User talk:Alex Bakharev/Archive20

UPA article

Welcome back! It seems that Jo0doe has resumed his disruptive ways on the Ukrainian Insurgent Army article. Might a warning or brief block be in order? regardsFaustian (talk) 13:17, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cats

Hi, Alex. Could you please look at the recent changes of categories by User:Kuban kazak? I think such changes are hardly appropriate and corrected a few of them. What do you think? Thank you.Biophys (talk) 16:55, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying not to interfere into the categories the purpose of which I do not understand and that Category:Jewish jurists, etc. I would think the category xx_victims_of_Soviet_repressions is for the classification by the 5th graph of all the Soviet documents, as it was the logic the Soviet authorities used. Then Kuban seems to be correct. If it is for the classification by the place of birth on the modern political map, then the category is even more useless than I think. At any rate the actions of the kazak on the first glance seems to be correct. Issac Babel is no more Ukrainian victim than Immanuel Kant is Russian philosopher or Adam Mickiewicz Belarusian poet Alex Bakharev (talk) 01:51, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- I agree that "ethnic" categories are useless and even harmful. Therefore I have corrected them like that or that. Do you agree with such changes? Thank you.Biophys (talk) 18:37, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - I like those changes Alex Bakharev (talk) 00:12, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for May 12th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 20	12 May 2008	About the Signpost

Explicit sexual content draws fire	Sighted revisions introduced on the German Wikipedia
Foundation receives copyright claim from church	Board to update privacy policy, adopts data retention policy
Update on Citizendium	Board candidacies open through May 22
Two wiki events held in San Francisco Bay Area	New feature enables users to bypass IP blocks
WikiWorld: "Tony Clifton"	News and notes: Autoconfirmed level, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Dispatches: Changes at Featured lists
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:09, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

request

Hello Alex Bakharev. As you are an administrator on wikipedia, I was wondering if you could do me a favor. A user (Ludvikus) was just blo

cked for two years (quite a long time). I do not think the block was justified. If you have time, could you look over the situation on his talk page (starting here) and please comment on it (especially consider the length of the block)? Thanks, Ostap 02:42, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am aware of the block but simply do not know what to do yet. I personally have enjoyed work with him on a few articles related to Russian ultra-nationalists but there seems that he was a major pain of few other articles like philosophy. Alex Bakharev (talk) 03:52, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, it just does not look as if you are active enough to watch over a user who often produces thousands of words in article talk pages, daily. El_C 06:46, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is a valid point, it looks like we need a team of mentors. I am usually quite active onwiki, but incidentally I want to limit my activities as it hurts my commitments IRL Alex Bakharev (talk) 08:32, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RFA thanks

Thanks for your support at my recent Request for adminship. I hope you find I live up to your expectations. Best, Risker (talk) 13:50, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this falls in your authority

Заебал, блядь... --Kuban Cossack 00:11, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thank-spam

Alex Bakharev/Archive20, just a note of appreciation for your recent support of my request for adminship, which ended successfully with 112 supports, 2 opposes, and 1 neutral. If there's something I've realized during my RFA process this last week, it's that adminship is primarily about trust. I will strive to the best of my ability to honour that trust in my future interactions with the community. Many thanks! Gatoclass (talk) 06:07, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A note about your board candidacy

There is a limit of 1200 characters for your candidate statement. Yours is 2954, giving you an unfair advantage over the other candidates. Please consider adjusting your statement. A character counter is available here.⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 22:16, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will fix my statement today Alex Bakharev (talk) 22:36, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Done Alex Bakharev (talk) 23:03, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Recent Rfa

Although you opposed me in my recent RFA I will still say thanks as from your comments and the other users comments that opposed me I have made a todo list for before my next RFA. I hope I will have resolved all of the issues before then and I hope that you would be able to support me in the future. If you would like to reply to this message or have any more suggestions for me then please message me on my talk page as I will not be checking back here. Thanks again. ·Add§hore· ^Talk/_Cont 16:19, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Akimov Lupa.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Akimov Lupa.JPG. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 18:29, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Ales adamovich.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ales adamovich.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 20:16, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Anrep Compassion Akmatova.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Anrep Compassion Akmatova.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 05:07, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Arkady Shevchenko and Elena.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Arkady Shevchenko and Elena.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 07:52, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category talk:Genocide

You recently removed the Category:Genocide from the Holodomor article with the brief comment POV Category. In Category talk:Genocide there is start of discussion dating from 2006 however there is no rationale for deleting the category from Holodomor articles. Is not the concept of the Holodomor as a genocide the majority view of current scholarship in this controversial topic. Waiting for your feedback. Thanks Bobanni (talk) 09:02, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Astafiev.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Astafiev.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 10:14, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Bernes cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Bernes cover.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 02:42, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Boyarsky.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Boyarsky.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 13:08, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

G'day Candidate!

First I thought I'd offer a thank you for being brave / foolish enough to put your hat in the ring as a candidate for election to the Wikimedia Board of Trustees! - I wonder if you might have any time, interest, and enthusiasm to record a brief 10 / 15 minute audio interview about yourself / the reasons for your candidature / your wiki philosophy etc. etc. ? - I've been promoting a project on the english wikipedia called NotTheWikipediaWeekly - which is a grassroots effort to promote good communications through (semi) regular 'podcasts'.

If you have a couple of moments free, would you mind taking a look at this page and signing up if you're interested! It'd be great to chat with each and every one of you, and I hope you'll be amenable to this idea! Let me know if you've any questions at all, thought perhaps my english wikipedia talk page is the best spot.

The best of luck, and kind regards,

Privatemusings (talk) 03:28, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, comrade! Best luck with your elections as well.

To be honest I have never participated in skypecasts, but I have a microphone and webcamera and skype installed. So I could try. I live in a weird timezone though... Alex Bakharev (talk) 06:08, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in Sydney - and I gather you live in another australian town! - shouldn't be too hard to find a suitable moment for a quick chat..... If you're amenable, go ahead and add my Skype ID - privatemusings - as a contact - and feel free to nominate a suitable time - perhaps Monday morning sometime? 11.00am Sydney time? - cheers, and I look forward to speaking with you before too long! best, Privatemusings (talk) 06:32, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can it be a weekend or an evening? I would rather do wikipedia business outside my working hours Alex Bakharev (talk) 07:23, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Перевод.

