User talk:Dimitree

{helpme}

I do ask everyone to help in resolving an 'existential dispute' between me and User:Jasepl: he insists on considering (and putting in each aviation article) Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia in Europe. Me - in Asia, taking into consideration an objective fact - their real geographical position. My opponent is trying to offence me using my country: example [1]. So I do ask all objective people to react. Thank you! --Dimitree 12:49, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

I’m sorry, but from what angle is anything I said or did against any nationality, ethnicity or whatever? I’m afraid these alleged “attacks” are simply a figment of your imagination.

As suggested so many times, you could have bothered to bring up the topic for discussion at the appropriate forum – instead of embarking on a reversion spree (earning yourself a ban in the process), instead of running crying to anyone who would (or wouldn’t be bothered to) listen, and instead of accusing people of “falsification” and Russia-bashing (when no such transgressions ever occurred) – but oh no, why do the logical thing, right?

Oh, and to clarify: my talk page, your talk page, a random moderator’s talk page, a sympathetic moderator’s talk page, another editor’s talk page, even the Aeroflot talk page… these are NOT appropriate places to discuss the matter that so concerns you.

And writing in BIG, BOLD letters across the top of a page doesn’t make you right; it only makes you loud (and more than a little annoying to others).

I’ll explain again, for possibly the 109th time:

Asia: Armenia, Cyprus
Asia and Europe: Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Russia, Turkey
Asia and Africa: Egypt

By the way, you sill see the same exact explanation by looking at any of the sources you cited as the basis of your claim. Wikipedia’s Europe entry being just one example (it was indeed your “source” by the way). Or look at a map: if you’re even remotely aware of what Europe and Asia’s physical boundaries are, then again you will see exactly what is explained above.

What is indisputable is that part of the primary territory of Azerbaijan, Egypt, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Russia and Turkey is physically on two continents. That is an indisputable fact. Unless, of course, you discovered this morning that Kazakhstan up and moved south and Russia moved westwards.

So, keeping that simple, indisputable fact in mind, and also keeping in mind that the majority territory of Russia is in Asia, why should one insist all of Russia is European? Is Novosibirsk in Europe? Really? Do they know? When only a tiny bit of Turkey (Thrace) is on the European continent, yet the country is called European. By that same logic, why shouldn’t Georgia be called European, when a greater proportion of its territory is in Europe?

And no, the English-speaking world is not on some collective mission against Russia and Russian speakers.

If, by your reckoning, being called Asian is offensive, is an attack, is demeaning… Then I’m afraid you’ve got a few billion problems you’re up against. And Azerbaijan’s location is the least of them.

Jasepl (talk) 16:12, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jasepl is correct. You have no reason here at all to see this as an attack. Your conduct in this dispute violates many of the behavioural guidelines in wikipedia. Specifically, WP:AGF, WP:ALLCAPS, WP:CANVAS, among others. You both need to talk about this; but the biggest problem here by far is not the content issue itself, but the way in which User:Dimitree has approached the matter. Calm down. However... Jasepl, as a point of information, both Armenia and Cyprus appear within the Europe entry that you mention. I think there may be problems with some of the changes you have made, and they may need to be reverted. But it's not urgent and it can wait until there is more input on the wikiproject talk page where I have recently raised the question. —Duae Quartunciae (talk · cont) 16:59, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. This has been discussed to death already, but I appreciate your arbitration and have added some discussion points on the project talk page, where those who edit issues affecting the entire project routinely participate, and can weigh in. Jasepl (talk) 17:45, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia were always in Asia. At least, on French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Serbian Wiki Pages. But here, in English Wiki space, they are considered "transcontinental" (along with Cyprus, Kazakhstan, Russian federation and Turkey). But Azerbaijan and Georgia are put in Europe; while Armenia, for example, remains in Asia. It is a tendancy, I think. But we have to be objective. And me, I'm trying. My opponent - no. He is engaged in editor war and starts do things like this [2]. Ok, no problem, pur Russia anywhere you want - it is up to you, but be objective if you can. If not - do not do silly things. It is easy. There is an evident misunderstanding: or we put all these countries in Asia, or we follow a tradition to consider Cyprus and Turkey european countries inspite of the fact they are in Asia. Thanx! --Dimitree 18:47, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Again, please read! Quoted from above:

Asia: Armenia, Cyprus
Asia and Europe: Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Russia, Turkey"

And even though Wikipedia itself is not a valid source tnat can be cited (since anyone can edit ane make stuff up), since you claimed all the other language versions of Wikipedia claim what you claim, then take a look at [the French Wiki's Europe article. See what's listed under "Autres États européens (ou pays dont une partie est sur le continent européen)": Andorre • Arménie • Azerbaïdjan • Biélorussie • Géorgie • Kazakhstan • Monaco • Russie • Saint-Marin • Ukraine • Vatican. The Spanish version says pretty much the same thing. So did you imagine things when you made your claim about "At least, on French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Serbian Wiki Pages" saying what you say?

