User talk:Ioannes Pragensis/Archive 1

welcome Pavel Vozenilek 02:30, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All Czech municipalities

Do you thinks this series of lists is really needed? The same information is completely covered by categories (well, it will be when after all the article will be created). Pavel Vozenilek 02:30, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, let's discuss the topic after you create and properly categorize the 5000 missing articles :-) Then we can perhaps delete the lists. Greetings! --Ioannes Pragensis 11:41, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be interested to help me in covering all the Czech villages? I once decided to systematically create basic skeleton for every town and village. My progress so far (very, very, very slow) is on User:Pavel Vozenilek/Locations. Pavel Vozenilek 02:34, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pavel, and thank you for the welcome.

I think that the lists - even full of red links - are good:

It can help us to set the proper names in advance. For example if there is a village Xyz, one can doubt whether it should be "Xyz" or "Xyz (Pardubice District)" or "Xyz (Czech Republic)" or 10 other possibilities. Here we have the hint in the list. I'm currently working on disambiguations etc.
Once the information is in Wikipedia, it can be found there. So if you search for "Sádek", the list tells you that there are two villages of the name in the Czech Rep. - even if there is still no article for them. In many cases this is enough to know, or the further search can be more specific at least.

Regarding your invitation, I appreciate your work very much, but still think that creating thousands of short stubs for the villages is a work for a robot. It would give more sense to mass-produce the stubs based on lists from Czech Statistical Office.

Greetings, Honza --Ioannes Pragensis 11:33, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

... work for a robot - yes, I do feel so. The problem, for example, is with disambiguations - they are far, far from trivial. Short names, especially, require a lot of work. Another non-trivial thing is to find valid website for a willage. Another question would be overall look - small US towns and villages were generated by a robot and they look accordingly and most of them stays in generated form (even large towns with over ten thousands of people).

The website is normally listed in http://mesta.obce.cz/vyhledat.asp?zuj={the ZUJ code of the town}, e.g. http://mesta.obce.cz/vyhledat.asp?zuj=541303, together with a lot of other information - it can be done by a clever robot. And yes, you must go after the robot and look after it. --Ioannes Pragensis 08:59, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The information here is often incompletel. I start from http://www.gov.cz/, check whether the website had changed or new was created, try to find English version and, if exists, portal for a town.

The naming convention I systematically use is "XYZ" or "XYZ (ABC District)". Since I has created hundreths such articles it is semi-standard now.

Yes I agree. I already try to keep your convention. --Ioannes Pragensis 08:59, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the list may give overview of quality for each article. What I create is stub with name, region, # of inhabitants, location map, link to municipal website and 2 categories. If I find them I add interwikis. All names have redirect for version without diacritics. If the name appears several times (checked by detailed atlas) a disambig is created (with name "XYZ"). These stubs currently constitute majority of articles. Several articles (I would say few dozens or less) are very, very good and more-less finished. Quit a few articles are horrible looking sub-stubs added by anonymous users as one-shots.

The list may provide assesment of quality for each article (an icon or stars) together with version for which the assesment was made. If this catches on people may feel more encouraged to create high quality texts and possibly other Wikis may establish something similar and coordinate the structure. Pavel Vozenilek 23:02, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK it is possible - you can add it if you wish: no star for a stub, two stars for a standard article, three stars for a perfect article, a question-mark for a sub-stub. Perhaps it will work as you wish, or at least it will not confound the users :-) Only keep a standard style in the whole list, please, in order to enable easy programming tricks with the list. Greetings --Ioannes Pragensis 08:59, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It would be needed to form a group of interested people (at least two) and record the discussion to keep track and have an argument against crapflooders. These people would identify the quality articles, check whether the are complete and with sources and if, then a box could be put to upper right corner saying "This article has endorsed quality version here".

Would you be willing to work on this? It is more less mundane and thankless bureaucracy and dealing with all kind of people. It may not be satisfying for one who wants just to write text. Pavel Vozenilek 16:01, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pavel, in this moment I cannot imagine what it means for me and what you expect from me. But we can at least give it a try. You are much more experienced in the field, so start please the work and I will try to follow you :-) Honza --Ioannes Pragensis 20:56, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ludmila Javorová