Здравствуйте, Александр!

Думаю, что поскольку русский язык для Вас родной, то никто лучше Вас не переведёт посвящённую Вам страничку: m:Board elections/2008/Candidates/ru#Alex Bakharev. Если Вы так не считаете, то я или другой переводчик переведём. Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 19:46, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Я уже перевёл. Посмотрите, пожалуйста, всё ли я адекватно передал. --BeautifulFlying (talk) 23:59, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- Огромное спасибо за перевод! Поправил немного Alex Bakharev (talk) 02:03, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

5/25 DYK

On 25 May, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article State Prize of the Russian Federation, 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.

--Bedford ^Pray 04:20, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Mediation: John Howard

Hello. A request for mediation has been lodged for the John Howard article, concerning whether information about an incident between John Howard and Barack Obama should be included or deleted from the article. The link for the RfM is Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/John_Howard. The issue is still being discussed on the article talk page. Please go to the RfM page and list whether you agree or disagree to be involved in mediation of this issue. Thank you, Lester 01:45, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

reverting

Why are you restoring the comment without consensus? If it is an appropriate compromise then surely consensus on the talk page would be reached? Timeshift (talk) 06:27, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BRD. I think it is better to have article in an in-between compromised state, that have chances to pass rather than in somebody's preferred version Alex Bakharev (talk) 06:52, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ivan Maisky

Hi, Alex! I am sure you had valid reasons to move Ivan Maysky to Ivan Maisky, but WP:RUS currently requires substantiation for spellings not compliant with WP:RUS. If you could provide something to that effect on that article's talk page, it'd be greatly appreciated. Please see WP:RUS#People for examples of acceptable rationales. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:21, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Ivan_Maisky#Maysky_vs_Maisky Done Alex Bakharev (talk) 02:57, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well that answered my query

I didn't want to block him myself as I was afraid that the phone number was his own and just fucked up when he started editing. –– Lid^(Talk) 09:42, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for May 19th and 26th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 21	19 May 2008	About the Signpost

Pro-Israeli group's lobbying gets press, arbitration case	Board elections: Voting information, new candidates
Sister Projects Interview: Wikibooks	WikiWorld: "Hodag"
News and notes: Russian passes Swedish, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Good article milestone	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Volume 4, Issue 22	26 May 2008	About the Signpost

Board elections: Candidate questions	Single User Login opt-in for all users
Community-related news sources grow	WikiWorld: "Tomcat and Bobcat"
News and notes: Wikimedia DE lawsuit, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Featured sounds	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:56, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NewArtBot

Hi Alex, I just wanted to let you know that I've been using User:AlexNewArtBot/PhysicsSearchResult and found it quite useful. A large fraction of the articles it tags really are new physics articles, which means I'm qualified to take intelligent action on them. Thanks! -- SCZenz (talk) 10:23, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Alex Bakharev (talk) 13:30, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A question for you.

You're running for the board of trustees and I might vote for you, but I have a question: Are you a Communist? ☯ Zenwhat (talk) 20:35, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No I am not, mild anti-communist rather of miniarchist streak. Still the wikithing I hate more than communism is soapboxing of all persuasions. Alex Bakharev (talk) 21:41, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for mediation not accepted

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted.
You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/John Howard.

For the Mediation Committee, WjBscribe 16:46, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mikhail Abyzov

As a contributor to Mikhail Abyzov you may be interested in the above discussion. The discussion has focussed around the fact that the sources for the article are in Russian. Thanks for your help. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 09:01, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another bot?

Hi Alex, good luck in the election! I know you must be busy, but could you entertain an idea for a new bot? Your new article bot is awesome, and has proved itself. And because a reword for a job well done is another job, would you be interested in creating something similar to User:SatyrBot/WikiProject_to_do_lists? That would be really really great. Thanks! Renata (talk) 09:05, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is wrong with the SatyrBot itself? Alex Bakharev (talk) 09:36, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The owner is on extended wiki-break... Renata (talk)
  - I see. Do you know if the bot looks through all the articles labeled on the talk page as belonging to the project, or look for articles that belongs to a category (probably via subcategories) or do we need to analyze the content the way AlexNewArtBot. The third one seems to be tricky, the first an second looks trivial in implementation. Alex Bakharev (talk) 10:47, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - I believe WikiProject supply specific categories to check. For example, I would request to go thru Category:WikiProject Lithuania articles. Some other might want several categories. I would not recommend going thru category:Lithuania & its subcategories, as one of them is World War II with 70k Lithuania-unrelated articles... I figured that one out when I tried to compile a list of all articles inside the category:Lithuania. Renata (talk) 13:29, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      - It does not look like a difficult task, I think I could do this in a couple of weekends. I will try to contact Satyr first Alex Bakharev (talk) 14:02, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        Great! Thank you. Let me know how it goes. Renata (talk) 19:22, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Kurdo

I understand what you mean, Alex. It wasn't my intent to post "permanent shame notices", but to warn the guy to stop edit-waring, or that there would be consequences. After he wrote me requesting that I stop, I replied back that I would not do so, unless there was an official need to do so. As I am thinking that this fellow is probably going to continue his behavior, I wanted to ensure that I had properly notified him, so no one coudl say - hey, you never told him he was edit-warring or being disruptive.
Lastly, I would point out that I am completely in agreement with you in regards to keeping article-related matters in the article and article discussion. If only Kurdo felt the same way, it might be possible to even have a discussion. He posts his personal view and pointedly refuses to discuss his edits. If he isn't responding or posting in article discussion, how would you suggest I respond to issues raised by, for example, the synthesis removal of cited information? I don't want to run to AN/I every time I run into a difficult user, but I am increasingly of the opinion that the stick is going to be a more effective learning tool than the carrot. Your thoughts would be welcome, Alex. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 16:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hamshenis