Aiy! Jasepl (talk) 18:56, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Listen to me, please, and try to hear what I'm saying: the fact these countries are considered "trans" does not mean they are european, because they are phisically in Asia, they are Caucasian countries or Middle East. So, first of all, they are asian countries, not european. That is why I'd like to put them in Asia, not in Europe.
- As for your chef-d'oeuvre [3] - Russia is an asian country - it is up to you. But I consider it as an attack because too much evident are rules of the game you are playing. Thanx!
  - Someone is putting them back in Europe, I agree with dimitree see Western Asia and List of Asian countries and territories.116.71.53.73 (talk) 17:27, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Aeroflot — Russian Airlines terminated destinations

I have nominated Aeroflot — Russian Airlines terminated destinations, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aeroflot — Russian Airlines terminated destinations. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Scapler (talk) 04:02, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

If you would like to comment on the deletion process, you can do so here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aeroflot — Russian Airlines terminated destinations. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 22:51, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 23:26, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Right to nominate

Any editor has the right to nominate an article for deletion. The nomination then goes to a discussion, which you have already participated in, and thank you for doing so. There, consensus must be reached on an article's fate. In other words, it is up to the community at large to decide. I understand you are a newer user and are most likely not aware of things like this, so if you have any questions, feel free to ask! You can read further at Wikipedia:Deletion discussions Cheers! Scapler (talk) 01:21, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Debate is kept open for up to five days. Scapler (talk) 11:32, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I ensure you sir, I am not trying to insult you by nominating this article, it is certainly nothing personal. Scapler (talk) 11:39, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personal Attacks

Please cease your personal attacks against me. Do not accuse me of bias towards Russia, or treat me, my country, and my state as if we are mentally unstable. As for not speaking Russian, I am afraid I have not gotten around to it, between learning English, Spanish, and beginning German, I will admit Russian is not a language I currently study. According to WP:No Personal Attacks "Using someone's affiliations as a means of dismissing or discrediting their views", and according to WP:Civility, "Insults and name-calling", "Belittling contributors because of their language skills or word choice", and "Using derogatory language towards other contributors or, in general, referring to groups such as social classes, nationalities, ethnic groups, religious groups, or others in a derogatory manner" is strictly prohibited. I nominated your article in good faith, I did nothing to you, I suggest you calm down and think before you attack anymore editors. Scapler (talk) 00:13, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer not to share personal information, like my name, online - for security. And my username, Scapler (not Scalper, though others have made the mistake) was really thought up as a random, meaningless name. I just ask you to calm down, no one here is biased against you, and those who vote with ridiculous reasons like "it is boring" will not be counted. Article for Deletion debates are closed by an administrator, who weighs the debate on the merits of the arguments made, not the number of votes. Consensus must be based on something reasonable. Regards, Scapler (talk) 01:12, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The external links are back in the article. Scapler (talk) 20:36, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suspected sock

You have been accused of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Dimitree. Thank you.

As you can see, even if I write anythin twice or thrice - no matter - I use the same name and IP. Pls, be objective. Thanx.

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 03:47, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your message on my talk page

Dimitree, your actions on Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Aeroflot_—_Russian_Airlines_terminated_destinations led me (and others) to suspect that you were using alternate accounts to support your opinions. If I'm wrong, I apologize. I'm not trying to insult you or your contributions. (In fact, I changed my vote to "keep" on that particular page because of your and others' improvements to it.) Your contributions to this encyclopedia are valuable. You're doing good work. But if you are using alternate acccounts, please just be brave, admit it, and move on. Everyone will think better of you and be more likely to support you in the future. Graymornings_(talk) 07:29, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm enough brave to face alone all your attacks, sorry, comments and votes. Just follow them and you will easy understand that I do not use any other accounts. I use the only one - mine. And it is evident: even when I've written "keep" twice and thrice I used my PC, with unique IP and sysadmin can easy check it up. Moreover, the user whom you think am I, Tolip, has written his account is registred in an another country. What esle do you need? I'm the only one here to use my own name - not nick-name! The question is that I'm not so keen in orientating here: signing, asking for help, addressing to administration, complaining of other users. And you? First accused, second apologized? Anyway, it's up to you how to behave. Especially here - in virtual reality. It's your own way - do as you consider best... --Dimitree 20:49, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Welcome

