User talk:Irpen/archived closed issues 03

afd closure

There is no such rule. It is a recommended practice in controversial cases, but this one is plain and simple. And I will continue closing in such cases. You may request updating the policy to unconditionally forbid closing, but until there is a slack, back off. I am entitled to my opinion, and you have no right to revert me, respect or not. `'mikka 18:05, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

No, Mikka. I have a right to revert you when I think your edits are incorrect. Please calm down. --Irpen 18:06, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Nope. It was not edit. It was admin's actions. If admins start reverting each other without asking first, we are in big trouble. Ever heard about wikipedia:wheel war? You "think", but I have a thinkig pot myself. `'mikka 02:19, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Mikka, please cool off. I saw your action as requiring a reversal. There is nothing to it, really. --Irpen 03:27, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

MY edit was not trolling

Hi, please do not revert talk by users whom you may happen to dislike. Perhaps you didn't like my odd sense of humour, but still... to call it trolling? Constanz - Talk 19:07, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I saw it trolling and I reverted it per message on top of my talk. This message, however, will stay, since I find it acceptable. --Irpen 19:10, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I'm not sure but I think someone wrote in Wikipedia, that removing other people's messages IS vandalism. So, I've kept things on my talk that I do not 'find acceptable', perhaps I may suggest you accept more tolerant policies as well. Constanz 19:29, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

You are mistaken. Vandalism is to remove administrative warnings but not trollish messages as well as PA's and other inappropriate stuff. I have a message on the top of my talk page where my handling of my talk page is explained in detail. --Irpen 19:32, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

So that every user defines himself/herself, how to handle his/her talk page? Thank you very much, now that I now, I'll start handling my own talk as well.Constanz - Talk 19:41, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Arbitration regarding Occupation of Latvia 1940-1945

I hereby notify you, that I started the arbitration case: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Occupation_of_Latvia_1940-1945. Constanz - Talk 10:36, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

FSU Metro Project

Help us here to start it off...--Kuban Cossack 14:32, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

MThis user is a participant in the Soviet Metro wikiproject.

It's ready...please join! --Kuban Cossack 14:26, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Tony Sidaway

Hi Irpen. I have had problems with him as well. I opine that he should have his administrator status revoked. I have seen him bully too many users.--Fahrenheit451 01:03, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Tony is not an administrator anymore. Pity that he continues to be disinterested in content creation but rather keeps teaching others what to do. --Irpen 01:07, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Yep, I just found this [1].--Fahrenheit451 01:18, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Ukrainian language partial rewrite

Do you think this [2] is more npov, than the previous one? --Riurik ^(discuss) 09:57, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I think the sections suffers from being very much unreferenced to begin with. I marked some requests for citations. --Irpen 18:49, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

You could consult with the section on languages in Lithuanian Metrica and the sections on names and on 17th cent. history in Belarusian language, too. There's some info touching the Ukrainian language emergence there. Yury Tarasievich 19:58, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, good to know about the article. Very useful! --Irpen 20:03, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Naming issues

Please take a look at conversation I have started. May be we can do something about this in a good faith. If you feel like transfering the topic somewhere - please do so. Otherwise continue on my talk page.--Bryndza 14:23, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for references

Thank you the for references, I will read them and make up my mind.--Lokyz 20:42, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations

Execellent job in removing the recent playpen of absurdity. Execellent arguments from you. I guess it ended favorably for you after all. Dr. Dan 00:50, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

А теперь у Крысы кукла

Its all here care to comment.--Kuban Cossack 17:01, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Jogaila time again

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Jogaila, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.
Perhaps this will be enough to get Ghirla editing again! Angus McLellan (Talk) 01:12, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Enjoy

I may not agree with you, but perhaps having 3 (or more) pages like this was contributing to none of them being very effective. Yes, three - look what I just found: Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts. Sigh.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  02:48, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Occupation of Latvia

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Occupation of Latvia. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Occupation of Latvia/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Occupation of Latvia/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Thatcher131 01:23, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Beregynia

Hi,

I asked a question at Talk:Beregynia.

It would be nice if you could answer. Заранее благодарю. --Amir E. Aharoni 11:33, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Fame and fortune

Or something like it, maybe [3]. -- TheQuandry 15:02, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Request

Hey Irpen, I noticed that this newly-added material at Nogai language is in Russian. Would you be able to translate it to English? Thanks, Khoikhoi 02:58, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again. Khoikhoi 03:28, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Irpen 01:47, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Supporting Soviet vision of history

Irpen, since you reprimanded me in Talk:Ponary massacre with the words:

On a side note, Lysy's remark about his being "surprised and saddened to see a Lithuanian supporting the Soviet ways to rewrite the history of Lithuania" is worth of a strong reprimand. While this is not the worse example of ethnic talk I've seen from this editor, I hope he will desist from any of that from now on.

