User talk:A Train/Archive VI

A reply for Paul Klenk and User:Imdaking

Gentlemen, I just got home from work and I'm making dinner. I'm going out for the evening shortly, so don't expect too many more replies from me tonight.

At Imdaking's request, I'm going to look into the RfC. I will put 100% effort at being detached and impartial as I look it over, but judging from previous experience with Lucky 6:9 and Bishonen, I do not expect to find anything amiss. I have had no interactions with Paul Klenk before, but I know Lucky 6:9 and Bishonen to be fair-minded and generally outstanding users.

As I said, I will put aside any pre-conceived notions that I have and will look into the matter. If I find that Paul Klenk, Bishonen or Lucky 6:9 have acted improperly, I will say so at the RfC. If I find that Imdaking has acted improperly, I won't do anything, as I am loathe to step on another admin's authority in any matter. I hope this is agreeable to both of you. Fernando Rizo T/C 23:55, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I just re-read Imdaking's request a little more carefully, and I realized that a fair portion of his complaint centers around the "gayness" of Paul Klenk. I guess I'm at fault here for assuming a slightly higher baseline of maturity. Sorry, Imdaking, you're on your own on this one. Fernando Rizo T/C 00:10, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind attention, and don't feel too bad about "stepping into a pile" of this person's immaturity. He has been dropping them all over the place. paul klenk 00:21, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto that, Fernando. I believe that I've acted within policy, but if I've done anything improper, please know that it was unintentional and that I appreciate your bringing it up in the interest of fairness. Thanks for the kind words, BTW! Have a wonderful night. - Lucky 6.9 00:27, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fernando: I'm not sure why Imdaking has contacted you, but if you have had some dealing with him and you think that you can communicate with him, that would be very helpful. He's going to be back after his 48 "wikibreak" no matter what happens in the meantime, but the question is, will it be for the better or worse. I personally do not want to see things escalate through RFC/RFM/RFAr. I've been through one before with the AFAr for Netoholic and would rather not go through that again. Instead, I would much rather see Imdaking editing as a productive editor without any copyright violations. If you could talk to him and explain why some of the things that he has done has violated Wikipedia policy, that would be greatly appreciated.

As for Imdaking's suggestion of some sort of cabal, I've never had any dealings with Paul Klenk before yesterday. I've corresponding with Lucky 6.9 (we are both in the Southern California WikiProject, and were dealing with the very problematic editor User:Ronald20 together), but we had never talked about Imdaking before yesterday.

I ran into Imdaking independantly and discovered that almost all of the images that he has uploaded other than company logos were tagged with {{Fairuse}}, but didn't fit the criteria for Wikipedia:Fair use, and so I've been reporting some of them to Copyright violations (only about a third, so that are many more to report). Because of that, I've been threatened, insulted, cursed, and had my signature modified by Imdaking.

Just take a look at WP:AN/I#User:Imdaking, and look at some of his recent edits as User:69.229.17.94, such as [1], and [2], where it is obvious that he is unrepentant. Plus look at his transparent lying at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection to have his complaint page unprotected. BlankVerse ∅ 15:26, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Marg to Fernando

Hi Fernando, I login, but cant find ur message. You can email me mtetcher@yahoo.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtetcher (talk • contribs) 08:22, 12 September 2005

Hey there Marg. I probably have archived whatever comment I had since then, as my talk page tends to fill up rather quickly. Basically what I said was that if NeoPop Realism is so important, why don't we write a whole article on NeoPopRealism? Find me some references in books or magazines or websites and I'll help you write the article. The problem with the Nadia Russ page right now is that it's really vain and not neutral at all. If we want to claim that NeoPopRealism is so important, we need references to back it up, OK? Let me know when you find something we can use. I'm posting this comment on my talk page as well, but I'm also watching your talk page here, so we can continue this conversation wherever you want. Cheers, Fernando Rizo T/C 19:25, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Marg, the other problem that I'm noticing as I look at the article again is that the only references we have are Nadia Russ' website. We need other, third-party references for this thing if you want it to conform to Wikipedia guidlines and be taken seriously. Fernando Rizo T/C 19:31, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bmicomp's RfA

Well, my RfA has not quite completed yet, but either way, I'd like to thank you for your vote and your support, regardless of the outcome. -- BMIComp (talk, HOWS MY DRIVING) 18:36, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User 167.219.88.140

User 167.219.88.140 vandalized another page ('he' repeatedly vandalizes the Jim Gerlach page). Time to lower the boom. jesup 04:07, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I be bold - I removed large unrelated talk section in Schiavo

I be bold - I removed large unrelated talk section in Talk:Terri_Schiavo.