Hello, Dimitree, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} and your question on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the ay, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Sandstein 21:27, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! If I liked this place? Difficult to say... My first step was so hard that I think now: if it worth to be Editor when you are, from the very begining, attacked in such a rigid way by so many users, and no one among them does not do anything to support you... If I want to stay? Definitely, yes! At least, here, on Aeroflot page :))) Regards, --Dimitree 21:38, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi

Privet, Dmitri!

You should not bombard this user with such messages [4]. He probably does not want to reply in Russian because he said he is an Australian. I would also reply using English, simply because I do not have Russian keybord. Pleas feel free asking me if you need anything.Biophys (talk) 19:01, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 19:22, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays Dimitree!

Here are some links you might enjoy: If you are interested in Russian topics, check out the Russia portal. The respective boards there are: Portal:Russia/New article announcements and Portal:Russia/Russia-related Wikipedia notice board. Of course there are also many other portals at Wikipedia or you may just get right into editing.

For Ukraine-related themes, you may want to check out the Ukraine Portal, particularly the Portal:Ukraine/New article announcements and Portal:Ukraine/Ukraine-related Wikipedia notice board. The New article announcements board is probably the most important and the most attended one. Please don't forget to announce there the new articles you create. Adding both boards to your watchlist is probably a good idea.

I hope all your celebrations are good ones and that you enjoy a festive and joyous end to 2008, and kick off 2009 in good spirits and good health. Take care. ChildofMidnight (talk) 00:38, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dimitree, user: Wikipopa seems to be introducing poorly translated articles from Russian wikipedia. Since you are such a collaborative guy, maybe you can help him out. :) Here's a link to his talk page [5]. ChildofMidnight (talk) 00:54, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Happy New Year!

A Happy New Year to you as well! There are no hard feelings, even though we were at each other's throats there for awhile. Congratulations on your article being kept, not enough people agreed with me (and those who did mostly gave inconsiderate or unhelpful votes), so the process worked as it should, and I am happy your article gets to stay on Wikipedia. Cheers! Oh, and though it may be a little late:

		Merry Christmas!
		Have yourself a Merry little Christmas Dimitree! - Scapler (talk) 00:42, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aeroflot destinations

I have reset article to wiki format and standards this is how it should be for current destinations and terminated destinations, do not change it to suit your own prefernces, as it is code share destinations and routings are not to be listed in the article, but I have allowed those to stay out of respect for the effort and time you must have put in doing that, however you should consider removing those, only destinations served by Aeroflot themself are to be listed, and CIS is not a region, its a political grouping, destinations cannot be listed according to such, what next, SAARC, ASEAN, Arab Leage, European Union, NAFTA instead of South Asia, Southwest Asia, Southeast Asia, Europe, North America???.116.71.36.236 (talk) 16:15, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would have to disagree with you, the case is not clear. I nominated Dimitree's article for deletion, but no consensus was reached, so it was decided it would be merged. I think that terminated destinations count as "destinations". Also, if you are going to claim the existence of a "code" and Wikistandards, please cite them, or else you arguments lack weight. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 00:26, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Scapler, my friend, is it you? :))) Thank's a lot :))) --Dimitree 00:49, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome, I hate it when people throw around supposed "format"s and "standards" which they do not provide... Scapler (talk) 01:01, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Dimitree. Scapler is a jerk. What are we talking about? :) ChildofMidnight (talk) 02:42, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aeroflot Destinations II

Hi, Kransky! Don't know if you speak Russian. May I ask you to pay attention to the changes you've done to the Aeroflot destinations article: it contains destinations served by Aeroflot as a flag-carrier of the Russian Federation (not of the USSR), starting from 1992. By that date, Aeroflot already dicontinued its flights to Burma/Rangoon. As well as Gander was used only for a technical stop (refuling, changing crew), not a regular destination. May I ask you to take it into consideration and not to remake it once again. Thank you and good luck! --Dimitree 22:06, 17 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dimitree (talk • contribs)

I do not speak Russian, but it is irrelevant to this issue. The Aeroflot of 1992 is still the same airline of 1982; I cannot see why earlier terminated destinations should not be included. What is the basis of this decision? What consensus has been made? Kransky (talk) 13:13, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An exciting opportunity to get involved!