can I ask you to explain why do you find my words condemnable ? I would be equally surprised if a Ukrainian or Russian or any other editor from any of the countries that actually experienced the Communist oppression supported the Soviet vision of history, particularly now, when the Soviet Union is long gone. (BTW: if you have problems with myself, rather than the article's contents may I suggest that you address them in my talk page in the future.) --Lysy^talk 20:36, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Lysy, I consider this type of ethnic talk offensive and most people also do. "How, can you, a Lithuanian, accept the Soviet ways" may imply a number of things and none of those are good. For instance, whose of non-Lithuanians acceptance "of Soviet ways" would not have saddened you? Why would someone's acceptance of anything be connected with this person's being Lithuanian? Is there anything that you accept (or do not accept) as a Pole. For instance, I recently removed a whole bunch of antisemitic rants from the History of Jews in Poland article like the unspeakable nonsense about "Jewish complicity (!) in crimes against Poles (!!!) during the WW2" [4] or Zydokomuna conspiracy theories presented passingly as not even needing a reference[5]. Judging from your past edits, the article was at your watchlist. Should I have asked how could possibly you, a Pole, tolerate this crap in Polish articles? Or should I have thought that you accepted that nonsense because of the "Polish antisemitism" being essential part of any Poles' worldview? (Just in case, and for the record I do not think the latter.) I merely removed that stuff, kept my thoughts to myself and moved on. I suggest that you also do not pepper talk pages with the ethnic talk. --Irpen 07:22, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

All right, we obviously do not understand each other on such topics. Thanks for responding, anyway. I would only like to explain that I have about 4 thousand articles on my watchlist and more on my sockpuppet's watchlist, and very many of these need a massive rewrite or other corrections. I'm also supposed to be on a wikibreak (obviously not being successful at that) and even if I were not, I could not afford to work on every article watched. This is to explain why I have not repaired the History of Jews in Poland to the extend that you'd expect me to. --Lysy^talk 12:39, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Per our 'genetlman's agreement'

I ask you to revert yourself: [6], [7], [8], and that's a fourth. I can agree to a compromise with leaving both your 'respected' (please, no weaselish 'highly') and mine referenced 'nationalist, Russian/Soviet' part, but one way or another, please restore the content you rm during your 4th revert. And your removal of my reference is really not constructive.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  04:48, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

This was not a revert but an edit. If you want to edit over it, do so and stop wikilawyering. I will then see whether your edit is acceptable to me. You know full-well that I am not edit warring but developing the article and there is no way to present my edits there as an edit war. --Irpen 04:51, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

More to it. My edit was not a revert but a replacement of the irrelevant citation (about his politicla stance) by a relevant one (assessment of his scholarly work). That Wagner is often viewed a nationalist does change that he was one of the greatest composers. --Irpen 04:56, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry Irpen. Even if you'd not report me, there are users who would (as you should be well aware of). Either removing your edit (which I don't think your quote supports) or readding mine would technically be a revert and thus make me a 3RR violator myself (I recently reread the relevant polices as there are some who indeed try to win disputes by blocking). So I ask you again: please revert yourself - otherwise as I cannot the article I will have no choice left.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  04:59, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Piotrus, I repeat that my first so-called "revert" is an edit. It replaces an irrelevant citation by a relevant one. I do not see how the cherry-picked statement that calls him a nationalist and "acomodating" is more relevant than the direct praise of his work. Again, this was not a revert but an edit of the article. I indeed removed the "unreliable" tag three times, this qualifies for three reverts, but not for the four reverts. If you insist, I can restore the "tag" as a personal favor. I thought my reasons of removal were convincing but should you disagree but can't restore it, I will do it for you. Nothing will happen with the article if it rests for 24 hours in the form unfavorable to either of us. Yuri will be back in the morning CET and will take a look at what we came up with anyway.

So, I can restore a tag if you want, but I don't agree with the misleading quote that calls him a nationalist. His high regards is confirmed by both the quote I added AND the number of citations his works receive even in the modern scholarship. --Irpen 05:07, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

The tag is not the most crucial point. It's the removal of a reliable (Oxford-published) reference that he is nationalist, and your denial that he was a Russian/Soviet citizen, that are problematic.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  05:15, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Let's continue this at the article's talk. It is difficult to switch back and forth. --Irpen 05:18, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

For the "Record"

Please replace the information that you removed from the talk page of the Ponary massacre, under the The Scope of this Article. I strongly disagree in principal with the removal of other peoples comments (one shouldn't even remove their own (unless there is an apology), that's "history"). Let everyone's statements speak for themselves. My comments were used against me, as the basis to to complain at the talk page of an Administrator, in yet another attempt to censor me. Please let the remarks remain in place, "For the Record". Dr. Dan 03:06, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

As I wrote in the edit summary, feel free to replace them back. I saw them unnecessary and bringing nothing to the discussion. If anyone disagrees, anyone can revert me. I will not remove them again if anyone at all insists them in being there and I mentioned that in my edit summary as well. If you ever need the record of them being there, you can always point the diff in the history. I can of course return them myself if you insist but nothing prevents you from doing just that. It's no big deal IMO either way but without comments so totally unrelated to the discussion the page seems to me a little nicer. I merely removed all sides' "warning" each other and commenting on each other's warning. --Irpen 03:08, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Rebel of Tushino

Dear Irpen! I must repeat: the Russian word "вор" in XVII century ment not "thief" but "rebel", so, please, do not restore the nonsense "thief of Tushino" because that vor did not steal anything but he did revolt. OK? Thank you! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zabaznov (talk • contribs) 06:44, 23 February 2007 (UTC).