See history.

While one editor saw the section and did not vote, I removed the section, since you had given me permission -I "voted" for him, in proxy (that was my idea, not yours, etc.) -and notified him in his talk.

The other fellow did vote to remove -and voted on a few additional things.

Like I said, Uncle Ed was my role model in how to negotiate disputes instead of mere spinnig of the wheels, like willy on wheels, and Big Willy, whoever they are, lol ha ha, and I hope I am a good understudy of Uncle Ed -things are moving along right well. Pretty soon, we can count votes and close the vote and open the page to editing.

--GordonWattsDotCom 03:56, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Android79's RfA

Thank you for your support on my RfA and for your kind comments. android 79 15:27, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and a question

Hey, thanks. It's nice to know that I haven't gone completely off the rails. Yeah...relistings...I thought about just deleting them. Given how many people look at AfD, I've previously thought that if none of them opted to object to deletion then that was good enough. Now that it's me with the delete button, I see things a bit differently. I also haven't taken any heat for doing so, despite asking people to tell me if they thought I was wrong. I did notice Android79 deleting some with a single participator today though, and I trust his judgement certainly. For some reason, since becoming an admin, my userpage has taken quite a bit of vandalism from one anon, and I really can't work out why. I suppose I deleted their page or something!

Anyway, I have a question actually. Jack Douglas (record producer) was (originally) created as a copypaste move from Jack Douglas, obviously a no-no. Jack Douglas was then edited into a dab. This is exactly the situation that Wikipedia:How to fix cut and paste moves says can't be easily fixed. However, I was wondering why the following could not be done:

Delete both
Restore Jack Douglas to before the dab
Move it to Jack Douglas (record producer)
Delete Jack Douglas again
Restore only the edits after the copypaste move

That would seem to preserve authorship and separate histories, in exactly the form that a proper move would originally have them. Is there a gap in my understanding? In fact, Bearcat has found another way:

Delete Jack Douglas (record producer)
Revert Jack Douglas to before the dab
Move it
Remake the dab at Jack Douglas

Is one of these routes righter than the other? Are both wrong? If not, does the example in Wikipedia:How to fix cut and paste moves need changing? -Splash 18:53, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. That's a good question. I'd say both methods are kosher with GDFL requirements, but I'm no expert. If I remember right, User:Kmccoy is the go-to guy on stuff of that nature.

As for the AfD stuff, I totally understand where you're coming from. Having the ability and responsibility makes everything feel different, doesn't it? It can be unsettling at first. Hell, I've been an admin for 3 weeks and its still unsettling to me sometimes. I just try to be as transparent as possible, and it looks like you do, too. Keep it up, man. If you want more depth with that question, talk to Kevin McCoy. Fernando Rizo T/C 19:09, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think transparency is probably key. Thanks for the help; if I get confused I'l' go see Kevin. -Splash 19:31, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal is here to help

Hi Cool Cat. I've picked up your complaint at from WP:TINC. Can you give me a brief description of the harassment you've been getting, with diffs, please? Fernando Rizo T/C 18:01, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Karl Meier (Stereotek) have recently apologised for an error of his, in an assume goof faith enviorment I have taken it as a sincere apology but I dont want to be as gullable as Belldandy as at this point as I cant afford it. This was the first real communication I have ever recieved from him so it is exciting for me. --Cool Cat ^Talk 19:04, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Davenbelle is plainly beyond reason. Check his past 3000 edits., how often does he revert me or opose me. See very reacent Soultheaster Anatolia Project issue of moving material around. Generaly in distant past Davenbelle and Stereotek have activeley revert ward against me together, sometimes for image sizes. He has a history of making his only edit in days in a vote to opposing me and ironicaly citing WP:POINT --Cool Cat ^Talk 19:04, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I do not hold revenge against people all I care is them leaveing me and others on wikipedia alone and stop "policing" policies based on how they interprete them. --Cool Cat ^Talk 19:04, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking into it now, Cool Cat. Fernando Rizo T/C 19:28, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Okay CC; I thoroughly read up on the matter, and it seems like the best thing to do right now is just to avoid Davenbelle and Karl Meier for the time being. Let me explain why I think this is the best course of action.

