User talk:Evlekis/Archive4

Yugoslavia - Please do not modify; you may start from fresh on my current talk page.

Latvian Soviet Socialist Republic

I am not party to whether certain actions of this world are legal or illegal. I was trying to make a point clearer. I feel it is better to say that one "recognises an occupation as illegal" rather than "recognising an illegal occupation". In the latter, the term illegal is an adjective modiifying the key object that is "occupation", and it is also using "illegal" with the official language of sanction when perhaps not all international bodies accept this. Evlekis (Евлекис) 19:07, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

I see. I have re-added your intended contribution. Unfortunately, your edits removed the word "recognises" and replaced it with "viewing", which gave the sentence quite another meaning. I hope the sentence now reflects your intended contribution? ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 19:18, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Absolutely. You did the right thing and I am grateful you respected my edit. I was never going to engage in an edit war on this one, not even with one more revert. I appreciate the source you added. Just one thing, with me and my background, it is Balkans not -tic!! We have some similar experiences in some areas but just out of interest, the non-recognition of the Baltic states as SSRs - is this now universally accepted? Even by Moscow? I know that a united Communist party continues to have branches in most of the former SSRs allbeit behind closed doors in some places where they have been banned (eg. Lithuania) but this doesn't constitute a world government. And because of the de facto status (that was beyond anyone's physical control), is it still all right to refer to the likes of Estonian SSR as you would Ukrainian SSR when applying birthplace details for persons born before 1991? Sorry about all the questions. Evlekis (Евлекис) 19:35, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

The Baltic states are still highly controversial here on Wikipedia with some heavy edit warring on certain articles, mostly about history and politics. Using SSR's as place of birth in Wikipedia articles is not controversial, merely a fact... at least in articles on Latvian topics. ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 19:44, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

All right, thanks for that Philaweb. Keep up your good work. Evlekis (Евлекис) 19:46, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Warnings on user talk pages

I know it's a little counterintuitive, but people are allowed to remove warnings from their talk pages, like 70.171.207.227 did. If they do, it's to be assumed that they've read them. I don't entirely understand that policy either, but I go with it. There's a little more explanation at WP:OWNTALK. I'd try and explain it myself, but I just downed three cans of Mountain Dew and have entirely too much energy to provide a coherent explanation --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 00:45, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

A side note: I noticed your signature uses Cyrillic script. Do you speak a language that uses the Cyrillic script? I used to speak Russian when I was a kid, and I still recognize Cyrillic script

Oh, and a second side note: I noticed I didn't reply to your last question when we were talking about the Twinkle tool. Just go to Special:Preferences and click on the "gadgets" tab and check the box that says "Twinkle". Hope this helps! --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 01:04, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Hello again Cymru.lass. Thank you for the information on both accounts, informing me about people's behaviour on their own talk pages and the details on Twinkle. Just to clarify: I am British-born to parents who came from pre-1992 Yugoslavia, the Cyrillic script was and continues to be used down the east side of the former territory in the lands akin to where Orthodox Christians form a majority; that is my religion and background. To that end, I can speak, read and write Serbian, Macedonian and Bulgarian, all of which can be written in Cyrillic. I also have a reasonable knowledge of Ukrainian and Russian (and to a lesser extent, Belarussian) that are also Cyrillic script languages. Note one thing however, the term reading Cyrillic is complex. Unlike the Greek alphabet, it not used for one single language, neither is it used for languages of one single family. In fact after the Roman alphabet, Cyrillic is the second most widely used script in the world with regards number of languages (not users). If we are talking users, I think the Chinese script comes first; dominated mainly by the languages of China but also used for languages beyond. My point is that just as every language using the Roman script has its own orthography, so too is this the case with Cyrillic. And if you are familiar with Russian, just looking at some of the scripts used for languages formerly within the Soviet Union and those still spoken in Russia, you can barely recognise the Cyrillic shape of them. Unlike the Roman script which has 26 legal characters and a number of diacritics, there seems to be no restriction to any Cyrillic imports. This is how the South Slavic languages (esp Serbian) came to deploy /J/ directly from Latin; this way we can uphold a phonetical system of one grapheme per phoneme, so Russian/Bulgarian /ю/ became Serbian/Macedonian /ју/. Then there are basic differences, Russian /e/ is either pronounced "ye" (stressed) or "ee" (unstressed). So the pronunciation of my name in Russian would be "Ye-vli-ch'is" (the /i/ softening the /k/ that it follows). To demonstrate a near-correct guide to a Russian, I'd need to write /Євлъєкъис/. So what is your background? I've seen your user page, are you a Welsh girl? Or are you American to Welsh parents? I'm particularly interested in the Cymru forming part of your user name. Evlekis (Евлекис) 00:04, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm what's called a Heinz 57 mutt—I've got a bit of everything in me, including a little Welsh. The cymru part of my username comes with my adoration of the Welsh language, which I desperately wish I spoke. I'll have to wait a while to learn Welsh, though.