Fine if you are so sure. Sorry for my mistake. --Irpen 06:46, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm not well versed in the contemp. Russian, but it could possibly also mean "bandit" or "outlaw" (not "thief", though). Yury Tarasievich 10:05, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Questions on Petliura

Hello, Irpen. Would you mind coming over here and weighing in on the discussion? Basically, we're trying to figure out how Petliura's transition between Hetman on the UPR and exile leader worked. In the template, we state that the government in exile lasted from 1920 to 1992, but its first president, Livytskyi, took office in 1926...what was Petliura's role in 1920-26? Should he too be listed on that line in the template? Thanks for any help you can offer. Biruitorul 03:51, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Mitrofan Dovnar-Zapol'skiy

Hi Irpen,

It's me again.

You posted the article about Mitrofan Dovnar-Zapol'skiy at some new article announcement page, so I suggested an entry from it to be featured at WP:DYK. It did, however, need quite a bit of copyediting, so it can be included there. I think I've copyedited most of the article, but could there was one sentence I just didn't understand at all, I made a note of this on the article's talk page. Maybe you could help me with this, since you speak Ukrainian and Russian? Could you throw a quick glance at the article itself and make sure I didn't falsify the meaning of anything while copyediting, because there were some things I wasn't 100% sure what they meant, when I re-phrased them.

Thanks,

--Carabinieri 21:25, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Link to Sviatoslav's family tree

Hi there. I am writing to ask why you removed the link to the family tree of Sviatoslav on his article page? I added it for informational purposes because he happens to be one of ancestors to members of royal families in Europe, including Prince Charles for instance. --Stanley78 22:45, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

It was added in an unencyclopedic form and seemed to me suspicious. I will take another look. --Irpen 22:48, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I am a novice to Wikipedia writing, sorry for not being a pro writer. There are dozens of references to people's trees on Rodovid from Wikipedia articles and they do no harm. Again, his tree can be viewed by following this link. The tree is really huge and may take a few minutes to load. Please, read more about Rodovid at www.rodovid.org. --Stanley78 23:04, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the Vladimir Alekseyevich Betz headstone photo!

Big thanx! Hope the image will stay. It would be better to upload it to Wikimedia, so I could put it in the Russian article. (and others of course). Best regards, --CopperKettle 10:16, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

You are very welcome. Besides, it was you who found it. I merely uploaded it once I recognized that the site you found is in the list of the ones that are OK to use. You can upload a local copy to the ruwiki as well. The author of the web-site made it clear that he had no objections to the usage of any of his images on wikipedia provided his authorship is attributed )see eg. how I did it). Personally, I prefer to stay away from commons as much as possible and here I elaborated why so. I cannot prevent you from uploading the image on commons although I see certain danger for the image even at that (see link above). So, ruwiki+enwiki local copies is a little extra server load and hard-drive space consumption but a little more insurance against the content deletion due to silly games. Best regards, --Irpen 10:32, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Soviet partisans

I already did explain what is wrong with that article, on numerous occasions and in a number of places, the talk page included. Nothing has changed ever since. Currently it presents only Soviet POV and as such is as far from neutrality as it gets. BTW, it seems it was you to make it look that way, so I wonder why is it so hard to accept an NPOV tag... After all you're an intelligent person and I bet you understand that when you present mostly Stalinist propaganda mixed with facts and legends, someone will come and tag such revelations. //Halibutt 23:29, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Halibutt, first og all thanks for your complements. Could you be a little more specific and avoid disruptive labeling the fellow editors? Best, yet, use the article's talk. Thanks, --Irpen 23:33, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Technical note

Please fix double redirects.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  17:56, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I would not worry. Bots will fix it soon enough. --Irpen 19:24, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

What's your take on this?

Hey, since you're a Ukrainian, I'd be interested to know your opinion about this: [9]. I think they overreacted a bit. — Alex ^(T|C|E) 00:25, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Just letting you know, I replied on my talk page on ukwiki, in case you don't check it often. — Alex ^(T|C|E) 07:31, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Ukrainian Passport

Thanks for supporting me. Anyway, I just read this, and I was wondering, do you think the passport will have a RFID in it? (Biometric Passport) I think you might be able to research it a little more (non-Internet resources), but I'll do some research as well. — Alex ^(T|C|E) 09:22, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Might be worth mentioning if it includes RFID. — Alex ^(T|C|E) 09:29, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Advice needed

Hello Irpen. I liked the way we had a discussion on Sviatoslav. Neutral and to the point. I decided to talk to you on one matter, which can be linked to our previous discussion. The question is: are there any rules against adding external links to non-FA? The history of recent edits on Genealogy and its talk page shows that one of the editors treats it as his own page, just like protecting it altogether. Also, his style of writing comments is far from being polite. Please advise. --Stanley78 22:27, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Rodovid.