The proposed arbcom decision currently being voted on clearly stipulates that Davenbelle should stay away from you as much as possible under threat of penalties imposed upon him. It's a small logical leap to invoke the same of Karl Meier.
Your request is materially the same as the subject being discussed at the aforementioned RfAr, and it wouldn't be proper for the Mediation Cabal to step on the arbcom's toes and get involved at this time.

What I'm going to do is leave a brief note on Davenbelle and Karl Meier's talk pages, asking them to keep there distance from you until the arbcom reaches a final decision.

If you disagree with my solution, please bring it up with my "supervisor" at the Mediation Cabal, User:NicholasTurnbull. I hope this works for you, Cool Cat. Fernando Rizo T/C 19:53, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fernando, thanks for taking a stab at this. On the proposed decision talk page (and on the original RfAr page) I have said that I look forward to others minding User:Cool Cat. You've asked that Karl and I take a step back per the proposed decision and I feel this is a good idea — but that it is incomplete. The proposed decision also prohibits User:Cool Cat from editing any articles related or referring to Turks, Kurds, or Armenians for a period of 3 months and places him on probation for a year, and I would ask that you suggest to him that he, too, accept the proposed decision pending the close of the case (which I expect to be rather soon). User:Cool Cat has a very long history of controversial editing of such articles. The proposed decision also states that other editors and administrators should take the lead in monitoring User:Cool Cat; I would ask you to monitor us all as your time permits and take what you feel is appropriate action. Thanks. — Davenbelle 02:15, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Davenbelle, thanks for your note. I understand your concern, but keep in mind that I was not acting as Administrator Fernando Rizo in this case, as I was wearing my Mediation Cabalist hat. I will keep an eye on the situation, but my role as a mediator (however brief) will probably create a conflict of interest if I intervene as an admin in the future. Fernando Rizo T/C 02:24, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. I am confident that any review of User:Cool Cat's editing by reasonable people will tend to find biased edits. Sadly, there are not many people willing to confront problem editors. I again request that you ask all parties to this case to cease all editing that is likely to arouse the ire of the other participants; User:Cool Cat needs to let the Kurds live. Thanks again, Davenbelle 02:45, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am not suggesting you interfere with arbcom, I was just pointing out my frustration ;) --Cool Cat ^Talk 09:04, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Operating Thetan

AI: Sorry you don't feel like talking, but why is the official listing of the OT levels in the Operating Thetan article a copyvio? It was properly quoted and cited. Surely it wasn't a reproduction of the entire pamphlet? Can you explain this to me? Thanks, Fernando Rizo T/C 04:05, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I know I initially promised you a pamphlet, but I couldn't find any, so I copied this from the What is Scientology book. My addition of fair use at the bottom was just so that I could post it to your talk page so you could use the information to compose the article using your own words. Please do not publish in Wikipedia as it is copyrighted. --AI 04:16, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Even if it's from a book, though, if it's just a couple of paragraphs, properly quoted with a source cited, how is that a copyvio? It's a reference, right? When I get home from work, I'm pretty sure I can show you in Diana Hacker's A Writer's Reference that that is neither copyright violation nor plagarism. Fernando Rizo T/C 04:24, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Can you edit the article and write up what you understand about the OT levels? It would be more professional than just copying. And will help NPOV the article. --AI 04:47, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A Request for uploading Diary Of A Drug Fiend

Hi Fernando,

Again another request for placing an article which my Internet account filters my access!!

Sepand

I'm all over it, Sepand. Give me a day. Fernando Rizo T/C 08:09, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@BEGINS HERE@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Aleister Crowley's first published novel was Diary of a Drug Fiend. The book was originally published in London in 1922. Although written over seventy-five years ago, the book is still relevant for today's readers. The book paints a vivid picture of the mind of drug users. The drug user's highs, lows, and sometimes strange thought patterns are described in great detail in this interesting book.

The infamous Aleister Crowley invokes a reaction with some people. Some say he was strange and went off the deep-end with his involvement in Magick, the practice of using various techniques to exert control over the forces of nature. If one is too close-minded to read this book because of the author's reputation, he or she would be missing a great read.

This story is supposedly based on truth. False names were used to conceal the identities of the people in the book. For instance, Aleister Crowley is called Peter Pendragon in the book. Peter went to a pub and was socializing with some people he knew when he saw the woman that would change his life, Lou.

Across the moaning body of the blackmailer, I was looking at the face of a girl that I had never seen before. And I said to myself, "Well, that's all right, I've known you all my life." And when I said to myself "my life," I didn't in the least mean my life as Peter Pendragon, I didn't even mean a life extending through the centuries, I meant a different kind of life --something with which centuries have nothing whatever to do

(Crowley 11).