please protect hamshenis page, omer keeps adding original research, no citations and refuses to explain his mass edits, where there is not consensus.67.49.46.213 (talk) 07:31, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not that familiar with the subject, so it is not that easy to spot the original research to me. Can you elaborate on the talk page of the article. Also if you want to seriously be involved in wikiediting please get yourself an account, it only requres a few seconds and gives you many benefits, including more serious attention to your editing Alex Bakharev (talk) 07:40, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- -- sure - intro reads like an essay and user removes content with citations from reliable sources for original research. he paints a picture removing armenian association from armenians of hamshen, like denying genocide or the like. I asked him for citations and consensus on talk, but he keeps removing, his earlier vandalism included removal of the picture as well, either he needs to be banned and spoken to or article protected.67.49.46.213 (talk) 23:49, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - I have asked for the editorial input on talk. Your arguments make sense Alex Bakharev (talk) 00:56, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - Kindly note that I have posted a response on the talk page following your input.Omer182 (talk) 11:38, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      - Thanks! I will check the discussion there Alex Bakharev (talk) 11:58, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alex; You had been briefly involved as an observant in the discussion on (now) “hemshin peoples”. Self evaluation is difficult, but I believe I am doing my bit cooperatively and politely. In spite of that I see that the article is in the risk of some trouble. I wonder whether you would have time to put a glance to the talk page ...your advice may become beneficial.Omer182 (talk) 22:13, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you for your interest Alex. I have just written something on its [[1]] talk page about the problematic edits by Omer. Meowy 00:34, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2008 WMF Board election

Hey, after I got the e-mail about the 2008 WMF Board election, I read through all the candidates' statements, and I decided to vote for you! (I'm not sure if it helps or hurts to only vote for one person in the Schulze method, but that's what I did.) Anyway, good luck! --Muéro^(talk/c) 05:38, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!!! Alex Bakharev (talk) 05:59, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fritzpollbot

Hi, Alex! Saw your comment on the Fritzpollbot poll, and just wanted to clarify that the bot will use not the names taken from some random English-language source (the romanization conventions of which will probably not match ours 100%), but from the list the editors of WP Russia (which, I guess, means me) compile. No stubs/articles will be generated until such a list is in place. Hope this addresses your concern. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 19:59, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for making this clear. It is great, though it might make life difficult for you Alex Bakharev (talk) 01:00, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, I signed up for this myself; no one dragged me by my ears, so complaining about life being too difficult would be pointless :) In any case, everything is going according to the plan so far, if only a bit slower than I would like it to be. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:44, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Republican Wikipedians

Please take a look at the comment on my talk, and un-protect the page. Thanks. - Diligent Terrier (and friends) 01:29, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment, but I would not unsalt the category. It was deleted by CFD and should be restored by DRW only. Alex Bakharev (talk) 02:47, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Image:Larionov red rayonism.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:Larionov red rayonism.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I8 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is available as a bit-for-bit identical copy on the Wikimedia Commons under the same name, or all references to the image on Wikipedia have been updated to point to the title used at Commons.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:Larionov red rayonism.jpg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. BJ^Talk 12:39, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for June 2, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 23	2 June 2008	About the Signpost

Board elections open	WikiWorld: "Facial Hair"
Wikipedia in the News	Dispatches: Style guide and policy changes
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:18, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

For your block on a particularly caustic vandal. Much appreciated, JNW (talk) 03:18, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gee, thanks for you thanking ! Alex Bakharev (talk) 03:21, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Soviet Chess School

You have tagged this article as "unusable". Can you explain what what you mean by this please? I have been on Wiki a few years now and I've not seen this tag before. Would some references help? Thanks in advance, SmokeyTheCat •TALK• 11:58, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion the article is so poorly written that it is not usable for the end users. If you disagree with my assessment just delete the prod. I would put the article on afd, probably Alex Bakharev (talk) 12:46, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen what he is doing?

The guy is doing massive deletions of nazi war crimes such as in the General plan ost article, so is it ok for him to delete this massive amount of information which is also SOURCED, IE he deletes SOURCED information is that ok, and his personal attacks calling me a "moron" and refusing to respond to my comments is that also ok? Tell me what I am to do about the massive deletions of the nazi war crimes, tell me exactly what am I am to do, just except that he deletes sourced material? AND he refuses to discuss with me all he writes is gibberish in the edit section, so it is ok for him to delete massive chunks of nazi war crimes write gibberish in the edit box and yet I am the one who is accused?Aheadnovel55 (talk) 17:37, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please check the discussion on the talk page of the article. Apparently his point is that the nazi crimes mentioned were not directly connected with the Plan Ost. He might have some valid point, BTW. Please help the development of the article by finding more sources showing connection between the real Nazi crimes and the Plan Ost (see Talk:Generalplan_Ost#Implementation_section).

I am sorry the guy was unnecessary sarcastic with you. I have given him a warning. On the other hand accusation of an editor in Nazi sympathy just for making edits that he beleved would make the article more logical is a monstrous violation of WP:AGF. Please assume more good faith in the future.

BTW the info you we concern with is restored Alex Bakharev (talk) 23:09, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism of the checkuser Bonaparte

Please stop vandalising my request for checkuser Xasha on the Bonaparte case. Rapido (talk) 11:19, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop trolling Alex Bakharev (talk) 11:27, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Semenov-Tian-Shanskij

Did I ever thankyou for the Barnstar? Perhaps not I broke my shoulder last year and it was hard to catch up with so many kind words to reply to and work not done.Thankyou now! Can you help me with this man Semenov-Tian-Shanskij (Coleoptera) Notafly (talk) 17:52, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pyotr Semyonov-Tyan-Shansky

I found him.Different roman forms of the cyrillic.Again many thanks for the star.More Russians soon I hope.They are now linking together into a single picture. Robert Notafly (talk) 20:28, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for June 9, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 24	9 June 2008	About the Signpost

Board elections continue	WikiWorld: "Triskaidekaphobia"
News and notes: Military media mention, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Main page day	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:11, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 15 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Vladimir Kvachkov, 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.