As a member of the Aviation WikiProject or one of its subprojects, you may be interested in testing your skills in the Aviation Contest! I created this contest, not to pit editor against editor, but to promote article improvement and project participation and camraderie. Hopefully you will agree with its usefulness. Sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here. The first round of the contest may not start until September 1st-unless a large number of editors signup and are ready to compete immediately! Since this contest is just beginning, please give feedback here, or let me know what you think on my talkpage. - Trevor MacInnis ^contribs 00:10, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aeroflot Destinations III

I'm sorry, but I cannot agree. And that is only because the countries in question haven't physically moved from where they are located. That's mot my opinion; it's a geographic fact. • Europe's land "boundaries" are the Ural mountains to the East and the Caucasus mountains to the southwest - that is a long-established fact. Also a fact (taken from Europe for the sake of convenience - also see the big map there):

• Armenia and Cyprus are physiographically entirely in Asia.

However,

• Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Russia and Turkey are transcontinentals countries in Asia and Europe.

Those are all facts, based on their actual physical location - not their political leanings or their group memberships, or emotional ties. A large part of Azerbaijani and Georgian territory is located along or north of the Caucasus mountains.

• So, if you insist on listing Azerbaijan in Asia (since it is transcontinental), then Russia should also be listed as an Asian country. A bigger part if Russia is East of the Urals, right?

• And no, Turkey really shouldn't be listed under Europe; over 97% % of its territory is physically in Asia.

Jasepl (talk) 20:46, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, really. First off, I didn't make that up. I quoted what was on the Europe page. Physiographic and geographic basically mean the same thing. Political means nothing (in this context). Physically/geographically/physiographically/actually/factually Azerbaijan and Georgia are partly in Europe. Armenia is completely in Asia. Simple fact, plain enough to see on the map and on the Europe page that says (quoting) "Armenia is physiographically entirely in Asia." Oh, and you didn't respond to my Russia question. Why don't you call Russia an Asian country? A bigger part of Russia is in Asia, right? Jasepl (talk) 18:22, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 23:55, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

October 2009

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Aeroflot – Russian Airlines destinations. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. Sandstein 06:37, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours to prevent further disruption caused by your engagement in an edit war at Aeroflot – Russian Airlines destinations. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Sandstein 18:00, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See User talk:Sandstein#Dispute with Jasepl. Sandstein 18:01, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In reply to your e-mail, sorry, administrators don't know or care who is "right" and who is "wrong". They just intervene if people disagree about it in a disruptive manner. Please read WP:EW and then WP:DR. These pages contain all the information you need to resolve your problem. Sandstein 21:26, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- I'm not surprised that admins don't know. When a human gets power no matter virtual or real, he forgets immediately notions of *right* and *wrong* and make us follow *rules*...

Whilst I have left the article alone, I still stand by what I have been claiming all along. Dimitree, please refer to the endless input I have given you, to try and explain. The section just above this one is but one example. Thanks. Jasepl (talk) 04:04, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanx for your understanding that Azerbaijan is in Asia. All *trans* countries are only illusions or the game of words. Reality is different.--Dimitree 22:31, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

What is a trans country? Has the Middle East come back into existence on the Aeroflot route list or is it still merged into Asia? :) Why are these people poking the Russian bear? ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:57, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Trans country is a country divided geogrphically between Europe and Asia, I think. It is the case of Russian Federation ))) Middle East still remains on the Aeroflot route list and never has been merged into Asia ))) To poke a bear - fancy --Dimitree 14:35, 3 November 2009 (UTC)allusion, thanx )))

See also: Russian Bear. Good to see you're still around! Take care. ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:20, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanx, ChildofMidnight for Russian Bear ))).