This truly eloquent description of Peter's first glimpse of Lou reveals that Crowley was truly a master of language. The book is written in such a clever way that the reader continues to want more.

Basically, the story is of Peter falling madly in love with a woman named Lou. They run off to Paris and travel throughout Europe. Lou introduces Peter to cocaine and heroin and they quickly become dependent on the narcotics. When their supply of drugs runs out, the withdrawal troubles begin. Lou's father, King Lamus, helps the two overcome their addiction by the application of practical Magick. Both Peter and Lou find their true purpose in life and live happily ever after.

"Diary of a Drug Fiend" would be a beneficial source of information for professionals involved with the psychology of addiction. Doctors, lawyers, police, and the average person would gain insight into the thought patterns of a drug addict from the first high, to the constant effort to regain the effects of the first high. The craving for the drug, and how it is the only thing the user thinks about when he or she does not have the drug for a period of time is covered thoroughly. How selfish and careless one becomes when he or she needs a fix is also mentioned in the book. Peter lost his love for Lou because he could only think of the drugs. He quickly knew this was wrong and constantly tried to regain his love for Lou.

If people are open-minded and enjoy challenging their beliefs, then Diary of a Drug Fiend may be the book to read. At the time of reading this book, we may find many useful insights that could dramatically change one's life contained within its pages.

SPAM

I've dropped around to spam, and saw your message. And now, of course, I have yet another thing to apologise for. I should have responded when you made yourself mor clear. I should have responded to your first (now struck out) message on my talk page. You were clear from the start that in your position, and I can respect that. I really didn't mean you should get stuffed, and again I'm sorry.
brenneman ^(t)^(c) 00:50, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Striking out my comment was uncharacteristically childish of me, and I'm sorry for that. Apology accepted. I still know that you're not a rogue. :) Fernando Rizo T/C 08:08, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

NeoPR, some publications

http://www.geocities.com/neopoprealismmmagazine http://www.geocities.com/nyartsneopoprealism http://www.geocities.com/artnewsneopoprealism http://www.webspawner.com/users/sohomoves http://www.nyartsmagazine.com/pages/nyam_document.php?nid=45&did=413 there more...

Marg, these all seem to be advertisements :). I meant articles. Fernando Rizo T/C 15:45, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Vote change Needed

I recently found Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black aces in which you voted keep. Around a day after Black aces I created Black Aces unaware the other page was thee but my has a little more content except the links. I need you change your vote to merge both articles together. Ty --Aranda56 00:28, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Suspect articles.

Can you take a look at the following two articles: British International Journalist of the Year award and Amnesty International UK Press Awards? I marked them for speedy deletion. I'm not sure this is the proper action to take. What do you advise? Thank you. SDC 20:36, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I appear to have arrived too late for this party. Fernando Rizo T/C 23:49, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nandesuka's RfA

I just wanted to drop you a note to thank you for your support on my RfA. I'll try my best to live up to the trust you've shown in me. You strike me as one of the most levelheaded admins we have, and I will be trying to emulate you in that. Thanks, Nandesuka 00:45, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ryu dispute

Wanted to say thanks for getting back to me about the dispute on the Ryu (Street Fighter) page, but the vandalism has continued. Even Mackeriv has been offering assistance lately to help combat it. The problem is an anonymous user from three different IPs -- 205.188.116.73 (talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log), 64.12.116.70 (talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log), 152.163.100.70 (talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log). (While I'm not certain that it's in fact one person, evidence can be found via the common editing history and repeated warnings associated with all three IPs).

As mentioned previously, this person continues to vandalize the page, apparently for no other reason than to be annoying, by reverting it to unproven and highly questionable Background history. The user never offers an explanation for these actions, much less a citation to support them.

I am again requesting, if it is within your power or that of someone you can get in contact with, that the Ryu (Street Fighter) page be locked from editing while presenting the info provided by myself and Mackeriv. Please do not lock it with the vandalism constantly posted by the user of the IPs mentioned above, as the very point of this request is to protect the page from this very immature person.