I have removed this link from Genealogy. The site is poorly managed, small, has no citation procedures or expectations, and cannot even get correct it's featured links. If and when the site restructures to have some semblance of scholarship, we can see about re-adding it. ThuranX 00:22, 6 March 2007 (UTC) further, I see above this waas done after a complaint from Stanley78. I made it clear to him too that the link is unwelcome, and explained at length that the fact that Che Guevara, a well documented famous person from the modern era, was attributed with children born 20 yeas after his death demonstrates that the site is non-notable and doesn't warrant inclusion. The currently discussed Wikia.org projects, however, are linked there, and should stay. Unfortunately, there are dozens of Wiki-engine trees out there. to include all would be a list of links, undesirable on wikipedia, and so We should wait until WIkia finds a viable solution. ThuranX 00:25, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I have written two times already, now is the third time: all of Che's children were born before he died and this can be seen from his family tree. Those added as born after 1980 are his grandchildren, two generations after Che. Try to read the tree. Thanks. --Stanley78 08:46, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Spelling of Kyiv

Hi there! I am a linguist by profession. I have materials to support the point of changing the spelling of Kyiv in Wikipedia from the current "Kiev". I just need time to arrange everything with all the citations and facts. My question is whether this drive would find supporters? --Stanley78 19:27, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, I'm in. You'll probably find plenty of users that would support you. — Alex ^(T|C|E) 01:05, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Care to comment?

Needs no explanation--Kuban Cossack 00:12, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Explanations greatly deserved

I would really like to know why you think I created an "inflammatory" User box for the purpose of "to harass User:LUCPOL"?-- Hrödberäht (gespräch) 21:23, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I said it all where I said it. --Irpen 21:56, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Ukrainian People's Republic

If I could ask a favour of you: in articles on defunct states, it's generally the policy to give the dates for that state's existence near the beginning, for clarity's sake. Compare with Austria-Hungary or Czechoslovakia, for instance. I would do this myself, except I don't know the precise dates. So if you do it, I thank you for it. Biruitorul 21:30, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

The article was actually written by another editor but I will add those dates. Thanks for letting me know that they are missing. --Irpen 21:42, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Great. I look forward to it. Biruitorul 22:50, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

History of Solidarity

I'd still love to see you NPOV/improve the article. I may not agree with some of your comments, but I do believe you could help address many of the issues you pointed out if you tried yourself.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  02:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks you but I probably won't. As I have explained, this is not the topic of my main consern to spend time as any progress in my NPOVing those articles is achieved through an excessive waste of time. And even then, when I go elsewhere my work is often undone as recently happened in PSW and KO. I really have to assign my limited Wikitime to the topics of my most primary concerns and this is not one of them. I will come back to PSW and KO, though, when I feel like it.

I opposed the nomination because I see POVed articles with a FA labels as inappropriate but as long as the article will be off the main page, I will probably live with it as is. It is the mainpage exposure of the POVed version of PSW that prompted my involvement. --Irpen 04:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Ghirla

Irpen, I have considered the fact that you have didn't openly support Ghirla in his misguided RfC attempt a rather positive sign - one that I recall we talked about in person - i.e. that each side would try to restrain their problematic users. Although I have seen little restraining, on the public forums you have at least managed not to support them too much. Alas, if you have desided to change your tactic and join the camp of 'Ghirla great, Piotrus bad' - go right ahead, I will not stop you. Ghirla can certainly use a third person endorsing his statement... although I am afraid that you will have difficult job to change the tide, considering as about 30 or so other editors failed to be convinced by his so eloquent description of 'my anti-Ghirla campaign'. Seriously, I think you are reasonable enough to know who is more likely to go down if it comes to ArbCom - so it is in your best interest to moderate the issue, instead of inflame it; I ask for nothing more then for Ghirla to stop his attacks on others, and I am not asking for an apology or punishment. Yet.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  19:25, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Piotrus, point by point, the RfC is not misguided, it is largely on the mark. Second, I have no intention to endorse Ghirla's statement which I think is too broad. I would rather write my own one. Third, I am afraid you are mistaken in your prognosis of the arbitration, especially since new election relegated more content writing arbotrators. I take no position on your threat to resort to it as it's your own affiar. I simply predict it will go bust the same way the previous ones went. --Irpen 19:33, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

З Різдвом Христовим і з Новим Роком!