--Maxim_(talk) 21:30, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About Andrew Pavlovsky

Dear Alex! I found the only advertising moment in this article that is the link to the M'ART GROUP article. I deleted it. Could you please advise what other aspects look not wikipedia like. You know that is it always easier to create an article about somebody well known in centuries than about a wonderful but modern outstanding person. I would like to underline that the publishing quantities of this artist's works do correspond to Wikipedia requirements. --Linatamar (talk) 11:05, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am mostly concerned that the article is misrepresenting its subject. We have a commercial artist producing some commercial and an almost unknown painter represented as a national-wide celebrity. Almost all statements are unreferenced, including those that are inheritently opinions. Most of the article comes most probably from the subject or his close associate. I have changed {{advert}} to {{likeresume}} that more closely summarize my concerns Alex Bakharev (talk) 12:17, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User ISO9909

Hello there, I wanted to know how to send a warning out to users who persistently vandalize pages. I noticed ISO9909 vandalism on two separate occasions and I wanted to send a warning to this user but was not sure how to. Your advice would be much appreciated. Thank you.Londonfella (talk) 12:25, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from Campora San Giovanni

Good morning to you, am I an Italian user, do I live in this country, and are they one of your supporters for the candidacy to Wikimedia, would I like from you a favor if it finds you possible, please you could translate in Russian the article of Campora San Giovanni, because many Russian live to Campora and their families don't they know where it is found, now thanks to the your their help they can know where their relatives live, can you do me this favor? I thank you in advance and good luck for your candidacy. --Lodewijk Vadacchino (talk) 10:31, 17 June 2008 (UTC) P.s. sorry my bad english.--Lodewijk Vadacchino (talk) 10:31, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would start with translation of Province of Cosenza (a pitiful stub in ru-wiki) and Calabria ( a rough automatic translation in ruwiki). I am afraid there is no sense to go to franzione level unless the upper level articles are up to speed Alex Bakharev (talk) 12:59, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

68.32.136.151

We have one hell of a disruptive IP here, he was warned several times, none of the other admins I spoke to DDima, Ezhiki, Deacon seem to have the vigilance to do the right think against to prevent this sterile attacks against Lugansk, Donetsk, Odessa their Oblasts and several other Ukrianian cities. Put it this way, if he is permabanned, noone will be sorry to see him go... --Kuban Cossack 14:11, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The IP seems to be blocked already. --Irpen 19:29, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nikolai A.Baskakov‎

Alex, thank you for visiting Nikolai A.Baskakov‎ initial entry, now I think I completed the article, and would appreciate your comments. Is it too long? Too detailed? His biography is so interesting, I was struggling to dismiss bits and pieces, maybe I was too partial. Your help or advice will be welcome.

On another subject, Turkic Khaganate‎ was "moved" to Göktürks ([[2]]) without conclusion of the discussion on the Talk page,[[3]], and I have undone it. But...the move discussion disappeared from the Talk page, and now it appears like it was even never discussed. Is it possible to restore the discussion page? As a side comment, Ashina/Gokturks/Edizes headed the Kaganate, but they never were "the Kaganate", which was a poly-ethnic state, with poly-ethnic cultures, and poly-ethnic history. Jamming the country into its elite is like jamming Rus into Rurik Dynasty, or replacing France with Plantagenets. Nobody would do it in a good faith.

And the last, I happened to run into your User:Alex Bakharev/BoardStatement, and found it to be excellent and impressive. I wish you good luck. Barefact (talk) 19:20, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quick favour?

Hi there. Thanks for the note about Beh-nam and NisarKand :) Hopefully, we'll all get a break from that now. Can I possibly ask something of you? I see that you are a native Russian speaker. Could you possibly look at wikt:ga:Vicífhoclóir:About this page and possibly translate it for us over there? I'm sysop on that wikti, too, and can link it onto the mainpage. (pretty-please? :) ) - thanks :) - Alison ^❤ 08:42, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done Alex Bakharev (talk) 09:18, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you so much for translating that! I really appreciate it. Thanks :) - Alison ^❤ 21:14, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This may be interesting to you

Estimates of the popularity of AlexNewArtBot's feeds with this tool, surprising enough:

rank – name of the feed – hits during the first half of June

1. AssociationFootball (372)

2. Wisconsin (362)

3. Good (350)

4. Africa (238)

5. COI (215)

6. Album (166)

7. Plants (152)

8. LGBT (129)

9. Oregon (105)

10-11. Airports (95)

10-11. Chemistry (95)

12. Chile (76)

13. Minnesota (75)

14. Poland (70)

15. Waterbodies (66)

16. NZ (65)

17. Sweden (63)

18. Literature (62)

19-20. Australia (61)

19-20. Japan (61)

21. Lithuania (60)

22-23. Israel (59)

22-23. ScottishIslands (59)

24. Mexico (57)

25-27. Norway (56, set up only few weeks ago, not announced)

25-27. Opera (56)

25-27. Organizations (56)

28-29. Physics (53)

28-29. Railways (53)

30-31. Mesoamerica (52)

30-31. Peru (52)

32 Cinema (51)

33-35. Kentucky (50)

33-35. Ohio (50)

33-35. Russia (50)

Colchicum (talk) 20:53, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder, however, if the tool counts transclusions properly. Since some of the feeds (like Russia) are transcluded on other pages and are thus primarily accessed through those pages, the reported number of hits for transcluded hits may be lower than the real number of views.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 21:12, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe, but unlikely. AssociationFootball is also transcluded. There is another problem, however. Unlike Wikipedia, the tool doesn't distinguish between uppercase and lowercase. Colchicum (talk) 21:17, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as evident from this, it doesn't count transclusions. Colchicum (talk) 21:54, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is interesting statistics, thanks. Still it is not exactly show the usability of the bot-generated pages. They are maintenance tools. If hundred people watch a page daily but do nothing to improve the articles listed the usability of the page is zero. If one user patrols all the pages listed daily (or even weekly for less active projects) and actually improve the articles (send hoaxes for deletion, add categories, tag, check the facts, etc.) then the usability of the page is great. Alex Bakharev (talk) 03:33, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hemshin / Hamshenis Again