Thank you. --James26 23:21, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Thanks for your support and compliments at my RfA. I think "brusque" is a pretty accurate word for me (better than "piss-taking", but I got a kick out of that one). I'll propbably be seeing you around AfD, once I get a internet connection at home. -R. fiend 16:44, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

repeated vandalism

I've just given a test3 warning to 168.170.197.160. If they get a test4 warning, is there a procedure for getting them banned? Bubba73 (talk) 15:14, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Just a quick note to thank you for your nomination and support re Admin. I'll try to live up to your kind words - and do let me know if you see any glaring mistakes. Cheers. --Doc (?) 01:32, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Hippy Gourmet Article (stub)

Hi Fernando,

Per your suggestion, we created a Hippy Gourmet article. It hasn't been published yet, because we wanted to make sure you had a chance to review where we're going with it and approve it accordingly.

The draft is located at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hippy_Gourmet

We assume you have access to this and also can tell us how we can publish it outside of the stub category, once you think it's ready to go.

Thanks!

Best, James

Deletion Review

Hi. You were involved in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Votes for undeletion#The scope of VfU which looked to establish a Deletion Review process in place of VfU. There is now a discussion about how we might construct the mechanics of such a process. The current proposal suggests that debates be relisted on AfD if there is a majority of editors wanting to overturn the debate (usually on procedural grounds) and that the alternative result be implemented if it is supported by three-quarters of editors. Please call by Wikipedia talk:Votes for undeletion/Deletion review proposal when you can to discuss. Thanks. Tito xd^(?!?) 02:05, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Jimbo Wales is coming to San Diego - Oct 18 - we will have a wiki Meetup

Jimbo Wales to Attend San Diego Meetup on October 18 2005

Hello, Jimbo Wales will be in San Diego to attend OOPSLA and has agreed to come by and visit with the San Diego wikipedians. If you are interested, you will find more info on my talk page. Johntex\^talk 00:54, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Feng Yun stub

Fernando (Rizo), don't worry about fact-checking.

I (Tderz) started the article(stub), have 25 years experience in Go, the level of 3 dan (in Europe = 5 dan in the USA or JP), took some lessons from Feng Yun herself, thus started this entry and of course asked her to verify the information (which she did). Mainly, the information comes anyway from her school website. Greetings, Tommie

Page deletion

I page which is part of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Anti-war (of which you are listed as a member) is up for deletion. It is The Left and Opposition to War, you can see its entry at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Left and Opposition to War. It would be helpfull if you could add your opinion.--JK the unwise 12:54, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

they use abusive and illegal measures

These are the arguments posted on the page of "Moldovan language".

For these facts many users have been blocked and more forced to accept an unilateral point of view of the Administrator Mikkalai and 16 years old Kid Node_ue. He does not bring arguments as we do, instead he uses his power to block many times (for one week or 24 h). Like for yourself, he warned you and mock on you saying that you don't have the right to say something.

I agree with you when you say to redirect to "Romanian language". Anyway "Romanian" was once recognized in the constitution as official language of the Moldova between 1991-1994 and many attempts to remake this were done.

"Moldovan language" is in fact indentical with Romanian language, renamed as a "language" for political reasons by the government. Although similar theories have been fielded for other languages, this proposal is now believed to have been made to serve political purposes only, and nobody has provided any evidence so-far towards the idea that Moldovan and Romanian are not from common linguistic stock.

The term "Moldovan" is also a soviet invention (see Dept. of State & CIA). A separate language based on these was declared and promoted for political reasons, in order to further advance a Moldovan identity separate from that of Romania.

The soviet Russians called people of Moldavia Republic: "Moldovan" because they wanted to create a new nation different from Moldavians/Romanians.

There is also in Romania a region called Moldova.

Russians manipulated people of Republic of Moldova and washed their brains to create a new person, the soviet "Moldovan". The real name in English is Moldavian, in Romanian is Moldovean and in Russian is Molidavanin. So "Moldovan" belongs to no language!

http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/1091/moldovan1qp.png

taken from Price, Glanville. Encyclopedia of the Languages of Europe. ISBN 0631220399; Blackwell Publishers, Oxford, UK; April 2000

Very interesting. For those who bother making a click on the link I will cite:

