User talk:Antidiskriminator/Archive 3

This 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.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

Rollback

Hello, following a review of

rollback

on your account. Please take note of the following:

• Rollback gives you access to certain scripts, including
  Igloo
  , some of which can be very powerful, so exercise caution
• Rollback is only for blatant
  vandalism
• Having Rollback rights does not give you any special status or authority
• Misuse of Rollback can lead to its removal by any administrator
• Please read
  Wikipedia:Rollback feature
  to get to know the workings of the feature
• You can test Rollback at
  Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback
• You can display the {{
  Rollback
  }} top icon on your user page

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me. Reaper Eternal (talk) 11:56, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

For somebody with as many good contributions as you have, you don't need to revert 50 obvious vandalisms before receiving rollback. That's only for the 200-500 edit people who request rollback. Reaper Eternal (talk) 11:56, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Ivan Ivanić

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.

Casliber (talk · contribs

) 00:04, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Durrës County (Kingdom of Serbia)

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.

Gatoclass (talk

Hello, Antidiskriminator. You have new messages at Takabeg's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Antidiskriminator. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Premarital sex, Muria people.
Message added 15:35, 24 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

You currently appear to be engaged in an

In particular, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue edit warring, you may be blocked from editing.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 21:58, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the support! You know the worst thing about being blocked? It's like you're in a soundproof glass room darkened from the outside so you see people and they can't see you. You cannot alert anyone's attention unless they have the foresight to notice you!! So imagine screaming to all your friends "HELP!" but they don't hear. It can be helpful when established editors lend support to one's appeal but on this occasion, Black Kite acted fairly and right now, that is the last person I wish to upset! In the meantime, thanks for noticing and yes, we ALL need to go a bit careful sometimes.

Hi, Antidiskriminator. When do you have time, could you control

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Myth of Albanian Indifference to Religion 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/Myth of Albanian Indifference to Religion 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. — ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 17:09, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Sure but I don't have acces to it right now.--Gaius Claudius Nero (talk) 21:47, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry but it's going to take a while. I haven't had access to my personal books for several weeks and I won't for a few more. Would you like me to photocopy Frasheri when I get access to it? The only access I have to any of my books is from photocopies but I didn't photocopy any of Frasheri's work.--Gaius Claudius Nero (talk) 01:56, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

The author of this article is V. Nitsiakos. Some parts of the text include the following:

p. 1 (par.2): From the very start of the Albanian National Movement we see a specific view about religion and national identity, mainly reflected in the words of Pascho Pasha... "The faith of Albanians is Albanianism". This view is fundamental and repeated in all texts of the Albanian Rilindja, a fact that proves alone that religion was not at all indiferrent.... and how could it be diferrent since the main criterion of social classification in the Ottoman society was that of religion?Alexikoua (talk) 20:37, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

p.2 (par.2): Indeed, with the years this myth was widely acccepted and the concept of national unity prevailed against the religious borders.Alexikoua (talk) 20:52, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

p.7 With the collapse of the regime (1991), the issue of religion has been raised again and is off course connected with that of the national identity of the Albanians, under the scope of the search of new ideological directions. The concept that the Albanian state is a secular state and that religion should not be connected with politics, something that is in accordance with the prevailing national ideology, is under discussion.Alexikoua (talk) 20:52, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

The above parts are about the author's view. If you need anything specific just let me know.Alexikoua (talk) 20:53, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

It's exactly what the same author claims.Alexikoua (talk) 21:07, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

The finals are upon us; we're down to the last few. One of the eight remaining contestants will be this year's WikiCup champion! 150 was the score needed to progress to the final; just under double the 76 required to reach round 4, and more than triple the 41 required to reach round 3. Our eight finalists are:

• Casliber (submissions), Pool A's winner. Casliber has the highest total score in the competition, with 1528, the bulk of which is made up of 8 featured articles. He has the highest number of total featured articles (8, 1 of which was eligible for double points) and total did you knows (72) of any finalist. Casliber writes mostly on biology, including ornithology, botany and mycology.
• Hugo Awards
  .
• Hurricanehink (submissions), Pool A's runner-up. Hurricanehink's points are mostly from his 30 good articles, more than any other finalist, and he is also the only finalist to score good topic points. Hurricanehink, as his name suggests, writes mostly on meteorology.
• Wizardman (submissions), Pool B's runner-up. Wizardman has completed 86 good article reviews, more than any other finalist, but most of his points come from his 2 featured articles. Wizardman writes mostly on American sport, especially baseball.
• Miyagawa (submissions), the "fastest loser" (Pool A). Miyagawa has written 3 featured lists, one of which was awarded double points, more than any other finalist, but he was awarded points mostly for his 68 did you knows. Miyagawa writes on a variety of topics, including dogs, military history and sport.
• Resolute (submissions), the second "fastest loser" (Pool B). Most of Resolute's points come from his 9 good articles. He writes mostly on Canadian topics, including ice hockey.
• Yellow Evan (submissions), who was joint third "fastest loser" (Pool A). Most of Evan's points come from his 10 good articles, and he writes mostly on meteorology.
• Sp33dyphil (submissions), who was joint third "fastest loser" (Pool B). Most of Phil's points come from his 9 good articles, 4 of which (more than any other finalist) were eligible for double points. He writes mostly on aeronautics.