DDima presents to you this wonderful Christmas tree of Kiev (Kyiv) and wishes you an upcoming Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

---

З Різдвом Христовим і з Новим Роком! —dima/s-ko/ 16:18, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

С наступающим!

I hope the season of good will, will provide a good issue to all of this mess. С Новым годом! С Рождеством! --Pan Gerwazy 17:12, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

... и с наступившим! :)

Here is to a happy, productive and rewarding New Year ~ to you and all yours. Cheers! - Introvert • ~ 22:28, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

2007

Irpen, с наступающим (наступившим)! :) Страстности в жизни, бесстрастия в борьбе за идеалы Вики. --Brand спойт 15:03, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you all, we'll all improve the Wikipedia in 2007

Dear all! Thanks for the warm wishes and all the emails that came in while I was at the New Year's vacation.

Now that I checked back for what has been going on in the last ten days while I was away the situation seems hopeful indeed. The bunch of scandalous action inspired by the secretive plottings are still being discusses and widely condemned and I see I see a strong momentum of the community of the Wikipedia editors to finally put a decisive end to the secretive activity at the closed channels followed by the drastically insulting onwiki actions. I am also hopeful that the new arbcom will act on the recent developments. --Irpen 05:14, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Happy New 2007 to all!

File:1953 S Novym Godom.jpg

Happy New Year! (Ukrainian: З Новим Роком!, Russian: С Новым Годом!). I wish you in 2007 to be spared of the real life troubles so that you will continue to care about Wikipedia. We will all make it a better encyclopedia! I also wish things here run smoothly enough to have our invovlement in Wikipedia space at minimum, so that we can spend more time at Main. --Irpen 05:14, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the New Year's greeting. I do believe that I will make a huge impact on Wikipedia in 2007 (as you can tell on my talk page, I just started with that). Of course, stress with bother us all, but I believe that if we can control it, it will be better for Wikipedia, and for us. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 06:41, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Irpen and thank you for your greetings. - Vald 06:44, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

File:Bulle champagne.jpg

Happy New Year, all the best wishes and good luck in next 365 days ! --TAG 07:28, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your greetings, and of course Happy New Year and all the best to you as well :-) Errabee 08:45, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll be original and say thank you for your friendly greetings. :) Yury Tarasievich 10:47, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Irpen! Glad that we're working together to improve Wikipedia. I more time can be spent in 2007 writing articles and adding knowledge instead of spinning our wheels with self-appointed bureaucrats and sneaks. TheQuandry 15:02, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Happy New Year to you too! Have some Swedish fish in recognition of your fine post here! Bishonen 16:16, 2 January 2007 (UTC).

Thank you for your warm wishes, Irpen! I trust your New Year celebrations were fun and joyful, and I hope that the year lying ahead will be more joyful yet!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 13:11, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Wow

Nice to see you back! Thanks for the greeting! I wish you Happy New Year! I believe, that Wikipedia is too far from being a pure academic encyclopedia, the distance between them is comparable to one from the Earth to nearest quasars :) But when a very valuable user, like you for instance, takes a long break, Wikipedia worsens. I wish us to have as less conflicts with vandals, trolls, insulting sockpuppets, annoying users, etc., as possible. And to have just fine Wikistress level in any case and all circumstances. Cmapm 19:48, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Response

Hi, I responded to a post you made on [[Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Giano/Workshop#Fourth_suggestion_2|]] with a question, just dropping a note here so it doesn't get lost. Regards, CHAIRBOY (☎) 02:29, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Valentyna Shevchenko

Ok, thank you for your message !

As I can't use the note and reference codes, I let you do it !

Here is the link of the former page I used to refere :

http://web.archive.org/web/20040603002149/www.shevchenkovalentina.openua.net/bio.plhtml

Bogatyr 20:25, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

2007

Irpen, с наступающим (наступившим)! :) Страстности в жизни, бесстрастия в борьбе за идеалы Вики. --Brand спойт 15:03, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Dear Irpen,

may I wish you Happy New Year? Let your force of mind be with you! :-)

Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 23:20, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Template help

Hey Irpen, I am attempting to create a cossack template that could be put on all the various cossack pages. I think I have a good start but am looking for some more links and an image to put on it. You can see it here. Feel free to add any improvements you might have. The only reason the Russian empire symbol is on there is because I can't come up with a better one. Let me know if you have any ideas. Thanks ~ Joe Jklin (T C) 08:35, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

I'm sorry to see you have not edited for so long, and hope that one day soon you will return. I know how very upset you have been about the disgraceful slur on your block log, and hope one day the Arbcom will decide to wipe it clean, especialy as it was the result of behaviour by IRCadmins, a now thoroughly discredited force. I have decided to continue editing Wikipedia because I still beleive in te project, and hope you will to. Regarding those who have brought the project into disrepute - I'm planning to say little more on the subject unless I'm attacked again. I have proved my point about the IRC admin channel, and many people (whose opinion matters to me) now seem to believe all I have ben saying was true. The channel is now thoroughly discredited and will never be a source of power again, and used by anyone of Wikipedian value - it is now basically finished - no one will ever believe a word that emanates from it again, no doubt a few little firecrackers will continue to pop on admins notice boards and such places but I think people can now evaluate such comments for themselves and see them for what they are dying embers of a former power base. Once again thanks for your support in this. I have appreciated it. Giano 10:46, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Newyorkbrad's RfA