"The name 'Moldovan language' (in Russian, МОЛДaВCKИЙ ЯЗБIK 'moldavskii iazyk'); in Romanian, limbă moldovenească, or, in Cyrillic characters, ЛИMбЗ MOЛДОBeНЯCKЗ was applied in the Soviet Union, as during earlier periods of Russian occupation of the area in question, to the * Romance language used in the Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic (corresponding more or less to the formerly Romanian territory of Bessarabia, annexed by the Soviet Union in 1940). In reality, 'Moldavian' is nothing else than the *Romanian language as spoken in Moldavia, i.e. both east of the river Prut in Bessarabia (now the Republic of Moldova) and west of the Prut in that part of the former province that remains as part of Romania. Claims made in the post-Second World War period by the Soviet linguists that 'Moldavian' should be recognized as a distinct Romance language were not taken into seriously by western scholars. Under Soviet domination, the *Cyrillic alphabet was in the use in the Moldavian SSR until the passing of a law on 31 August 1989 (i.e. before the break-up of the Soviet Union) proclaiming Moldavian as the official language of the Republic and the use of Latin script. Apart from a few lexical differences (mainly technical terms borrowed from Russian rather than, as in standard Romanian, from western languages), the written language was thenceforth indistinguishable from that in use in Romania and moves are afoot to harmonize the technical terminology of Moldova with that adopted in Romanian specialized dictionaries. After the Republic of Moldova declared its independence of the Soviet Union in 1991, its Constitution (1994) declared that the official language was limba moldoveneasca 'the Moldavian language'. At the time of writing, moves to have this amended to 'limba română' the Romanian language have not yet succeeded.

Heitmann, K., 1989, Moldauisch. In Holtus, G., Metzeltin, M. and Schmitt, C. (eds), Lexicon der Romanschinen Linguistik, Tübingen, vol 3. 508-21.

GLANVILLE PRICE"

Even at the internationally level (officially) is recognized that in Moldova the people speak romanian. Just for your record the US State Dept. (their foreign office), the french ministry of foreign affairs(France), the UK foreign office (UK), the german ministry of foreign affairs (Germany) are stating one think: in Moldova it is spoken romanian. romanian is the official language even if the name is moldovan. For the others motivated "moldovan language" followers please check the links:

German Foreign Ministry, Germany

http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/www/de/laenderinfos/laender/laender_ausgabe_html?type_id=2&land_id=113

US State Department, USA

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?frd/cstdy:@field(DOCID+md0027) ("..Stalin justified the creation of the Moldavian SSR by claiming that a distinct "Moldavian" language was an indicator that "Moldavians" were a separate nationality from the Romanians in Romania....")

France – Ministere des Affaires Etrangeres

http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/fr/pays-zones-geo_833/moldavie_468/presentation-moldavie_1001/donnees-generales_23177.html

UK – Foreign & Commonwealth Office

http://www.fco.gov.uk/servlet/Front?pagename=OpenMarket/Xcelerate/ShowPage&c=Page&cid=1007029394365&a=KCountryProfile&aid=1019672579768

Others except the Russian are in the same manner. All the western powers refuse the russification attempts.

Artificial creation of the "Moldavian language". Evolution from Romanian to so called Moldavian

Lately were discovered some facts that prove that the theory of the both languages romanian and "moldovan" - was prefab since the 1812-1918. Some important aspects of the problematics: functioning of the romanian language in the sphere of the laic education system from Bessarabia of the year 1812-1918, the attempts to codyfing the romanian language in conditions of a linguistic situations, causes that determined to degradation of the language compared with spoken romanian on the right side of the river Prut, taking out the name "romanian" and introducing the term "limba moldoveneasca", the intention of the tsarist government "to create a dialect neared to the slavic language".

In the first years of russian occupation (after 1812), because 95% of the population being romanians which they knew only their mother tongue, romanian was admitted as an official language in the institutions of Bessarabia, used along with russian. Gradually the russian language win importance. According to the dates offered by the Dept. for ruling the Bessarabia from 1828, the papers from bureau were held only in russian, and around 1835 it is established a term of 7 years time in which the state institutions will still accept acts in romanian language. As concerning the education, romanian was admitted as language of teaching only until 1842, after that being taught as a separate object. Thus, at the theological Seminar of Chişinău, romanian language is found on the list of compulsory subjects, with 10 hours weekly, until 1863, when the department of romanian is closed for good. At the highschool no. 1 from Chişinău the pupils had the right to choose between romanian and german or between romanian and greek until 9th of Feb. 1866, when the state counselor of the russian government interdicts teaching of the romanian language because the pupils "know this language in the practical mode, and its teaching follows other goals". Around 1871, the tsar published an ucaz "On the suspension of teaching the romanian language in the schools from Besserabia", because "In russian Empire are not taught local speeches".

Two examples of the identity were given: (one is from the constitution of both countries – see the identity)

Comparison Romanian/Moldavian

The example below demonstrates that a formal text in Romanian and Moldovan may be completely identical, the only difference being the spelling of the î vowel in the word vântul. The colloquial languages show more difference, which varies over the area.