I'm not sure what you are asking me Dimitree. The link you gave me seems to direct me to the bottom of this page. I haven't shared anything with anyone regarding you, and I'm happy to help in any way I can as far as resolving disputes or improving aritcle content goes. I agree that there are many editors biased against Russia, or at least with very different perspectives and understandings of history and events than Russians and Russian editors. Please let me know if there's something I can clarify as I'm not understanding what you think I did. Be well my friend. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:06, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see that a notification was put on Jasepl's talk page by another editor about the Wikialert discussion. Normally those filing noticeboards reports are expected to notify the other editor. Anyway, I hope you get it all sorted out. Try to stay focused on the content and to be as courteous as possible. I don't think anyone is targeting you in any way. We all just fancy ourselves experts and like to have our own way when it comes to article content. You can also try posting the issue to the WP:Content noticeboard and asking for suggestions on how to resolve the dispute or try the wp:3O board, or use the aviation noticeboards as another editor suggested. Try not to get hot. It's bad for your digestion! ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:22, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm talking about this: "and no, the English-speaking world is not on some collective mission against Russia and Russian speakers [6]", posted above by User:Jasepl. May be, in my 30, I do not understand what is polite and what is not?...

The link points to the list of "Southwestern Asia" destinations. I'm still not understanding what the issue is. But maybe he read my talk page? I don't really understand what the concern is I'm sorry. I'm not understanding. ChildofMidnight (talk) 05:56, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As for English-speaking editors biased against Russian-speaking editors: so what can I=we do? We are aliens here, in English Wiki. We can just follow the rules established here and try to defend ourselves when we are attacked. No help from no one. Even Admins are subjective. The example was the article Aeroflot — Russian Airlines destinations nominated for deletion but saved because "no consensus was found". As you perfectly know. Nothing else to add...

Yes, I understand. But as you've noted we all the same and our perspectives and udnerstanding are based on our upbringing and education. If there is specific content that concerns you we can try to work through it step by step. The way geographic destinations are included does not seem a major issue to me, but I certainly understand that it's an interest of yours and you're not happy about the way it's being handled. I'm not sure how I can help except to encourage to to try and stay calm and see if you can work something out with the other editor or get additional input. ChildofMidnight (talk) 05:56, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As for Americans/British. I'm really sorry for their=your vision of the world: no democracy, no dictatorship - every nation merits the authority it has. But we are - people of the Earth - we are all the same: white, black, yellow or red. Different are politicians - white, black, yellow or red. They play their games, frequently abusing and denying our interests. But in my opinion, we have to be much more kind and tolerant towards each other. We must no use our nationalities/countries for provocations (as it has been done here)...

Well put. I'm happy to have you as a friend and to help you in any way I can. Perhaps we can work on other Russian airline articles together? are there other subjects and interests that could provide some editing enjoyment and a break from the frustrations of the dispute? ChildofMidnight (talk) 05:56, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dimitree, I refuse to comment any further on what I consider to be a combination of fabrication and delusion (the bits about the English speaking world being on a collective Russia-bashing campaign and other such fun stuff). However, please remember that embarking on yet another reversion spree without the matter being discussed is NOT the way to go. Just because a discussion topic has started does not give anyone carte blanche; one must wait for the discussion to come to its logical conclusion first. Then, feel free to make whatever changes you wish, in accordance with said conclusion. You were already requested to do that by Duae Quartunciae (“We are trying to find consensus, of course. You do that by talking as we are doing here, and presuming good faith in other people. Be patient.”) right before you choose to ignore that and start your reversions. The last time you did that, you were handed a ban, if you recall. Jasepl (talk) 18:11, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Really?! And you? You were also banned for the same thing - editorial war. There is a standard (template and UN list) where clearly indicated as asian Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia; as european Russian federation. And what have you done and are doing? You have put and are putting them in Europe. And what have I done and am doing? I've tried and I'm trying to put them back. Ok. Here was the Rubicon. But you crossed it. For purpose or not - I do not care - you put Russian Federation in Asia. What for? To make more conflict? Ok. I'm waiting for another stupid decision where to put or how to consider our discutable "trans countries". You are able to do whatever you want unless it hurts others. This is the basical principe of coexistence. Best regards, --Dimitree (talk) 19:19, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was banned? Really? Go check again... the answer is no. I wasn't, because I didn't embark on a reversion spree unlike you did. In fact, if I remember correctly, the admin who blocked you specifically pointed that out. But I see you've embarked on yet another spree... Do you not realise that it's prudent to wait for the conclusion of a discussion first? Jasepl (talk) 19:32, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have conveniently forgotten this. Good job! Jasepl (talk) 19:42, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be so occupied with others. It's better to watch yourself. It looks like a politic of the "Empire of Kindness": interests all over the world, including Moon. Cheer up, Jasepl! ))) --Dimitree (talk) 19:47, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You wanted to reply? I do appreciate a worth of your word: or given, or taken back... May I beg you to let me say the same to you: do you not realise that it's prudent to wait for the conclusion of a discussion first? First you have changed everything, second you tell me "wait untill conclusion". Double standards or personal genius - who knows or time will show... --Dimitree (talk) 19:37, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 12:33, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help

