wetman (talk) 06:35, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks! It was nice Alex Bakharev (talk) 06:41, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You appear to have a previous friendship (or warm acquaintanceship) with

Please reread

WP:DICK Alex Bakharev (talk) 08:53, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Pleae see

WP:AGF. Since you don't disagree with my analysis I assume you agree. Please be more careful in the future. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 18:12, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

I have a feeling that we are witnessing a rerun of what we saw yesterday, now at a different page. A pity sight. --Irpen 18:33, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can indeed provide the good-faith explanation for my warning to Giano, which you said you couldn't see. Giano was engaged in writing an essay that was, at the time, laid out as "the good, the bad, and the ugly" administrators. It would be easy, given that layout, to create a page that a reasonable person thought contained personal attacks or assumptions of bad faith. So I left a very brief note reminding him to avoid that. I think the difference of viewpoint here is that I see Giano as simply another contributor to the wiki, subject to the same standards of decorum as all others. Actually, Giano is under civility parole, so he is subject to higher standards of decorum than others. — Carl (

You are here harasing Alex. You have obviously never seen a long page laid out in skeleton form before. You are not ASG yourself, in fact I am beginning to wonder if you are not trolling for trouble. I'm sure that is not the case. Please ensure I am correct in my assumption.

talk) 12:50, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

I do not see any harrassment of me yet and at any rate I can survive harassment quite easily. Please do not protect me from anything other than vandalism of my userpage. Alex Bakharev (talk) 02:15, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Giano's alleged incivility. Patrolling civility within interactions between editors has the only target to improve cooperation in creating encyclopedic content. I have yet to see Giano's incivility affecting article editing, obviously I will block him per Arbcom decision if he would byte new users or somehow oppress the content creation in another way. On the hand administrators are suppose to be part of the solution not being part of the problem. Actional incivility towards an admin over his or her interaction in admin capacity is a red herring something similar to a sign that only said "Danger! This sign has sharp edges".

The communication problems between editors are indeed a serious problems that is often better to be solved by communication rather than blocking. I am not sure if the editing of Giano's userpage by Wel and Carl was helpful so if could find something else to occupy your time onwiki it would be appreciated.

I am happy that putting frightening over resolved incident under the header "Why we a here" was not trolling but just an assumption on bad faith. It often happen on wikipedia. Thanks for your interest to my contributions, anyway Alex Bakharev (talk) 02:15, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Обрати внимание на Ivan Samohvalov (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), в рувики он заблокирован бессрочно. Занимается кукловодством, вандалит.--Torin-ru (talk) 08:52, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for the heads up Alex Bakharev (talk) 08:53, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Это клевета, товарищ. Меня там заблокировали ни за что ни про что. у меня небыло никакого вандализма. я писал статьи и ставил шаблоны. поставил шаблон в статью про рокировку, что там нет источников, так его почему-то убрали. а там нет источников!! а теперь вообще запрещают редактировать даже анонимно, хотя я сегодня написал хорошую статью - про группу "Rock-Bottom Remainders‎". сейчас и тут заблокируют, да? нечестно...--Ivan Samohvalov (talk) 18:08, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Nobody will block you if you will edit constructively. On the other hand your notices to userpages of a few users were hardly productive, so please take my warning seriously Alex Bakharev (talk) 01:53, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• User:Сайга20К - это не мой (ru:User:Сайга20К) аккаунт. Данная учетка явно создана для моей дискредитации тем же человеком, что и зарегистрировал учетку User:Ivan Samohvalov. Можно подать запрос местным чекъюзерам. --83.167.112.197 (talk) 10:32, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  Вообще, как я полагаю, проблемы с этим участником ещё будут. Мне уже несколько писем от него пришло с угрозами в адрес как ру-вики, так и англо-вики.--Torin-ru (talk) 03:46, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  Не надо ля-ля, дарагой коллега. ведите себя прилично и всё будет о-кей! С превеликим уважением, Иван Самохвалов.--89.204.103.238 (talk) 17:07, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it might be playing up? It's only listed one new article for each of the past two daily updates on the Australian list, which would seem to be a bit strange. Any chance you might get a chance to look at this? Rebecca (talk) 13:33, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes, you are right. The syntaxes of the Special:NewPages has changed once more so the bot was looking 12 times the same 250 newest pages instead of the 3000 pages. I have made a temporal workaround over this problem, so it should work now Alex Bakharev (talk) 01:50, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the