Moldavian	Romanian	English
Vocala este un sunet din vorbirea omului, făcut cu trecerea sonoră, liberă şi fără piedică, a vîntului prin canalul sonor (compus din coardele vocale şi întreaga gură) sau un semn grafic care reprezintă un atare sunet.	Vocala este un sunet din vorbirea omului, făcut cu trecerea sonoră, liberă şi fără piedică, a vântului prin canalul sonor (compus din coardele vocale şi întreaga gură) sau un semn grafic care reprezintă un atare sunet.	The vowel is a sound in human speech, made by the sonorous, free and unhindered passing of the air through the sound channel (composed of the vocal chords and the whole mouth) or a graphic symbol corresponding to that sound.
Aşa bunăoară, avem şase vocale ce se fac cu vîntul ce trece prin gură, unde limba poate să se afle într-un loc sau altul şi buzele pot să stea deschise un soi sau altul.	Aşa bunăoară, avem şase vocale ce se fac cu vântul ce trece prin gură, unde limba poate să se afle într-un loc sau altul şi buzele pot să stea deschise un soi sau altul.	This way, we have six vowels that are produced by the air passing through the mouth, where the tongue can be in one place or another and the lips can be opened in one way or another.
Vocalele pot să fie pronunţate singure sau împreună cu semivocale sau consoane.	Vocalele pot să fie pronunţate singure sau împreună cu semivocale sau consoane.	The vowels can be pronounced alone or together with semivowels or consonants.

Second example is taken from the Constitution of Moldova and Romania. The identity is more than obvious.

so called Moldavian	Romanian	English
TITLUL I: Principii Generale	TITLUL I Principii Generale	FIRST TITLE: General Principles
Articolul 1 Statul Republica Moldova	Articol 1 Statul român	Article 1 (Romanian/Republic of Moldova State)
(1) Republica Moldova este un stat suveran şi independent, unitar şi indivizibil.	(1) România este stat naţional, suveran şi independent, unitar şi indivizibil.	(1) Romania/Republic of Moldova is a national, independent, unity and undestructible state.
2) Forma de guvernămînt a statului este republica.	(2) Forma de guvernământ a statului român este republica.	(2) The form of the guvernment of the state is republic.
(3) Republica Moldova este un stat de drept, democratic, în care demnitatea omului, drepturile şi libertăţile ...	(3) România este stat de drept, democratic şi social, în care demnitatea omului, drepturile şi libertăţile ...	Romania/Republic of Moldova is a state of low, democratic, in which the human dignity, rights and liberties...
[[3]]	[[4]]	Links to the official page of Constitution for both countries

As you can obvious see from these examples they are identical. We speak here about one language. But they Mikkalai and Node_ue don't accept such examples and they constantly delete them without any argument. They delete them because the examples demonstrates all …

Wikipedia Anti-war project, push to get a featured article b4 Xmass

February 15, 2003 anti-war protest, an article which is part of the WikiProject Anti-war of which you are listed as a member, has been recently rated A-class by the Version 1.0 Editorial team (see here) This means that it is considered to be of good quality. The Anti-war project has yet to achieve a featured article but with a little pushing I feel we could get this article up to FA standards. To this end I have put the article up for peer review, if you could help make this a brilliant article that would be much appreciated. Please give your comments at Wikipedia:Peer review/February 15, 2003 anti-war protest/archive2 or on the articles talk page. Fingers crossed for a FA before Xmass.--JK the unwise 13:02, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please discontinue your involvement outside of the article namespace

I was quite shocked tonight when I stumbled onto the recent RFA for Rl and saw your vote and its justification. Quite frankly I can see no excuse for the harm caused to our community by your ridiculous imposition of a bureaucratic and arbitrary numerical standard which is neither supported by policy or by community behavior. I find it further unacceptable that you choose to use a helpful user as a pawn in your wiki political battle and as a result alienated him from our project. I have never before been so ashamed to be a Wikipedia editor. After careful consideration I believe that all users who have caused this travesty are a greater harm to our project than an asset. Please confine your activities to the main namespace or discontinue your involvement altogether. Thank you. --Gmaxwell 05:50, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Rl

Well, whatever you did a couple of months ago, you've certainly atoned for it by doing mediation cabal work :)

But even then, I'm curious as to your reasoning back then, because that seems to be pretty important to the future of wikipedia all of a sudden. Would you care to elucidate? Kim Bruning 06:59, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Brainwashing and Mind Control

Please take part at the merge vote under Talk:Mind control#Merge vote --Irmgard 16:28, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya!