For dispute resolution, please see this and to request resolution, see this. Thank you.--fetch comms 15:23, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

November 2009

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for move-warring at List of Aeroflot destinations despite an earlier warning against editwarring with respect to that article. Please stop. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below. Sandstein 14:28, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Dimitree (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

There is no yet any consensus on changing Aeroflot - Russian airlines destinations in favour of List of Aeroflot destinations. There is an open discussion with no yet established conclusion. I'm sure that all reverts are not allowed untill agreed on. User:Jasepl thinks he is allowed to do anything he wants inspite of the public opinion. Thanx!

Decline reason:

This is a textbook case of J'Accuse syndrome, which means you won't be un... oh, wait.... Declined as moot. -Jeremy ^{(v^_^v Stop... at a WHAMMY!!)} 21:21, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I have fixed your unblock request to make it visible, but you do not seem to realize that "I am right" is not a valid reason for edit warring, even if you are in fact right in the content dispute. Sandstein 17:38, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jasepl is a big bastard

Hi, i wanted to tell you that Jasepl is a very big bastard. (203.76.185.35 (talk) 14:36, 6 November 2009 (UTC))[reply]

You followed his talkpage? ))) I do not care what kind of nature this human is. It is his own life which he makes so difficult. I may jsut be sorry about it... --Dimitree (talk) 14:49, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great News!!!

Unable to resist bacon's temptations, rogue editors have kicked off the Bacon Challenge 2010 before the New Year even starts! This is a fun and collegial event and all are welcome. There are many non-pork articles for editors who enjoy some sizzle, but object to or don't like messing with pig products. This year's event also includes a Bacon WikiCup 2010 for those who may want to keep score and enjoy engaging in friendly competition. Given the critical importance of this subject matter, I know you will want to participate, so remember to sign up today and get started A.S.A.P. ALL ARE WELCOME!!! The more the merrier. ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:10, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have you heard anything about Auktyon? ChildofMidnight (talk) 02:25, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I've heard: it's a Russian well-known musical rock-group. I'm not so fond of it, but if you need any help, I'm at your disposal. --Dimitree (talk) 22:02, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Aeroflot Destinations (again)

Please familiarise yourself with editing guidelines, both those of Wikipedia, and those of the aviation project:

All additions of new routes MUST include a valid source
Personal blogs are NOT valid sources

Thanks, Jasepl (talk) 20:14, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Repeat

Repeat above comment: Please familiarise yourself with editing guidelines before making additional edits. As already explained, additions without sources (where required) will be removed. Thanks, Jasepl (talk) 05:21, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Repeat (again)

Repeat above comment: Please familiarise yourself with editing guidelines before making additional edits. As already explained, additions without sources (where required) will be removed. "And SU Planning Department told me" is NOT a valid source from any angle. Thanks, Jasepl (talk) 20:58, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Untill when u indicate me a VALID source for any other similar date/flight/aircompany, I will do the same - kindly correct your unreasonnable reverts. Thank you. --Dimitree (talk) 21:04, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've protected the page. Figure it out, and then let me know. Resume that edit war and you'll both be blocked. Guettarda (talk) 05:31, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Editing Guidelines

It is obvious you are not familiar with editing guidelines that have been laid down for Wikipedia as a whole, and those for the Aviation project. Your recent edits - including the one to Portela Airport is evidence of that fact. Additions to articles MUST meet some basic criteria for inclusion. Again, please familiarise yourself with the Aviation Project's editing guidelines at WP:Airlines and WP:Airports - those will help. Also, a general rule:

All additions of flights/destinations must be supported with a valid source
- Your addition to the Aeroflot destinations page includes no valid source
Ensure that you leave an edit summary where required
Also ensure that your additions follow established convention and formatting
- eg: [begins 21 June] and NOT [starts 21 June] as you wrote in the Lisbon Airport article cited above
Edits to the English language Wikipedia must be in the English language

Jasepl (talk) 07:38, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Begins and not starts? Really? Would u explain me the difference, please? Thanx. --Dimitree (talk) 22:03, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, here is a standard Wikipedia template that also explains the requirement to include sources (with the appropriate links that you need to familiarise yourself with):

Your recent edit appears to have added incorrect information and has been reverted or removed. All information in this encyclopedia must be verifiable in a reliable, published source. If you believe the information that you added was correct, please cite the references or sources or before making the changes, discuss them on the article's talk page. Please use the sandbox for any tests that you wish to make. Do take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you.

Jasepl (talk) 07:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As I've said above: untill when u indicate me a VALID source for any other similar date/flight/aircompany, I will do the same - kindly correct your unreasonnable reverts. Thank you. --Dimitree (talk) 21:04, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Additional Warning

Do not add anymore unreferenced entries into articles again, period. Wikipedia's basic requirements are very simple: if you cannot provide a reliable and valid source for reference (per Wikipedia:Reliable sources); or that your input is not verifiable (per Wikipedia:Verifiability), they will be reverted, no matter how right or wrong you are. Also, Wikipedia is NOT a crystal ball either, per WP:NOTCRYSTAL. Familiarise yourself with these, and with the Project guidelines as already provided to you at least a dozen times. Other than that, have fun editing. Jasepl (talk) 17:16, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Untill when u indicate me a VALID source for any other similar date/flight/aircompany, I will do the same - kindly correct your unreasonnable reverts. Thank you. --Dimitree (talk) 22:01, 7 February 2010 (UTC)--Dimitree (talk) 21:04, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good Lord you're tedious!

Aeroflot do not codeshare with those airlines. Only the reverse is true, as is evident from the very same link (ie: Iran Air codeshare with Aeroflot). If you bothered to familarise yourself with the WP:Aviation guidelines, instead of screaming Comrade this and Kondoleeza that, you would know that there is a difference between the two. And you would know what is listed and what isn't.

Aeroflot DO? May be, Aeroflot DOES is a bit better, Ph.D. Jasepl? Let's respect English grammar, at least, if not each other. Anyway, Aeroflot has code-share agreements with all airlines that you have deleted without any VALID source. Just takes some troubles to have a look at Aeroflot web-site to which I provided the link. --Dimitree (talk) 21:46, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And I demand nothing; Wikipedia does. If you bothered to familarise yourself with Wikipedia's basic editing guidelines (such as WP:Reliable sources, WP:Verifiability and WP:NOTCRYSTAL to name but a few), instead of screaming Comrade this and Kondoleeza that, you would know that too.

And what? Which of my editions contradicts above mentionned rules? WHICH? No one! All dates and flights are available in GDS Timetable. It is YOUR problem that you have no access to it and YOU can not verify it. By the way, who are you? Who gave you the right to teach others? Are you Wikipedia itself that demands? Just familarize yourself with yourself. --Dimitree (talk) 21:46, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All this has been explained to you dozens of times. But oh no, you'd rather scream Comrade this and Kondoleeza that. Not to forget how the entire English-speaking world is on some collective Russia-bashing mission and how you're being singled out for targeting. It's not true, so get over it.

Explain yourself what to do, Mr. Teacher. No one asked you explain anything. When asked - welcome, when not - fuck off. --Dimitree (talk) 21:46, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lastly, and pay attention, because this is important: If a reliable and valid source for reference is not provided - in accordance with the three tenets cited above - edits will be reverted, no matter how right or wrong you may be. Or how wrong or right your secret Aeroflot Planning Department source may be. Compris? Jasepl (talk) 04:28, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can say whatever you want: Planning Department, Departmenning Plan - it's up to you. The truth remains the same: I have reliable and valid sources (GDS Timetable or even, as it was with THAI Airways, official web-site), you have no. That is why you revert everything that YOU (and no one else!!!) can not confirm. You are the only one here to impose constantly others YOUR INCORRECT point of view:

First it was a wise dispute over Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan.

Second - GDS Timetable (or even aircompany web-site) is not VALID source.

Third - Aeroflot cod-share flights (indicated on its web-site), still is NOT VALID for you.