We say goodbye to our seven other semi-finalists,

In other news, preparations for next year's competition have begun with a brainstorming thread. Please, feel free to drop by and share any thoughts you have about how the competition should work next year. Sign ups are not yet open, but will be opened in due course. Watch this space. Further, there has been a discussion about the rule whereby those in the WikiCup must delcare their participation when nominating articles at featured article candidates. This has resulted in a bot being created by new featured article delegate Ucucha (talk · contribs). The bot will leave a message on FAC pages if the nominator is a participant in the WikiCup.

A reminder of the rules: any points scored after August 29 may be claimed for the final round, and please remember to update submission pages promptly. If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on

Hi, Antidisriminator. I'm asking you because I consider you as one of the reasonable and neutral users. A user delete some samples with claiming "personal attack". But I have no intention to attack creator of that map. the inclination of the creator of that map is very clear and users have right to investigate his/her edits in commons. I think a user try to erase evidences to "win" discussion. I'm afraid a user confuses encyclopedia with a kind of field of debate. Regards. Takabeg (talk) 03:12, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

This except from

WP:NO PERSONAL ATTACKS

should clear it up for you:

What is considered to be a personal attack?

There is no rule that is objective and not open to interpretation on what constitutes a personal attack as opposed to constructive discussion, but some types of comments are never acceptable:

• Racial, sexist, homophobic, ageist, religious, political, ethnic, sexual or other epithets (such as against people with disabilities) directed against another contributor. Disagreement over what constitutes a religion, race, sexual orientation, or ethnicity is not a legitimate excuse.
• Using someone's affiliations as an ad hominem means of dismissing or discrediting their views—regardless of whether said affiliations are mainstream. An example could be "you're a train spotter so what would you know about fashion?" Note that although pointing out an editor's relevant conflict of interest and its relevance to the discussion at hand is not considered a personal attack, speculating on the real-life identity of another editor may constitute outing, which is a serious offense.
• Linking to external attacks, harassment, or other material, for the purpose of attacking another editor.
• Accusations about personal behavior that lack evidence. Serious accusations require serious evidence. Evidence often takes the form of diffs and links presented on wiki. Sometimes evidence is kept private and made available to trusted users.

Your tendency to personalize matters by attacking the motives of people who disagree with you falls afoul of this rule. If this is the way you always edit, I'm at a loss to understand why you haven't been blocked for it before now, but if you continue behaving in this manner, I will take the necessary steps to bring it to the attention of an admin or admins for disposal as they see fit.

Once again: Discuss issues, and not editors. Always

assume good faith. Do not speculate on the motives of other editors without very good reason to do so. Do not assume that anyone who disagrees with you is pushing a POV or clueless about what this project is and how it operates. Beyond My Ken (talk

) 04:16, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Antidiskriminator, As to the source I've used, Nish is not involved in the eyalet of Rumeli. Do you have any sources ? Takabeg (talk) 15:17, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi, again :) Could you control this users edits ? I think he/she can create better map(s). Takabeg (talk) 17:03, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

		Ottoman Empire Barnstar
		For your extensive and detailed work related to the Ottoman Empire, I hereby award you the Ottoman Empire Barnstar. --Kebeta (talk) 21:52, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Antidiskriminator! It just so happens to be my 20th GA too, and this unique church is definitely a worthy topic :) — Toдor Boжinov — 11:17, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Do SANU regularly give out licenses? If so, that would be great and I'll contact the Serbian wiki author and ask for assistance. Actually the best to do would be to visit Donja Kamenica, see the church and take some pics myself (I'm in Niš for a few days from tomorrow, but I don't think I'll be able to get to Donja Kamenica because of time and transport constraints). — Toдor Boжinov — 13:14, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

I am inexperienced with licenses and I don't know if SANU regulary gives them but I believe sr.wiki author knows it. I also thought about visiting Donja Kamenica because I frequently pass by Niš, but I don't think I will have enough time for that.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 14:06, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Materialscientist (talk