• I noticed your name in the REDIRECT regarding the above.
• So I want to ask you on what basis are we to believe that these were not two (2) distinct newspapers?
• In other words, how do you know that "
  Russkoye znamya"? --Ludvikus (talk) 04:39, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• • Vragi roda cheloviecheskago: posviashchaetsia Soiuzu russkago naroda

I know the translation of the above as "Enemies of the Human Race" and "Union of the Russian People."

The former is the title of the

Protocols of Zion

.

The latter is the text's publisher, the Union of the Russian People.

But what the meaning and usage of the middle Russian word posviashchaetsia? --Ludvikus (talk) 05:32, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• • • Well, I do not remember now, there I got this info. The Russian Wiki in the article on Krushevan ru:Крушеван, Павел Александрович says that he published Znamya in 1903-1904 and the Russian Znamya was founded in 1905 with Krushevan being just one of the editors. So it might be that those two publications were formally independent. At that time it was quite common to slightly change the name and re-register the publications that have trouble with state censorship. E.g. Pravda (The Truth) changed its name to Put' Pravdy (The path of truth) then Golos Pravdy (The Voice of Truth), etc.

• • • posviashchaetsia (Посвящается) means Devoted to, With compliments to. The publicator publisher wanted to tell say that the book publication is a gift for the "Union of the Russian People." Alex Bakharev (talk) 06:03, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. Best to you. By the way, it seems our work on the 1905 text by

Anti-Christ. I am extremely disappointed in the fact that this article on the book was deleted from Wikipedia. I think that this deleting was the result of ignorance of this fact. I think it is an extremely important encyclopedic fact that the Protocols of Zion are fundamentally intertwined with Nilus's ideas about the Antichrist. --Ludvikus (talk) 14:58, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

• • • • What was the name of the article? Doing research is fun but sometimes may lead to allegation to
        WP:OR and deletion. Still I could certainly restore the article into your userspace so you could use to develop other articles Alex Bakharev (talk) 15:15, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
        ]
        • Dear Alex, you and I worked hard on what is - historically - an extremely important book - no less important than Hitler's
          Velikoe v malom i antikhrist, kak blizkaja politicheskaja vozmozhnost. Zapiski pravoslavnogo (The Great within the Small and Antichrist, an Imminent Political Possibility. Notes of an Orthodox Believer). Don't you remember? Anyway, what I really would like you to do is argue that deleting this article was unjustified, and a very big mistake, done while you and I were both asleep! --Ludvikus (talk) 15:37, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
          ]
        • Now, misleadingly, this is just another title (a Russian language title) for the
          Protocols of Zion as the final Chapter XII. That important historical even is now lost because of some zealous Wiki editor(s). --Ludvikus (talk) 15:48, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
          ]

• Well, you and I worked hard on this article. But that's not the point. I think this book is sufficiently important to deserve its own Wiki article. Much less important titles have one. And wasn't Nilus recently (after the fall of the Soviet Union)
  Russian Orthodox Church? So let's at least TRY to restore the article on the book first! --Ludvikus (talk) 16:18, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Do you think, perhaps, the deletion was likely inspired by a desire to protect the reputation of Nilus?--Ludvikus (talk) 16:23, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Or do you think that some zealous Wiki editors think its better to bury, or hide, the evil associated with The Protocols by just censoring as much of it as possible?--Ludvikus (talk) 16:23, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alex, another Administrator (I just noticed that you've become one too great, & congratulations) has also agreed to support restoration! Here's what he wrote (my Copy & Paste) on the Talk page of the
    Protocols of Zion
    :

     I think I can back you up on that, Ludvikus. To see how to get it restored, see 
WP:DRV
.
     Be sure you mention that the book is not just an alternate title for The Protocols
     but a separate book that contained The Protocols as its final chapter in a later edition.
     --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 16:22, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

--Ludvikus (talk) 16:42, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ludvicus, I even not sure we need