Fourth? What could be fourth? Ah! English grammar! There is a NEW Jasepl rule that says: forever and ever, the verb must always disagree with its subject: single subject = plural verb, plural subject = single verb [Jasepl]. The same for: to begin and to start - there is a yawning semantic chasm between these two verbs, and you must always keep it in mind [Jasepl].

Resuming: until you violate the rules but demand others to follow them, I'll be always close to you in order to correct, to support and to find consensus. Best regards, --Dimitree (talk) 21:46, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note you both need to have a read of WP:CIVIL and also a reminder Dimitree that we have no need of bad language. You really need to discuss this on the related article talk page Talk:Aeroflot destinations, Thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 20:19, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Noticed, thanx. I'm sure that I'm right: I do not violate Wiki rules, I always provide links (always deleted by Jasepl - here is just one example [7]), I never dispute over things I don't know. This something Jasepl constantly VIOLATES rules, constantly REVERTS without any VALID sources (his favourite phraseology) and constantly IMPOSES others his "uniqe" opinion. There was already a global discussion over his vision of contemporary geography [8] and he was defeated. BUT! Just few weeks later, this Jasepl launched a new editorial war [9], [10], [11], [12]...

Frankly speaking, I do not care about what you are doing here, in English Wiki, how you are doing here, what double/triple/quadruple standards you use - it's your false and virtual world. I just care about myself, my principles: when someone like this Jasepl starts TEDIOUSLY explaining me that white is black and black is white - I will kindly explain him (using my bad and sharp tongue) that he is DEEPLY mistaken. That's all. Just business and nothing personal. Regards, --Dimitree (talk) 22:41, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dimitree, the main tenant of WP:V is that information must be verifiable - Truth is not the ultimate criterion for inclusion - verifiability is. If something is not published, WP cannot include it. Tell the Aeroflot planning department that you can only post what is made available to the public in printed official and/or reliable sources. WhisperToMe (talk) 10:29, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I agree with all that you said above. No problem. The problem is the approach that this Jasepl has to all the rest: reverts without discussion on the appropriate page or simply deletes (official sources: web-sites, bulletines or GDS Timetable data) sayinп that someone "does not grasp with something". That is the problem. --Dimitree (talk) 20:35, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Dimitree. About the Aeroflot codeshare carriers, since i do not have any knowledge of which airline are codeshares with Aeroflot but the main thing is to check their website. If Aeroflot's or the codeshare carrier's website list it as a codeshare then it is a codeshare. If it is not listed as a codeshare, then it's not. However, I would advise you, Jasepl, and all Wikipedia editors to continue to discuss this matter on the airline's talk page rather than not to get blocked for edit warring. I would tagged this article as "References Needed or Citation Needed". Regards. Snoozlepet (talk) 23:21, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. The problem is already resolved - have a look at Aeroflot page. Sure that all these air companies are code-share partners of Aeroflot because they are indicated as those on Aeroflot's web-site and Aeroflot's on-line timetable to which I provided the link THRICE but this tedious and stubborn Jasepl just deleted it. --Dimitree (talk) 23:57, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Austrian Airlines Group destinations

Hello, Dimitree. You have new messages at Talk:Austrian Airlines Group destinations.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

kedadial 18:16, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

March 2010

When you add entries to airlort/airline articles, as you did to TAP destinations and Domodedovo Airport, please ensure that you make the corresponding entries in other articles as well. For example, after adding DME as a CX destination, please go ahead and make the appropriate addition to the HKG and Cathay destinations article. This will ensure completeness and enable the loop to be closed. Thanks, Jasepl (talk) 03:25, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Thank you. --Dimitree (talk) 22:31, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Dimitree. You have new messages at Jetstreamer's talk page.
Message added Jetstreamer (talk) 23:12, 25 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia RU Policies

Hi, I am a university student helping my professor with his research on different conflict of interest policies in different Wikipedia languages. I was wondering if you, or someone you know, would be able to share with us the conflict of interest policies on Russian Wikipedia. (I know very basic Russian language.) Let me know if you have any questions. You can respond on my talk page. Thanks so much! Snapesofwrath (talk) 06:22, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

October 2017

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Aeroflot, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Jetstreamer ^Talk 01:20, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Dimitree. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Soviet aviation task force

You have been requested to join the Soviet aviation task force to create and improve articles related to Soviet aviation.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 19:13, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]