Thank you for your support on my RfA, which closed favorably this morning, as well as for your kind comments about me. I appreciate the confidence the community has placed in me and am looking forward to my new responsibilities. Please let me know if ever you have any comments or suggestions, especially as I am learning how to use the tools. And most important, I hope that you are ready to start writing again. Best regards, Newyorkbrad 21:13, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Ukrainian-German collaboration during World War II

Can you please comment on my proposal here--Kuban Cossack 22:26, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

User:Briangotts/Rus template

Your comments/ adjustments would be appreciated. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 06:49, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Help

I was wondering if you can help me with organizing sources on the Battle of Konotop page. I listed them as links and sources, but believe they should be separate. I will list the sources that I use in the Source heading. Almost all of them are electronic books, articles and reference material. My problem is, I don't know how to organize it correctly. Could you have a look at it when it is done and comment on changes? Thanks in advance.--Hillock65 23:27, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I will gladly help you with that later today. --Irpen 23:34, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Latvia evidence

Do you know when they will stop taking evidence in the Occupation of Latvia arbitration? Jd2718 02:58, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, I am not the one to ask but there are no fixed rules. You can post if you like. The only thing I am asking everyone is to read the entire talk page. Cheers, --Irpen 03:04, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I have. Whether the arbitrators agree or not, this is essentially a content dispute. Good sources have gone untapped. Jd2718 03:21, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you that this is purely a content dispute. But it is centered not around the factual accuracy but the questionable scope and title. Tendentiously picked events arbitrary picked and put together under the improper title cannot make an encyclopedic article. --Irpen 03:25, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

They've extended 'occupation' to cover everything up to 1991, yes, I am aware. There's some conduct issues, but they are comparatively minor. Jd2718 04:01, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Exactly. The case was accepted, however, for the reasons which are too complicated to explain in a few words. --Irpen 04:21, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

FYI, one of the arbitrators has now written a /Proposed Decision in the case. Newyorkbrad 17:28, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I was too slow to provide evidence - but no harm. I was fearful that the ArbCom might rule on the content; it didn't happen. Jd2718 00:03, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

A note and some support

Hello there. I'd like to thank you for filing the RFAR request you did, it's honestly about time that something official happened regarding that cesspool of a channel. I would just like to make a suggestion, however - it might be helpful to clearly state who you wish to recuse themself from the case. Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge ( Talk to Me • Neutrality Project ) 01:48, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your support. The thing is that if I name the individuals, it may be perceived as a lack of respect towards ArbCom and a personal attack. They would know who I am talking about. --Irpen 01:50, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps you could email them? That way it wouldn't be very much of an attac, at least as long as you are respectful. Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge ( Talk to Me • Neutrality Project ) 01:57, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

What for? They know who they are! If I see them non-recused, I might speak on that but hopefully, it won't be necessary. --Irpen 01:59, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I would hope not, too. Mackensen saying he'd recuse himself from the matter was encouraging at least. Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge ( Talk to Me • Neutrality Project ) 03:22, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Ive been watching the case and now I see that two of the arbcom have rejected this. I can't say that I'm terribly surprised by this, but you have my support anyways. I don't know if I should make a statement or not, do you think it would be helpful? Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge ( Talk to Me • Neutrality Project ) 04:09, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I see one accept, one reject for now. Fred's rationale is interesting. He wants to reject because he thinks that this is not the arbitration but the policy issue. This very objection was brought up by Ghirla and myself in the original Giano case. It was accepted over such objections, including by Fred. I can't figure how our arbs think. --Irpen 04:16, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that's very confusing and rather inconsistent. I know we can't expect the committee to be consistent from case to case where the arbs taking it are different, but you think that a single arbitrator would be more consistent.