An anonymous editor had previously complained to you about the behaviour of editor Omer182 removing large quanties of referenced material from this article, and replacing it with his completely unreferenced opinions/original research. He seems to be engaged in a mission to exclude anything that contradicts his POV, and things have got even worse since that initial complaint. Can you suggest directions to a solution, or some way to make him cease his activities? Meowy 18:47, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pavlovsky

Dear Alex! I noticed your activity and decided to address you. I’ve read the article, dedicated to you, in which you are in concern for the development of WIKIPEDIA. I’m very interested in this project myself however, I’ve known about it for a very short amount of time. Nevertheless, some things seemed a little strange to me. I am the initiator of the article dedicated to Andrew Pavlovksy in WIKIPEDIA’s English version; in no way am I connected to this person in a partnership of any kind. I’ve been put to blame – that I have published his article simply out of pure advertising purposes – that is not true. My only true wish is to inform those who are interested about this artist. Wikipedia’s problems are obvious. It is my firm belief that I am only trying to expand Wikipedia’s range of information. 1. Wikipedia is receiving an article about an artist who is involved with the <advertising world> & works very often for custom orders by the government of his country. 2. Wikipedia is introduced to an artist who was never posed as the greatest artist of the Russian Federation, but an artist who lives and simply creates phenomenal designs in multiple worldwide magazines with which you are most likely familiar with. You are not living in Russia, together we share the same fate, let’s not talk about the reasons, but why take away such a possibility from Wikipedia? While deleting this article – it is losing its powers of being an ENCYCLOPEDIA. Have you ever tried to become a member of the MSH? I doubt it… This group of phenomenal artist’s and philosophers are accepted only by private invitations; Andrew Pavlovsky is one of the respected members of this cultural group. Perhaps you don’t like his works, or the direction in which he thrives? Maybe I can ask the author to upload on WIKI COMMONS, but that will only lead to a personal point of view. It won’t change the fact that this artist was an activist in the late 1980’s early 1990’s. Let us fill in the gaps, instead of making them wider. Believe me, a person who is truly interested in the modern Russian culture (Moscow) that this artistic figure is well known in the advertising and cultural world in Moscow. I can’t ask him in order for you to believe my words, for him to go and pay thousands of dollars to be on the cover of some magazine, I’m sure his time is much more valuable than that. 4. I hope that you consider this information, and I truly hope that you understand that this is not for any advertising purposes. Perhaps if you decide to accept this article into your archives you will develop the cultural range of Wikipedia!--Altamal (talk) 19:11, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptions and abuse on Ukrainian Insurgent Army article

After a break from such behavior Jo0doe (talk has resumed with his abusive behavior here [4] ("Inability to read and comprehend books by some of editors it’s not a hurdle for others, while removing of well referenced NPOV information called as usual -vandalism") and here [5]. He has already been warned by and others about such behavior in the past: [6]. I would also like to point out that he has been engaged in a low level edit warring involving making massive one-sided changes to the article which have been reverted by several editors: [7]. According to the Wikipedia:Three-revert rule, "The motivation for the three-revert rule is to prevent edit warring. In this spirit the rule does not convey an entitlement to revert three times each day, nor does it endorse reverting as an editing technique. Rather, the rule is an "electric fence".[1] Editors may still be blocked even if they have made three or fewer reverts in a 24 hour period, if their behavior is clearly disruptive. Efforts to game the system, for example by persistently making three reverts each day or three reverts on each of a group of pages, cast an editor in a poor light and may result in blocks. Many administrators give less leniency to users who have been blocked before, and may block such users for any disruptive edit warring regardless of whether they have explicitly violated the three-revert rule. Similarly, editors who may have technically violated the 3RR may not be blocked, depending on circumstances." This particular editor's months-long behavior seems to qualify. On the article's talk page I summarized various applicable wikipedia policies that have been repeatedly violated by this user: [8]. Would you be able to send him a friendly warning please? Thank you. (I am sending the same message to another administrator familiar with this page).Faustian (talk) 19:13, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another editor has removed the abuse but it can be seen here: [9].Faustian (talk) 19:31, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest I do not know what to do. From one side J0ed0e knows a lot in the areas that are of a great interest to WP-readers and he somehow counters the possible bias in a few important articles. On the other hand he is bad in following WP:AGF, WP:NOR, inclined to edit warring and generally not good in the cooperative work. Can we start a WP:RFC to see what can be done about him? Alternatively if the main problem is a single article maybe some sort of the article RFC or mediation could help? Any ideas? He did not edited Ukrainian_Insurgent_Army recently and I am not sure a short block for a stale violation will help anything. Any ideas? Alex Bakharev (talk) 22:19, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If I might interject, we had something of a similar issue in the Jack the Ripper some months back, wherein a certain user, who clearly had a lot to offer the article had significant issues offering polite discussion or interacting constructively with dissent. Looking at the situation in retrospect, the user's positive contributions were effectively negated and additionally hampered by creating a toxic atmosphere in which to work within a community. And while we, as an encyclopedia welcome the expertise that each member might bring to the Project, the overriding fact is that the Project is an assemblage of editors who work together to improve all of the encyclopedia, and we cannot give special dispensation to the knowledgeable but uncooperative. It short-circuits the fail-safes that keep OR and cruft from getting into the article by driving away editors who might wish to dissent. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 22:48, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with both of your comments. The user has brought in some wonderful sources (even though he misused them at times) so I did not bring him to admins' attention earlier despite his abusiveness. But it seems that recently his contributions have been limited to the negative stuff, at a slow but constant rate.Faustian (talk) 03:42, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's too bad. I find the willingness to willingly misuse (do you mean misinterpret for the sake of argument?) sources perhaps more disturbing, as it casts into doubt not just his present contributions, but all of his past ones as well. Golly, Alex, I used to thnk I was your biggest headache. Though you aren't able to clap abut it, I'm glad that I'm not anymore. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 05:08, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, he just did his massive revert again, and was abusive on the article's talk page again [10]. I won't go into the details of his pattern of misusing information here, they are all over the article's talk page - for example [11]. Jo0doe listed numerous horrific atrocities committed by UPA described in the article. However, the article placed those atrocities in the context of a reaction to atrocities from the other side. When this was pointed out, the original source was then dismissed by Jo0doe. Indeed, the pattern in the past has been that he has tended to find a good source, then quote selectively from it to create a dramatically different picture than what the source actually said. I would access the same source on-line, include the rest of the info, and as a result of both of our edits the article actually improved substantially. This was done in the context of his occasional abuse and constant reverts of info he personally deemed bad. I overlooked the unpleasantness of dealing with him for the sake of a better article. But unfortunately for a couple of months he hasn' been adding anything of value anymore, while continuing his low-level edit warring and insults.Faustian (talk) 13:54, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have protected the article for two weeks hoping you would get some consensus rather than editor. I have also given Jo0e a stern warning Alex Bakharev (talk) 14:22, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I really missed this fruitful process. So dear administrators and editor which think what I’ve Lie - you lie by ommission Faustian (talk) 15:39, 31 January 2008 (UTC) [12] I would like to explain my action – I acted strictly with WP:REDFLAG , WP:UNDUE , WP:NOR WP:RS and especially WP:NOHOAXES, policy. If you see here [13] you can see how many hoaxes removed and how many still remains in this article (only in heading) – [14]. And interesting the origin and initiator of such hoaxes is a same – and originated from 2006 see here [15]. Since the misinterpret for the sake of argument it clear and noted many times - see examples[16] with “fair” translation of what actually appeared in source – case with @statement published by OUN in July 1941, (pg.90), @ and @Page 90 In a letter from August 29, 1941 froom Stetsko to Bandera@. Same similar story with [[17]]