Wow. You speak many languages. I tip my hat to you. (I'm a bit of a language nerd) I only speak English and Spanish for now--- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 00:15, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Cuiously enough, yes I am very enthusiastic about all languages but the few I listed are all closely related and knowledge of one surmises certain knowledge of the others. It is also a coincidence that I happen to be in Wales now as I write this; last night when you posted the above message I was at work - in England - but I have come to Chepstow for the day because I love it here. In this town, you will not hear any Welsh and most of the people tend to have some English connection. So you're of 57 backgrounds and Welsh is one of them. I admit it's an interesting language too, more remote from English than Spanish and the Slavic languages I named that are written in Cyrillic. Seems hard to believe but when you examine the Welsh language, you see how different it is. So how do you come to know Spanish? I'm now trying to learn it and I am very fortunate that this is one language on which you can obtain a Michel Thomas course, I swear by them, as he was the world's finest language teacher. To that end, I am confident I will speak Spanish as well as you! Evlekis (Евлекис) 08:54, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

My mother's been speaking Spanish since she was 17, and I grew up hearing her speak Spanish while talking to patients on the phone (she's a doctor), so I've always had a little basic knowledge of Spanish. I got really serious about learning it once I began high school. I really want to go into linguistics; it's a subject area that fascinates me. By the way, since you're in Wales, you simply must go to the Wales Millennium Centre and Roald Dahl Plass (they're right next to each other). I haven't been to Wales yet, but my favourite TV series was shot around the Millenium Centre and it's pretty awesome. --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 23:40, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Well done to you on having picked up the language in your given circumstance. It is far from ideal but you obviously did well. Linguistics is a great interest of mine too, and you're in the right place: Wikipedia is a good starting block for this topic. I'm sorry I didn't go to those places but I was only in Chepstow across the Severn Bridge from where I live. I see more of Cardiff when I look across the Bristol Channel from Weston-Super-Mare. Atleast from there one can see the Millennium Stadium if not the arts place. Still, I'll bare all in mind when next visiting Cardiff!! :) Evlekis (Евлекис) 20:58, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

MOS:BIO issue

Hello to you Kww. As you are an admin that is aware of procedures, do you think you can settle an issue? Recently, you made this edit, and the summary speaks for itself. Over the last few days, I have engaged in something of an edit war on the Xherdan Shaqiri page with an editor called User:IllusionFinal. At this moment, the article stands as he last left it (concerning ethnicity in intro). I refer to the page including this information. If indeed there is something different here from Hakan Yakin then give me a brief explanation if you would, otherwise I would be most grateful if you intervened here. Please also watch this user regarding his uncivil edit summaries that include personal attacks; I have warned him, and he has done it twice to date, but was only warned once. With this, no warning is required but it requires an admin to keep an eye on him incase he flouts this caution and continues to curse in summaries. Thanks Kww. Evlekis (Евлекис) 12:54, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Socking accusation

I notice that you made socking accusations in the edit summaries. Can you give me a series of diffs to support that? That would support my taking direct action.—Kww(talk) 12:58, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

All right, it is more of an internal instinct than anything else, and I apologise if my suspicion is otherwise unfounded. User:Sinbad Barron, although not the first user in his catalogue of socks, has been deemed by the admins to be the puppet master. His confirmed socks edited disruptviely on a wide range of subjects but mostly all seemed to take an interest in the Balkans, pushing Albanian bias and demonstrating Serbophobia. But some have done this very loosely. The first similarity directly involving Sinbad Barron is the use of such language as "fuck off" in edit summaries, this is rare language usage from any editor. Then there is the claim that he is not Albanian, but Canadian, a speaker of French and Italian, but since his first edits in February this year, most have been on Albanian-related matters. If you examine his complete list of edits to date, you'll notice the first few months of sporadic editing is all based on showbusiness topics, then from July 16 this year, the account holder has become an overnight enthusiast on Balkan matters, and all edits have discredited Serbia(ns) - key rival to Albanians for most issues - and promoted Albanian interest. Then you had users as User:Metrospex who also bounced backward and forward from Balkans affairs to English language showbusiness as you can see from his list. But worst of all, almost all of these users seem to appear wherever I or User:WhiteWriter are taking an interest, and they seem to stand against us not that WhiteWriter and I are part of any bloc. It is a curious point that IllusionFinal has never returned to his showbusiness topics since starting on Balkan affairs but the biggest giveaway that this is neither a new nor a genuine user is the fact that he has not even made 100 contributions since his inception in February, and many of the Sinbad accounts have lain inactive for periods of time until the person felt the time was right to start using the account. I'd be shocked if Sinbad Barron, User:Lontech and IllusionFinal were THREE real-life people, it would be absurd. Lontech has received a topic-ban and I have personally suspected him to be Sinbad Barron but it hasn't carried any weight. So I'm sorry if I have raised a false alarm here on any issue, but one way or another, IllusionFinal is a certain case for disciplinary in one field or another. Thanks Kww. Evlekis (Евлекис) 14:21, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I do confess however that the Xherdan Shaqiri issue of ethnicity is in the second paragraph and not the intro; that was my mistake, it had originally been in the intro and I made the mistake of removing its restoration without seeing where it was. To that end, I will not touch the article as it currently stands. I personally favour such usage and am not opposed to it despite I.F's rants that I "swear" at Albanians, that is not true. Evlekis (Евлекис) 14:28, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Divorced?