Personally, I feel that the ArbCom kind of took it on itself when it asserted itself on the channel. Saying they're uninvolved when what seems like at least a quarter of the committee are the new ops there seems like bollocks to me. But ... we'll see if Fred's views are the view of the panel. I tend to think they'd be as fractured as the rest of wikipedia on it, but we'll see. Anyways, this was kind of the wrong place to rant about it, my apologies. Just wanted to let you know you're far from the only person that's calling the spades, spades, here. Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge ( Talk to Me • Neutrality Project ) 04:24, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I think ArbCom took it upon itself when it accepted the original Giano case. It was not a behavioral dispute. There was some sort of the community uprising as Tony's random blocks was the last straw to trigger it. And in the middle of the discussion at WP:AN a strange account submitted this strange arbcom. If you note the decisions of that case, you may notice that there were none in fact. By original standards, that was a non-arbcomable case. But this one is clearly more arbcomable. We'll see. --Irpen 04:30, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah - I've heard of that case, but I haven't really read it, so I can't comment on it. I should go read up on it. In either event I hope they look into it. I think that it might be right that there is some overreaction in this case - but I don't think it's on the "side" of the people that want action taken against the channel. It goes against the openness and transparency of Wikipedia for them to implement blocks only discussed on IRC. That's why I posted the note I did when I saw Beta blocked you, by the way - no discussion had taken place on wikipedia about it, and I felt that was wrong. If beta posted ot ANI or something it would have been less murky, but simply of IRC, in a channel where there is restricted membership where you couldn't've even defended yourself if you wanted to? That's not cool. I respect Beta, and I think he was probably the "messenger" in this case (I cant tell, I don't have access to the channel or logs) but either way, I thought he had more good sense. Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge ( Talk to Me • Neutrality Project ) 04:38, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

What actually happened there

Beta's action was outright bizarre and appalling. To begin with, PAs are nowhere in the allowed reasons for the blocks in the WP:BLOCKing policy. Does not mean a user cannot be blocked for them ever, but they would really need to be very serious. Secondly, there were no PA's at all in this discussion. Further, none of the Irpen-bashing crowd that showed up in the middle of our discussion were ever at PAIN before. It means that the IRC league were actively following my edits looking for any possible conflict with my involvement to reign in with blocks. I know for a fact that discussion about "getting rid of Irpen" took place at that channel and I even know who took part in it.

Beta was not duped but he took part in this abuse actively. There is no excuse for that block. Finally, there can never be a justification for the hit and run. If I was not lazy, I would have written a Beta deadminning arbcom but I am too tired of this whole matter. Maybe I will change my mind, don't know. --Irpen 04:59, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I think he got suckered by the IRC admins, but I don't know one way or another. In any event, whether or not PAs are blockable or not, the simple fact of the matter is, he should have talked about it on WP. That goes with the whole IRC cabal thing. Some ten or <insert arbitrary number her> admins getting together and just deciding to ignore the community and block users they disagree with is not good, and it's threatening the wiki. It needs dealt with, and I really hope ArbCom will. IRC in and off itself isn't the issue, but the is no need for some closed channel for admins. Especially a closed group where non-admins hold the keys as Ops. The whole matter disappoints me greatly.

I feel personally somewhat responsible for that block, as it was my actions in the PAIN report that sparked that conversation and the resultant block. For what little it may be worth, I deeply regret that you were blocked over it, and hope you can accept my apologies. Whatever merits my actions there may or may not have had, your complaints were legit, and some IRC group decided to block you over it was so utterly -wrong- I have no words for them, except for the fact that I am sorry. ✎ Peter M Dodge ( Talk to Me • Neutrality Project ) 05:05, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

You don't need to apologize. It was not your fault. Take it easy. --Irpen 05:11, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I just felt very shortchanged (is that the proper expression? I'm not sure, but it makes sense to me..) by the whole pile on there. I don't at all blame you for thinking that there was some sort of coordinated communication there. There likely was. I just didn't have a part in it. I wish I had - I'd've spoken up for you. Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge ( Talk to Me • Neutrality Project ) 05:13, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Let me explain. I thought you were part of that communication only because I could not come up with any other explanation how you could have possibly found out about that block before even I knew it and without any blocking message posted anywhere onwiki. I did not know about the bot. Once you explained this to me, I am absolutely convinced that you had nothing to do with Beta's abuse. So, no worries. --Irpen 05:19, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Maps

I scanned two maps, one of them of superficial, all-USSR coverage, comprising 1941-1944 (prepared in 1974), second of partisan units organisation and activities in Belarus (in 1941 borders), by the year and by the size (author is Manayenkaw (bel. Манаенкаў), this is the updated (c.1990s) variant of the same map (first variant prepared by him, too, in 1974)). First map I managed to squeeze down to the 1200K in indexed-color PNG 1280x~1900 pix. Second map I didn't yet process, possibly I'll do this tonight.

The question is how do we proceed from here on. It is reasonable guess that nobody in the publishing house would raise any trouble over the propagating of these maps (with proper attribution, anyway), indeed, on the present polit. tide we'd go with their blessings. Just that currently I don't need any additional rain on my parade here, and am reluctant to upload these to commons by myself. What do you suggest? Yury Tarasievich 12:59, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Maps 2

First map down the hatch. I put the "don't know license on it". I commented out the first 3 images just to make way for it. Let's see how this goes down, then the second map could be processed.