Have a good time on your vacation. Regarding the issue, I really believe this Opus Magnum of Nilus deserves its distinct Wiki page. Also, I think you underestimate the importance of ultranationists (I will not mention the WWII German ones who you know succeeded in their aim, in spite of their electoral minority). But also, I have substantial experience that such ultranationalist have also been whitewashing Wikipedia articles to make their views look better historically. For example, look at what's happening/happened at "Union of the Russian People" and the "Black Hundreds" articles - there is, I think, a tendency of stripping these articles of references to antisemitism - I think such edited must be driven by shame, or a desire for positive publicity (I imagine some ultranationalists find antisemitism today to be counter-productive). --Ludvikus (talk) 01:00, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An image that you uploaded or altered,

Hello. I see you've blocked user:Dilmun for allegedly being a sockpuppet of user:Islami. However, the checkuser request did not include user:Islami. Am I missing something here? Is there another checkuser page where it was proven that Islami and Dilmun were the same person? Earlier, Islami was judged to be a sockpuppet of user:Skatewalk and user:Serenesoulnyc. However, I've had dealings with both Dilmun and Skatewalk and the two have absolutely no similarity whatsoever in area of interest, editing style, or "talk page" style. It's truly inconceivable to me that they are the same person. If the indefinite block was based on an IP check then can you please show me the relevant page? And if it was instead based on a perceived similarity in "editing patterns," then can you please reassess the situation? I truly believe that you've blocked a valuable contributor whose contributions are almost always well-written and cited to impeccable sources, so I hope you will bear with me. Thank you. -- Slacker (talk) 02:19, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Islami's edits are to old to be checkusered. Still comparing Dilmun's and Islami's patterns of editing (including sock puppet usage) shows that both are controlled by the same person Alex Bakharev (talk) 03:10, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly is similar between the two editing patterns? That's such a vague charge. Sock puppet usage does not prove anything either because many users are likely to engage in it. -- Slacker (talk) 03:24, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, there is almost no similarity at all between the two: Islami's edits were almost entirely related to

Salafism and related religious topics, while nearly all Dilmun's edits were related to the history of Bahrain -- two completely different topics. -- Slacker (talk) 03:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Well, first, Dilmun is obviously a second account of an experienced user. Even his first edit is insertion of a reasonably obscure template. Secondly, both are editing from the extreme Suni positions, both like to "Arabize" people who are usually not considered as Arabs. Thirdly, both use sockpuppets abusively. There also a few other similarities in the edit pattern Alex Bakharev (talk) 08:29, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Bakharev is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Wikipedia on May 4

If you stop by before then, can you take a look at my comments on User talk:Dilmun? I took a pretty close look at their edits and, while there is no proof either way, I'd say it's more likely than not that they are two different people. --B (talk) 01:29, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I note you've left a non-notability tag. while i dont normally questiona more experienced user, you should probably have left a tag on the creators talk page telling him this to give him a chance to rewrite the article, since the tag says it may be "considered for redirection, merge or ultimately deletion". I've left one, its just a quick heads up Ironholds (talk) 19:40, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• I like your politeness, still I think the tag is self-explanatory: unless reliable sources establishing the subject's notability are found the article Marc Kalinka will be eventually sent to deletion. Please help the author to find such sources. Alex Bakharev (talk) 08:19, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Paskha_sauna.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to
   di-replaceable fair use disputed
   }}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before

Hi! You may be interested in this discussion: [12]--Dojarca (talk) 08:41, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The wise way to address the controversial claims of our Polish partners to Stefan Banach is to acknowledge his European Ukrainian origins and background. Europe is our common home and Poles should have their say too. Let's stop arguing. As a citizen of Ukrainian Lviv, Banach is both Ukrainian and European. Let's call him a European mathematician. I hope Poles would agree. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.210.14.5 (talk) 09:02, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• I do not see referenced data that support your statement. He does not seem to be mentioned as a non-Pole by any serious sources. On the other hand I have added Category:Members of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine to him and indicated on talk that I would not object to include also Category:Ukrainian mathematicians Alex Bakharev (talk) 10:29, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jo0doe is at it again with his massive edits, uncivility and refusal to discuss his edits and come to an agreement with other editors. As explained in the discussion, this behavior seems to meet the criteria for acting as a disruptive editor [13]. Would another warning be in order? regardsFaustian (talk) 17:36, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alex is at vacation. I will try to handle it. His massively controversial edits will be reverted. --Irpen 17:43, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Alex Bakharev/Archive19!