Sorry to hear that (in fact I saw the changes in your userpage); I wish all the best to you Evlekis. — Kedaditalk 15:42, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Kedadi for the kind words. I am just this minute updating the page and working on it so it does not look too depressing! But that is that, life goes on. My actual purpose for including this information is so that individuals that know me in real life can keep track of what is what in the absence of any social networking site (such as Facebook); but they all know anyhow so it is not news to anybody. But for me to have left the site unchanged would have been misleading, atleast since October 29 this year. Anyhow, I've got a small son that I love, I will continue to do my best for him, and raise him in a Balkan spirit, and hopefully if Wikipedia is still here, he will in time emulate me and edit on his subjects. I promise never to induce him to dislike other nations, and certainly in south-eastern Europe I'll try to encourage him to embrace the nations as though they were his own. I refer to Albanians mainly and it may surprise you that I do have Albanian friends outside of this website! It's just a sad fact that the world's activities have driven wedges between groups of ethnicities. I'll encourage my boy as a future editor to be polite with the decent editors such as you. Thanks again for the kind gesture, and mainly for the reminder that despite all squabbles they have in Kosovo and Macedonia and everywhere, we're all mostly kindhearted caring hospitable people. Cheers. Evlekis (Евлекис) 16:01, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Albanians as always are the last of the Mohikans and understand probably better your heart? I have witnessed several times a great source of humanity stemming from your writing, and I truly believe that the writing more than anything else discloses someone's soul. I'm sorry like Kedadi above, but I'm sure that you have many talents to make this turn out for the best. Cheers and take it easy. Don't worry too much. --Sulmuesi (talk) 21:49, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

SFRY

Hello Timbouctou. Regarding this edit[1], I think by that time (from 1990), the SFR was formally dropped from the name. This was amid the collapse of communism and the reintroduction of a multi-party system. Evlekis (Евлекис) 22:00, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

• AFAIK it was called "SFR" (Socialist Federal Republic; consisting of six "socialist republics") right until the Breakup of Yugoslavia. Croatia and Slovenia proclaimed independence from it on 25 June 1991, followed by Macedonia on 8 September 1991 and Bosnia and Herzegovina on 1 March 1992. To put it briefly, the remaining two republics (Serbia and Montenegro) considered all others as secessionist and saw themselves as the sole remains of SFR Yugoslavia. On 28 April 1992 they renamed their federation FR Yugoslavia (Federal Republic), dropping the "socialist" adjective to reflect the end of communism. The former four countries (Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia & Herzegovina and Macedonia) gained international recognition as independent countries in the early 1990s while the latter two (Serbia and Montenegro) continued as part of FR Yugoslavia until it was reorganized in 2003 and renamed Serbia and Montenegro, which in turn lasted until 2006 when Montenegro declared independence, which led to the creation of the present-day separate countries Serbia and Montenegro.
• Now as far as football player infoboxes are concerned, the general consensus for country of birth is to put the colloquial name of the country as it was known at the time. In my opinion "Yugoslavia" (but with a piped link to SFR Yugoslavia) is fine for everyone born there between World War II and the breakup of the country as this is what the country and its national team were referred to as in this period. However, some editors from these countries insist on keeping the "SFR" designation to distinguish it from the later FR Yugoslavia, but I believe that over time this will become obsolete as Serbia and Montenegro is becoming widely accepted as a colloquial name for what was at the time known as "FR Yugoslavia" (1992-2003) and later as "Serbia and Montenegro" (2003-2006) because the two were essentially the same thing.
• With all this in mind, I believe the piped link should reflect this rather confusing history, as Yugoslavia alone leads to an article which talks about the pre-WWII Kingdom of Yugoslavia (1918-1941), SFR Yugoslavia (1945-1992) and FR Yugoslavia (1992-2003). The first two versions were more or less the same in terms of size, borders and population, while FR Yugoslavia was significantly smaller.
• In short, players born in Croatia (and Slovenia) between 1945 and 25 June 1991 should be listed as being born in (SFR) Yugoslavia. This also applies to Franko Andrijašević, who was born on 22 June in Split, three days before Croatia's declaration of independence. The issue gets even more complicated as we often get anonymous editors changing the Yugoslavia designation as some other Wikipedia versions prefer to use the present-day country of birth. In any case, ex-Yugoslav locals often get upset when someone mistakenly confuses the SFR and FR versions of the defunct country although I know that this all may seem confusing to foreigners :-) All the best. Timbouctou 23:26, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I know your intentions are good and I am also aware of the 1991-92 activities. I followed every twist and turn. I just thought that the SFR was removed some months prior to HR and SLO going solo. Apart from that you know that I am one for pro-accuracy and I never push to have modern-day entities replace actual time statistics. Whatever happens, I shalln't be too quick to support SCG over FRY for the 1992-2003 period. Serbia and Montenegro is what the US recognised, and how it was recognised in the UN but the constitutional name was FRY (wholly de facto and potentially de jure). But just for simplicity, in sport, it was accepted as FRY even if not a true successor to the SFRY. I recall Yugoslavia at the Euro 2000 football, and at the 2002 World Basketball which they won. Evlekis (Евлекис) 01:05, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Partially