Hi, thanks for your message. I can only say that your additions are not in accordance with Wikipedia polices about verifiability and neutral point of view. I'm sure you sincerly believe that Ludmila Javorová was ordained, but that's not the point. I think that you may be confusing truth with neutrality and verifiability. Let's take for example the case of Michael Jackson, who was accused of molesting children, or Lindy Chamberlain, who was accused of murdering her daughter. If you say (about one of them), this person was innocent, and another person says, this person was guilty one statement is true, but both statements are POVs, and therefore cannot go on Wikipedia. There is no proof that she was ordained, so no matter how true you may think it is, no matter how few people doubt it in your country and elsewhere, it is a violation of two Wikipedia policies to state as a fact that she was. If the Czech Wiki is breaking policy, that's too bad. I don't speak Czech, so I can't correct it; but it's no reason for us to do so here. Also, things like "without claiming her sacerdotal rights" are POV. First of all, it implies that she has sacerdotal rights. Now if she wasn't ordained, she certainly doesn't have sacerdotal rights. Also, if he ordination was invalid, (i.e. if it didn't take, if the bishop said the words, but nothing "happened" when he said them) then she doesn't have sacerdotal rights. And if the ordination was illicit, she presumably doesn't have sacerdotal rights.

Anyway, I'm going to move our two messages to the talk page of the article, as I feel they're more relevant there. So, if you want to make a comment, please make it there. Thanks. AnnH ♫ 11:30, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikics template

Hi Honza! I've just created a new template to indicate English Wikipedia user who also contribute to the Czech Wikipedia.

Template:User wikics

Feel free to add it to your userboxes if you like it (and if you actually contribute to cs wiki). Happy Easter. Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 22:54, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Daniel! I do not contribute to cs wiki, so it's not a box for me, but nevertheless thank you. Have nice Easter! --Ioannes Pragensis 08:04, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Abdel Khalik

Thank you very much for telling me how to use the categories. I've tried correcting my articles. If i've missed some articles, please let me know. Concerning Abdel Ghani el-Gammasy, I've no idea when he was born, and I haven't been able to find out when he was born.

František Kmoch

Thanks for adding the links and improving the orthography! Chonak 15:08, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

:-) Thank YOU for improving the whole article --Ioannes Pragensis 16:21, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question

hi there,

While adding content to topic Mathura, I referred to a small village in the vicinity of Mathura town, called as Nandgaon (literally means, the village of Nanga). Now there is a topic by this name already in wikipedia. The page refers to some other Nandgaon somewhere else.

The question is how do I create another topic/link for my reference to nandagaon...

regards raghav..

WP:PROD

Johannes, could you be a little more careful in the future with your PROD nominations? I removed the PROD notice from Backwater training centre, since it is rather notable (but we already have an article on them, at Blackwater USA). Had you Googled or searched Wikipeda for Blackwater, you would've seen it needed merging, not PRODing. --maru (talk) contribs 06:27, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maru, as you probably noticed, the article was during the time changed into redirect and not merged... There was probably nothing new to merge. - My reasoning in similar cases is this: If there is a new short stub about an US company, you can almost surely mark it as PROD, because there are only two possibilities: either the company is unimportant or there is already a fairly good article about it. :-) --Ioannes Pragensis 15:04, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

world chess championchip

sorry 'bout my edit, thought I had spotted a grammar error, guess i was wrong ;-) thanks for the revert...

Sirana 18:16, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It happens, sorry for my warning, I thought that you are just playing with the text. Have a nice day. --Ioannes Pragensis 18:17, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CORP

Hi, This is not a valid rationale for CSD. The CSD are specific and narrow, and do not include notability standards (expect with respect to the limited exception for people in A7). Please PROD or AfD articles you feel fail WP:CORP, but do not mark them as speedy unless they fall under a WP:CSD. Best wishes, Xoloz 19:16, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake, I probably wished to PROD it. Greetings, --Ioannes Pragensis 19:28, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Advocates of Peter

Do you have a source to assume they are out of business, or is that just a wild guess? Many Catholic things are out of the spotlight, but most persist in some form Fastifex 13:56, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I googled them and found no single sign of their existence after about 1900. They must be non-existent or at least very obscure today. --Ioannes Pragensis 20:21, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gibraltar Tercentenery

I agree with you that it was not a quality article, someone entered it into the main article about Gibraltar, I sidelined it with a view to doing it properly.

However as the event was very visual it needs photographs and currently mine are not available for commercial reasons.

However, I can state is was a wonderful experience to be there that day. Birthdays are good, and that was a 300 year one. --Gibnews

OK, then start the article again after you get the photos. I am not against it, but the article was ugly (and its name was ugly as well). Greetings --Ioannes Pragensis 07:20, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Beer

Hi 3210 - as you see, I am trying to explain them that your article is legitimate but I do not much believe in success. I write this only to tell you: keep up a good work, and do not worry - most of the opponents do not understand the reality in this part of world. If you will be by chance in Prague, I will pay you a beer :-) --Ioannes Pragensis 18:47, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry to be late replay.I will be Prague thanks.Your effors are good fight.