Despite the stated opinions of Dmytro Klyachkivsky and Roman Shukhevych that the Germans were a secondary threat compared to their main enemies; the Soviet partisans and Poles, the Third Conference of Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists held near Lviv 17-21 February 1943, adopted the decision to commence open warfare against the Germans

source [18] p 163 -164 directly contradict with mentioned above

And recent [19]

UPA, fighting a two-front war against both the Germans and approaching Soviets (as well as Soviet partisans), did not focus all of its efforts against the Germans. Indeed, it considered the Soviets to be a greater threat. Adopting a strategy analogous to that of the Chetnik leader General Draža Mihailović, UPA held back against the Germans in order to better prepare itself for and engage in the struggle against the Communists. Because of this, although UPA managed to limit German activities to a certain extent, it failed to prevent the Germans from deporting approximately 500,000 people from Western Ukrainian regions and from economically exploiting Western Ukraine." Which cannot be conclude not from p.179 nor from p.180 http://history.org.ua/oun_upa/upa/13.pdf

Until now I can see only effort to redistribute important and well referenced info with third-quality and even propagandistic claim – as for instance originated from former head of the Office to Counter Soviet Disinformation at the USIA. While you cant find any traces of information about collaboration between UPA and SS and SD while Institute of Ukrainian History, Academy of Sciences of Ukraine work noted it many times in [[20]] [[21]] [[22]] As regards claim for WP:OR – I can refer every piece of information on your choose (while it’s already done) – I can’t see the reason to put refs on every word – while I can do so – and not with [23] – to have in WPedia info like

in 1946) Russian agents, disguised as beggars and refugees, traveled from village to village disseminating typhus-carrying lice. When these criminals methods of Soviet Police come to light, the OUN underground network ordered mass vaccination of the populace in several areas.

While if you would like to have such and similar trash in en:WP – not a problem – you can ask the editor which invent this and same quality of data in WP based on same quality sources based on doctored historical texts to eliminate pro-German and antisemitic statements from Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute. [24]. So It's on your decision hoax - [25] or wp:nohoaxes - [26] Jo0doe (talk) 17:46, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Abuse again on the UPA article

More nastiness by Jo0doe (talk) despite the warning: [27]. regards,Faustian (talk) 14:59, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And here he is accusing me of dishonesty: [28].Faustian (talk) 16:21, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Extinguishment talk page - photograph request

Extinguishment Reading the article, it's not immediately obvious what photography is lacking. I have removed the photo request template. Centrepull (talk) 17:40, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

K and D

Hmmm, I am a bit puzzled by this. So I do have a doubt. I've never paid attention to K until today, but I see no similarity between them whatsoever. K was registered and started editing well in advance of D's last two blocks, K is from Tallinn and D is from Tartu, K is much less verbose on talk pages and much less tempered, unlike D, he has created a number of articles on the Estonian military and is also passionately interested in the Balkans – I've never seen a sockpuppet which would be able to reform himself to such an extent. Could you please elaborate why you think so there? Ok, yes, I understand that K works productively and we are not going to interfere, but I believe he is not D, so we will not have to, and if he is then the general community seems to have another opinion on that matter anyway. As we all know from those infamous "pan-Estonian" RFCUs, it is better to avoid such hearsays spreading, but right now they are spreading, so some clarification is in order. Colchicum (talk) 18:23, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Russian geography question

Would you have time to look at Talk:Anadyr River? Seems the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica wasn't very good at getting the geography of the Russian Far East correct. And my Cyrillic is hopeless. Some people have tried answering the question already, but I thought I'd try here as well. Carcharoth (talk) 10:01, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pianist and beginning of modern Russian statehood

User Pianist changed the Russia article again to say that modern Russia statehood began in 1917. His basis is that RSFSR was renamed Russian Federation in 1991 and legal continuity in various legal aspects. However, we are discussing statehood; it very well might have changed its name from RSFSR to "Russian Federation", but between 1922-1991 it was part of a larger state, the SU; there was no country called Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic between 1922-1991. (The U.S.S.R. legally ceased to exist on Dec. 31, 1991. The new state, called the Russian Federation... Britannica--Miyokan (talk) 14:32, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I know I have a conflict with him before. Strictly speaking having more info does not hurt but I am not sure it is worth the lead. If you think the long variant is unacceptable then lets start an article RFC. I would support the short version Alex Bakharev (talk) 14:50, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would prefer it without the information irrelevant to statehood - ie my version before Pianist recently changed it. Otherwise we might as well say add there that Russia is also considered the legal continuation of the SU. This is tricky and I'm not so sure anymore but I guess that the Russian Federation might well be considered the same as the RSFSR, but the the USSR was considered a country. The logic goes that the RSFSR cannot itself be a country and yet also part of another country, if you understand what I'm getting at. I don't plan to use the other account but if you still want to block it that's fine. --Miyokan (talk) 15:36, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anadyr et al.