Congrats on your upcoming transfer! I certainly can't argue against studying instead of Wiki'ing. :) It's been a weird semester for me. I was really looking forward to one of my classes, and it turned out to be not so great. That hasn't been filling me with inspiration for my degree. And, some big things have been going on in my family -- not bad things, but things that make long-term planning difficult. So, in short, life has been generally okay but kind of up-and-down. Next year looks to be more exciting, so I'm thinking positive. Thanks for "stopping by" my user talk page, and (again) welcome back to the east coast! FreplySpang (talk) 00:06, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Can you hear the drum, Fernando?

Come back, Little Sheeba! Hamster Sandwich 04:38, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

alive, you say!

Finals week is coming up, so I've been sticking to small-scale edits and tweaks now and then. Getting flight requirements done in North Dakota weather can get pretty hairy. We should probably get a {{todo}} going for the PBY article at some point. ericg ✈ 20:00, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Unspeakable

Since you are unspeakably busy, I won't speak of it, other than to say it's nice to see you around a bit. Joyous | Talk 21:18, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Good to see that you are doing well since you got out of the Marine Corps. Good luck in the future and all the best. Ulla Tempore, Ullo Situ. --Looper5920 17:44, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Hamster sandwich.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Hamster sandwich.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you can claim fair use use {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or {{fairuse}}. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thanks so much. --Sherool (talk) 14:10, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your help is needed

Hello, I am Robert, I have a cooking wiki already established that is in need of a few good contributors. I would be interested in giving Admin rights to a few good contributors. The wiki has mucho content but no real active community and just a handful of contributors. The project is located at Cookbookwiki.com and I can be contacted at wikimanager@yahoo.com, I recently removed google ads and such. I need help getting the community part of the wiki active. Feel free to stop by and add your comments to our home page discussion or get started. From my understanding, there is much content that can be added that is missing from wikipedia due to politics. So, if you would like a cooking wiki playground, please stop by or contact me. - Robert

WP:TINMC

Hi, you're down as being an an active cabalist. Is that still true? There are plenty of cases awaiting mediator response, please drop by if you can! Dan100 (Talk) 10:58, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

[Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sturmgrenadier]

hi, there is an organized campaign to save the above self-promotional vanity games-club page from deletion.... i'm wondering if you'd be willing to take a look and voice your opinion? normally i wouldnt care but (a) i hate organized campaigns from groups of users (especially when they have vested interests but dont declare them) and (b) when challenged about it, they suggested i try it myself! so here i am.... cheers! Zzzzz 20:43, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!!

Wikiproject anti-war, Article improvement drive

February 15, 2003 anti-war protest an article from the WikiProject Anti-war, which you are listed as a member of, has been nominated for the Article Improvement Drive (by me ).

It is an article about a day of much importance both to the history of the anti-war movement and to general discussion of the Iraq war. With a little work from experienced editors it could gain FA status. If you would like to see it improved please vote for it at Make "February 15, 2003 anti-war protest" the subject of an Article Improvement Drive--JK the unwise 13:17, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Shark illustration.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Shark illustration.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you.

SPANISH

HELLO, HOPE I AM NOT BEING A NUISANCE, BUT I NOTICED THAT YOU ARE A FLUENT SPEAKER OF SPANISH. I WAS WANDERING IF YOU COULD TELL ME HOW TO SAY THE FOLLOWING PHRASES IN SPANISH.

WHAT IS YOUR E-MAIL ADRESS?

MY EMAIL ADRESS IS..... YOU SPELL IT LIKE THIS

I WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE IT IF YOU COULD HELP. NO WORRIES IF YOU CAN'T.

CHEERS, --CONRAD- 14 YEAR OLD SOCIALIST!!! 05:03, 16 February 2006 (UTC)--[reply]

Sad to see you go

You'll be missed. Joyous | Talk 22:00, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More than a little, I'd like to add. Good luck with your studies! If you happen to learn anything from your four-star college, you might want to add an article or two, just for old times sake! Peace Fernando, I wish you well... Hamster Sandwich 23:58, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

templates substituted by a bot as per Wikipedia:Template substitution Pegasusbot 08:13, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

There is a consensus discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft#Infobox Aicraft consensus discussion on adopting a non-specifications summary infobox for aircraft articles. Your comments would be appreciated. Thanks! - Emt147 ^Burninate! 18:32, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Anti-war topics up for deletion

Template:Anti-war topics is up for deletion. Please weigh in on the discussion. Thanks! SchuminWeb (Talk) 09:26, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]