From my personel point of view Afd doesn't metter for Eyüp Sabri Kartal article. But In my opinion every managers bios should be in WP.Also Kaymakams defenetly shold be in WP for local historian sake.How local historians get informations abaout their governors? Thank you for your strong support and efforts for Eyüp Sabri Kartal's article.Thanks.

Thank you

For your very generous copyediting of the Fort Bend page. If ever you come to Houston, I will buy you a beer. Yours, a Czech Moravian American, proud of his heritage.

Event Management in Pakistan

Thank you for your notification regarding the AfD for Event Management in Pakistan. I've only added a cleanup tag to the article, but I might join in the discussion later. Cheers, Tangot a ngo 10:53, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fortified

Quick note: it pays to check the article's history. It had a fine redirect prior to being advertising spam. You could've reverted it instead of tagging it. Don't forget to check next time. :) _ Mgm|^(talk) 11:40, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FOLIOfn

Hello, you recently placed a prod on FOLIOfn and it was deleted... and then undeleted. Please review WP:CORP and its first criterion. Perhaps make an attempt to search for the first criterion before you assume that it does not exist? Many examples were easy to find. Uris 14:07, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion log shows that it was not deleted. And the Google hits I saw looked like advertising or PR articles, that is not independent on the company itself. But let it be, I'll definitely not AfD this article. Greetings --Ioannes Pragensis 15:18, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion logs seem to revert back to blank when the article is brought back from the dead. It was deleted, and many of the top Google hits are full articles from Forbes, The New York Times, etc., hardly PR or advertising pieces. Not a huge problem, just something to look out for going forward. Uris 17:18, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I accept it. My judgement was probably too speedy this time. - Please add the "proofs of notability" there and watch the article in order to keep away spammers and deletion tags, if possible :-) Greetings --Ioannes Pragensis 18:58, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Roger that, will do! Have a good day. Uris 02:35, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded picture, unsure of copyright

Hi Ioannes Pragensis! I don't know if this is a totally technical oriented question, but I will give it a try. To the Forex Teacher article I uploaded a picture to Wikipedia which could be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Jamesdicks1.jpg

And the original URL where I found it was: http://www.universaltalknetwork.com/programs.htm

(And under the topic: buy, sell, Hold)

How do I know which copyright adheres to a picture, and in this case, since it is used on another website not directly affiliated with James Dicks, could I assume that it is fair use of the picture that applies?

Thank you once again for your help, Pete8 16:24, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pete8! As far as I know, the owner of the copyright for photos is normally the photographer, or the company for which he/she works. It is usually a big problem to find a copyrigh owner for such photos, and if found, to obtain a "free" license for the photo. I would try first the website owners (info@universaltalknetwork.com) - they will pehaps know who owns the copyright. Good luck! - For more info about the Wikipedia copyright policy, read WP:COPY. --Ioannes Pragensis 16:58, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again!

Thanks once again for your help. I will contact universaltalknetwork.com about it, thanks for the advice, Pete8 17:26, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mahabharata glossary

Hi Bhadani, please consider to add links in Mahabharata glossary only where they really lead to the desired article; e.g. Arani leads to a Brasilian city, Astra leads to a disambig page etc. Happy editing! --Ioannes Pragensis 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. I will be careful, and remove the links leading to "wrong destinations." --Bhadani 10:47, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since done. --Bhadani 13:38, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Googlefansite

Hey, I didn't make the Googlefansite page - if anything, I nomimated it for deletion using Vandalproof in the past few days as it absolutely should be deleted. I'm sure your notice on my talk page was just an honest mistake, and I'll be removing it as I like to keep my talkpage for current items only. Fabricationary 23:02, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fabricationary, I've sent it to you just because you were in the editing history of the article. Happy editing. --Ioannes Pragensis 05:23, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Invitiaion

Thank you for your invitation, I've got an account here, but forgot my pass... Good to know that somebody checks my edits — how do you see my activity (list of articles I've modified? special page with guest editors somewhere?)

Greets to Czech bro'!

83.24.216.67 17:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC) Konradek[reply]

Sure!

Of course! Thanks for your assist!

Bye!

83.24.216.67 18:45, 29 June 2006 (UTC) Konradek[reply]