Yeah, that's the perennial problem with translations of names of geographic features—everyone seems to have their own idea regarding what's supposed to be correct! With Anadyr, the situation is especially confusing. "Anadyr Range" ("Анадырский хребет" in Russian) is an alternative name for Chukchi Range (Чукотский хребет), which itself is a part of the Chukchi Uplands system (Чукотское нагорье). Анадырское плоскогорье is located south-west of the Chukchi Uplands, and is usually translated "Anadyr Plateau". Our Anadyr Range stub most likely refers to some eastern part of the Kolyma Uplands ("Колымское нагорье"), and probably is not the same as either "Анадырское плоскогорье" (which is not a part of the Kolyma Uplands) or "Анадырский хребет" proper (see above). You might want to ask that stub's author to verify where his information came from (the sources listed at the moment sure suck, and if that's all that's available, I'd just prod this stub pending addition of more reliable sources).

That said, however, please don't take my word blindly on all this—I was working primarily from memory and might have very well made a mistake or two (I don't have access to good sources on Russian physical geography at the moment)). Hope this helps at least a little bit. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:21, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I talked with JoshuaD1991, who authored the page, and he agreed to me prodding the article as he has no further sources apart from those listed. Feel free to deprod if you intend to work on this article later. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:11, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, looks like I got so carried away with the details that I forgot about the original question! The Anadyr River originates in the Anadyr Plateau (Анадырское плоскогорье), about which we currently do not have an article, and which shouldn't redirect to "Anadyr Range" as it does now.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 13:52, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Flickr

Thanks for the Flickr explanation.--Miyokan (talk) 08:00, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Brest

As you seem to be able to communicate with that user calmly, I wonder if you consider this helpful? The "alternative names" link goes more or less to nowhere, so he has effectively deleted relevant information (the town had been part of the Polish-Lithiuanian Commonwealth and Second Polish Republic for quite some time, furthermore, the name Brest-Litovsk certainly has gained currency in English). And the edit summary is certainly over the top. Colchicum (talk) 10:00, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, removing clutter from the first sentence of the lead is a good thing. The solution should be similar to used in Istanbul or Kiev.Said this, it is important to know there to put the border. I have returned Brześć Litewski, Brest-on-the-Bug and Brest-Litovsk as they are prominent in history of the city. I have also fixed the link to Names_of_European_cities_in_different_languages:_B. Most of the possible modern names of the city in different languages are already in interwikis, no pressing need to clone the information. All other variations of the name should go either to the body of the article or to the list of alternative names. Alex Bakharev (talk) 13:10, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Double standards, Colchicum? Georgia, Estonia, Lithuania, etc all used to be part of Russia "for quite some time" too, yet I don't see all their city names written in Russian.--Miyokan (talk) 13:42, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh really? See Tartu, Tbilisi etc, even though there is a great difference between being part of the Russian Empire or Soviet Union and being a Russian city. Brest once was a Polish city, Tallinn has never been Russian. But you apparently don't care. Confrontational approach? Nice. It won't get you anywhere. Bye. Colchicum (talk) 15:02, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is a bit surprising that you have engaged in a holy crusade to delete Polish and Lithiuanian names of various cities, while the article Nizhny Novgorod is in a horrible condition. No, I was wrong, it can get you somewhere. This is a dangerous path, remember this and this. Such is life. Colchicum (talk) 15:23, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 26 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kresty Prison, 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.

Thanks Alex. --Gatoclass (talk) 11:07, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

****!

Finally you took the second place in the Board Elections. :( That time, only the winner (that Chinese guy, User:Wing) passes, but you surely deserve it too, so I'm asking — will you try again at some point? — Kalan ? 18:14, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It will depend on who else will run. If I feel that on my own set of criteria I am better than people registered for elections and if I feel I could find sufficient free time to work on the board I will try, otherwise no. Alex Bakharev (talk) 05:03, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Better luck next time.

I voted for you. You seemed like the only person worth voting for, because either I didn't know the other candidates or I knew them and know they are douches.

So, the new board member is the Chinese guy with bad english? It must've been rigged!

I glanced over Ting Chen's responses to various questions and he seems right on some issues, but wrong on others. A short summary of some selected answers to candidate questions (green is good, red is bad):

He doesn't think Wikipedia has any overall problems of bias of any sort.
Problems in Wikipedia are exaggerated by the media
He opposes making Wikipedia a membership organization (this is one of the main reasons I voted for you, because this is an issue for me as well)
He thinks all board activities should be published
He doesn't care about the Foundation's carbon footprint (I thought it was a silly question to ask and it was funny that he did not respond with a politically-correct answer)
The community should decide on advertisements
Wikipedia should be appropriate for children and adult material should be flagged, so that it isn't visible to the general public.
He believes we should focus primarily on online activities rather than offline (likely meaning less financial waste, a server which works, and more than one tech guy)
He defends Jimbo in the face of the various scandals and respects him but not on the level of creepy cult-like fanaticism, as with some users (I'd prefer that he'd acknowledge some of Jimbo's shortcomings, but at least he doesn't worship him)
He supports having every seat elected by the community and their chapters

So, he's a poor candidate but it could be a lot worse.