You are cordially invited to participate in WikiProject Christianity The goal of WikiProject Christianity is to improve the quality and quantity of information about Christianity available on Wikipedia. WP:X as a group does not prefer any particular tradition or denominination of Christianity, but prefers that all Christian traditions are fairly and accurately represented.

You are receiving this invitation because you are a member of one of the related Christianity Projects and I thought that you might be interested in this project also - Tinucherian (talk) 14:41, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:08, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the

This stub could use your knowledge of Russian history and current events. I just created the stub. Hope you have returned from your vacation, or will do so soon. Wikipedia misses you very much I'm sure. --Ludvikus (talk) 05:57, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• I have expanded a little bit. You may want to fill the redlink on Ioann of St. Petersburg and Ladoga, his teacher, another prominent nationalist and Anti-Semite Alex Bakharev (talk) 11:45, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I saw your work - much appreciated! And welcome back. I hope you had great vacation!
    • You are one of the editors I enjoy working with. Have a great day Wikipedianing. --Ludvikus (talk) 12:17, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Banach was born and spent his childhood in the area populated by Rusyns and Ukrainians. In fact, his last name and the last name of his mother is a very common name among both Rusyns and Ukrainians who lived in this area for millennia.

The modern day resurgence of nationalism and anti-Semitism in Poland led to a controversy surrounding the coverage of the ethnic origins of Banach and other

Alex, listen, I am astonished by the stuborness of the guy (User:Maracana). I believe there is something that needs to be considered. That is very annoying having him changing things. It seems that it is not only me who is trying to stop his doings.Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 23:39, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Alex. Happy Easter from Ukraine! Hope your vacation goes well :) --Irpen 08:10, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a bot that scans articles for expansion? NewArtBot scans new articles, and proposes some for DYK, but it appears that there is no bot that scans for articles that have been expanded, say 5x or more in a day. I'll leave it up to you if you want to propose / create a bot, or pass on the suggestion to someone else who might be interested. Mjroots (talk) 14:53, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• The bot does not exist yet. It maybe interested to write something like this. It should analyze the recent changes page instead of the newest article so it must have a more complicated logic than that. Something like: for all the recent changes see if the article changed significantly in size since the last week. If yes, check the topic and report. I would like to write such a bot but cannot promise anything: very busy in reaL life Alex Bakharev (talk) 12:25, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, just wanted to ask you for some help with sorting out the article, as well as inlcuding it in the list of new articles in the Films Project and Films Portal. Thank you in advance.--Rubikonchik (talk) 17:09, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:10, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Don't forget your promise! To restore that Page of ours on
  Serge Nilus's book on the Antichrist! --Ludvikus (talk) 13:55, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Remember that it's 11 chapters on Antichrist - and only the last chapter 12 is on
  The Protocols. --Ludvikus (talk) 14:05, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]

I have nominated

I think this is harmful and breaks the link to the flag. Could you please first make sure that the St. abbreviation doesn't occur in links, direct quotations and who knows what else? I don't think that it is a good idea to make such changes summarily.Colchicum (talk) 09:38, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you do a bot-assisted changes, shit sometimes happen. Still better than to do nothing Alex Bakharev (talk) 10:58, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing out the flag image link, I use AWB and was quite careful not to change images and book titles, etc, but missed that one. It has now been corrected. Cheers, --

Диалог 12:58, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Hi, your edits to the Putin article were misinformed. The nominal GDP increased 6 fold. You can see it on this chart (only goes to 2006). You also can learn about the difference between nominal and purchasing power parity in their respective articles. The two different figures are noted separately in the economy section as well. Also, regarding average salaries, they grew from $80 to $650. Average income of the Russian family is not the same thing as monthly salaries. All of this data was already reliably sourced so I've reverted your edits and I made more clear that its talking about average monthly salaries/nominal GDP. Krawndawg (talk) 14:01, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --08:16, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the