I've reverted you on Kosovo for the moment until you return. This use of partially is considered incorrect by a great many pedants because of its conservative meaning. That is generally a good enough reason to insist upon a certain usage here but "partly" may also mislead. See this description[2]. I'd rather rewrite the section than use language certified as incorrect. Evlekis (Евлекис) 00:32, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Are you certain?

See [3] "partially is used when you talk about a condition or state. partly is a part distinct from a whole such as a physical object"

And [4] "some commentators insist that partially means only “to a limited degree” (My liver and bacon were only partially cooked; they were practically raw), and partly means only “in part” (My lunch was only partly cooked; the salad and vegetable were meant to be served cold)".

To my understanding "partially" is the more appropriate word. "Partly recognised" implies that only bits of Kosovo are recognised, whereas "partially recognised" implies that all of Kosovo is recognised, but to a limited extent.

Bazonka (talk) 09:37, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

I think you're right. I am sorry I even raised the issue now. It is certainly widely accepted as "partially" when meaning "in part" but the language pedants still insist that this word is the adverb of partial (eg. partially judged). I normally make switches from common standard to conservative usage where the latter still has currency; but so rife is partially for partially recognised that it even appears in the sources we care to use. This was only a language matter and not a content dispute so I won't touch that section from now on. Regards. Evlekis (Евлекис) 13:37, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Support your changes on biographies

Yeap Evle, I support the changes you have done on many footballers biographies, as for exemple, changing (;) by (,) between cyrillic name version and the date and place of birth in lede section, the exclusion of the somehow ridiculous "...currently..." that doesn´t really make sence in a encyclopedia article (currently, when? :)... I´ll start doing articles that way from now on. FkpCascais (talk) 02:02, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes thanks FkpCascais, I actually recall maybe two years or so back when you orininally created the articles. Many were started by you and those that weren't were certainly brought to life by your contributions. I thought even back then, one day I'll simply tidy them a bit. You can be forgiven when not speaking English as a native language for not realising that the ; as a punctuation mark serves a particular purpose. That said, how we do things on Wikipedia is not exactly how they might be done in other official contexts. The WP MOS obeys its own laws. Take paragraphs, a new paragraph will begin following a small gap on the line, and directly beneath the previous sentence. Here that option is not open because you know what happens when you skip the first space on a line. I don't know the purpose of this arrangement. Anyhow, the comma I feel just makes the articles look like others but don't worry, every other part of your editing remains untouched. As for "currently", I believe this to be a superfluous word, not just because it is unencyclopaedic but because there is no difference between "Ivan currently plays for Hajduk" or "Ivan plays for Hajduk" (it is the plays that is essential and that cannot point to the future or the past, there we'd have "will play for" or "played for"). Thanks for your support. Evlekis (Евлекис) 10:08, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Naming conventions

Hi. I want to inform you that there is current voting about name of this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Momcsilló_Tapavicza#Requested_move Perhaps you can say your opinion there if you wish. PANONIAN 10:21, 31 January 2011 (UTC)