In any case, better luck next time. You came in second place this time, so you'll likely do well if you run again. ☯ Zenwhat (talk) 19:18, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Wing was in the top three on my own vote card. He did a lot of work for Chinese and German wikipedias and I guess he knows our problems quite well. I wish him luck. Many candidates are quite devoted wikipedians doing a lot of unpaid work. All of them are Wikipedians in good standing. Please confirm to WP:Civil and WP:NPA then discussing them, they deserve it. Anyway, thanks for voting me, I appreciate it Alex Bakharev (talk) 05:11, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure I disagree with Wing on all the red points, you have mentioned:

I do not think that overall English Wikipedia has one systematic bias: there are many warrying groups of all the possible persuasions. Still there are many biased articles and bringing balance requires more efforts than it should.
I agree with Wing that problems of Wikipedia are exagerrated by the hostile media.
I am against making Wikipedia a formal membership organization with annual fees, etc. It would create a bunch of bad ethical and legal issues. I am for the control of the WMF board by the editors though.
I agree with Wing that the community should decide on advertisements. Personally I think that without the steady advertisement revenue we are a colossus on clay feet and we can make ads to be sufficiently unobtrusive (the way Google did it) . Still it is to much a decision to be taken without community approval. Maybe we could live without ads if we could get steady supply of Government moneys or large grants. We do not need that much of money actually.
I have put my opinion on the matter in my answers. Explicit and shocking images should be limited to the cases we really need them (not unlike the Fair Use material). Every Encyclopedia has its share of sexually explicit images - in the articles about anatomy, art, etc. Still there is a line between the eductional materials and pornographic sites. Alex Bakharev (talk) 08:15, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, Alex. I'm sure it's disappointing not to win, but still second is an awesome achievement! Well done. :) Sarah 08:22, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to butt in, but the above comments of Zenwhat on Ting Chen are awful and horrendous personal attacks. I voted the two candidates; one is Alex Bakharev, mainly because of Alex's devotion and thankful bot to Wikipedia and the other is Ting Chen due to his achievement to "Chinese Wikipedia" (you know about RPC's policy on Wiki) and other wikis. The attacks on his English, his ability, characters are very offensive. I'm pretty sure that his nasty comments would disappoint Alex Bakharev much. Anyway, Alex Bakharev, you are proven as a very qualified Wikipedian at the election campaign, so you would get a second chance for the next time. I also always appreciate your hard works and the wonderful bot. Regards--Caspian blue (talk) 04:46, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image deleted despite IfD consensus to keep

The image 'Image:FotD 007x.jpg' was deleted despite a 2:1 consensus to keep. I am looking at a list of Nv8200p (talk · contribs) recent deletions, and he seems a bit too happy with the delete option. Maybe you could step in, reinstate the image and talk to the fellow admin? - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 04:19, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest to file a WP:DRV, I am not sure how I would close the IFD myself. The discussion is not exactly voting and our EDP policies are not negotiable. I do not see obvious violations of the copyright laws and policies but the article could live without the image, so NRCC#8 might be applicable. At any rate the restoring of the image is not something I or anybody could do without the community consensus Alex Bakharev (talk) 05:26, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but in that case, Nv8200p could have chimed in to vote, which would have tied the vote (not sure what happens in case of ties). Voting via deletion seems pretty bad faith, I think. I am hoping he just made a mistake. I will follow up with DRV. Thanks for the wiki-learnin' - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 05:43, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the likelhood that this was just a mistake, I've sent a message to the admin (as per DRV's suggestion) and placed a note at the bottom of the IfD image section. I will wait a day to see what the deleting admin says or does. I'll keep you appraised. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 05:53, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it looks like Nv decided to dismiss the vote and remove the item altogether, as per his reply to me. I guess DRV is the way to go. Frankly I am surprised that such a long-time contributor would unilaterally override a consensus and simply close debate and delete an image. I wonder how many times this sort of thing has happened before. Hmmm...

Signpost updated for June 23 and 26, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 25	23 June 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor
Board elections completed; results forthcoming	WikiWorld: "John Hodgman"
News and notes: Military media mention, milestones	Dispatches: How Wikipedia's 1.0 assessment scale has evolved
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Volume 4, Issue 26	26 June 2008	About the Signpost

Ting Chen wins 2008 Board Election	ArbCom's BLP "special enforcement" remedy proves controversial
Global group discussions in progress	WikiWorld: "Raining animals"
News and notes: Foundation hires, milestones	Dispatches: Reliable sources in content review processes
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:41, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Contributions to history articles, related to Russia

Dear Alex, please avoid contributions or edits related to Russian history. Your vision is neither neutral nor backed with knowledge. Now, you support russophobic sentences and politically biased entries from enemies of Russia (e.g. reviosionists and nationalists from Poland). As a renegade/dissident from Russia, you should have ethical reasons not to interfere with controversial articles dealing with russophobia, and for sure - not to abuse your position at this project. Is that dubious honor of being "Board elected" for russophobic Wikipedia the reward for your dissent? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.69.240.51 (talk) 10:02, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:TROLL Alex Bakharev (talk) 10:51, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You seems to have good English, knowledge and energy. If instead of trolling you would produce reference edits you can be quite useful. If you are interested in fixing anti-Russian bias there are plenty of articles that can be improved. There are also a huge pull of articles related to Russian history and culture that are in sorry shape or not written yet Alex Bakharev (talk) 11:00, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Logged out bot?

I just blocked 165.228.204.166 which I think is your bot. BJ^Talk 03:58, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is him. I would restart it later Alex Bakharev (talk) 04:04, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please take a look

Hello,

On this page, [[29]], one editor is making deletions and undoing changes while seemingly ignoring the discussion on the talk page. Could you please take a look? Thanks, Horlo (talk) 08:22, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree with Irpen's edits the article is reasonably neutral and has no synthesis or OR. What the article is a so pitiful stab is indeed a shame for us all Alex Bakharev (talk) 08:28, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, the issue is with how things are dealt with - rather than discussing, Irpen simply removes tags that I placed. It is a question of procedure, not content. Thanks, Horlo (talk) 08:39, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, It is a question of content. If tags are obviously invalid filibustering is not accepted Alex Bakharev (talk) 08:45, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, the article has no in-line citations, and the references either get the dates wrong (one lists 1931-34, one lists 1931-33) or are an introduction, or are an op-ed piece. No filibustering on my part. Thanks, Horlo (talk) 08:55, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]