I have some relevant info on partisan movement, with numbers, too. Much more relevant than the dilettante's political discourses the article filled with now. Will put in tonight, if all's well. Yury Tarasievich 08:17, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: the User:HanzoHattori amusing person's edits, seems it's up to you and other guys to deal with that, for now. I'm quite quite busy here. Yury Tarasievich 09:34, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Ukrainian national Television

5 kanal is not a national TV channel in UKraine. It's on cable. That's why i did not put it in the template. Sakura-org 19:11, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Ukrainain TV Networks

I looked that there are no articles about most of the Ukrainian TV Networks in English Wikipedia. If you want, we can create them together. Sakura-org 19:26, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

This is not exactly a subject of my expertise but I will try to help with what I can. --Irpen 19:39, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Do you know smbody how works on that? Sakura-org 19:47, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

For now just the two of us :), but you get the ball rolling, I will join and others will jump in. --Irpen 19:50, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I probably will start with STB Sakura-org 19:54, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Meta

Пардон, я ничего не понял в этой тарабарщине. Что там конретно угроза? MaxSem 08:48, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Иллюстрация к статье Russians

Прошу не загружать версию с А. С. Пушкиным по той причине, что поэт не является в полной мере этническим русским, следовательно, его портрет не следует использовать в соответствующей статье. Сам он неоднократно подмечал свою экзотическую внешность, а по поводу приведенного портрета заметил, будто тот ему изрядно льстит и скрывает его нежелательные черты.

Л. Н. Толстого убрал, так как подумал, что прерыдущая иллюстрация показалась вам слишком мелкой. Можно загрузить и предыдущую версию, где и А. П. Чехов, и Л. Н. Толстой. Чехова, впрочем, надо непременно оставить, так как у него классическая русская внешность, тогда как Толстого на приведенном портрете за бородой вообще практически не видно. Известны они примерно в одинаковой степени, так что не стоит обижаться.

Александра Невского добавил, чтобы отразить достаточно древнюю историю этноса и чтобы разнообразить стили (в духе портрета Елизаветы в статье про англичан, например). Humanophage 21:38, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Partisans et al.

Hey. I didn't forget my unfinished work on this and other articles (e.g., Polonisation, Russification), just currently my hands were (and still are) somewhat full with starting up of our WP AND (last, not least) with my actual real-life work. I'm now reading up and consolidating the knowledge. The subjects I'm encountering aren't easy to integrate neutrally, some substance will hit the fan.

And: Big Thanks for you help on the "day one". Thanks for all the help which came our (project) way, actually. Cheers! Yury Tarasievich 19:23, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

AN comment

It is a bit frustrating to see people deliberately breaking rules and causing disruption, but I do see how that could be offensive and will try to use a more moderate tone on that. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:22, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your understanding. Regards, --Irpen 22:23, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Ukrainian pics

As a typical Ukraine-hater and Polish pan I tend to be in the Ukraine at least twice a year, sometimes even more often - so it's not a problem. I go mostly to Lvov, Kiev and Odessa, but I plan to make some trip to Yalta this May and perhaps to the small towns of Galicia this summer. Just let me know what you need and I'll see if I have any pics already in my archives. //Halibutt 14:19, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Kiev Metro, the more photos the better! --Kuban Cossack 14:21, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

BTW, it's not referred to as The Ukraine in English. Just as we do not say, "I went to the Poland," or "I went on Lithuania (na Litwie)". These are probably the archaic remnants of the belief that these nations were, or are, provinces of something larger. In any case, it's improper. Dr. Dan 14:34, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I have a thought that many people say the Ukraine beacuse it sounds like the UK . It might be a stupid idea... Sakura-org 18:25, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

To Halibutt: "As a typical Ukraine-hater and Polish pan..." Did I ever call you that? My message to you was entirely non-confrontational. And I am glad that Ukraine now abolished the visa requirements for many countries, including the Polish pans thus opening itself to the world. Why such a response? Anyway, some of the requests are here but if you find any Ukraine-related pictureless articles, please add to it if you have anything.

As for the, some recent discussion on the matter is here in the archive. It's not "wrong", as long as it is used by respected sources. It's just that as less and less sources use them nowadays, it is a little bit obsolete. I do not use it but I see have no issue with those who do. --Irpen 19:14, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, my response was ironic, but was not aimed at anyone. My message was not confrontational either, it was merely a joke of myself. And no, you did not call me those names (though some Wikipedians did, check the list you-know-where). As to The Ukraine vs. Ukraine - one of my teachers was very, very old and I believe I inherited that version from her. I could stick with Ukraine if the former usage is offensive to some. Not a big deal.

As to the pics, the last time I went to Kiev I did not have my camera with me and had to borrow one from my colleague (a really lousy Nikon). The result is that most after-dark pics (as well as those made in the tube) are really, really bad. Anyway, I'll see what I can come up with. Just give me some time to browse through my archives. //Halibutt 20:27, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Okay, it took me some two hours to select the pics and tag them properly. In some half an hour all should be listed in my autouploader gallery. Just pick your poison, I hope some of them could be helpful. The weather wasn't really nice and the camera was lousy, but I guess some of the pics could do. I was able to dig up several pics of the Kiev Metro, but all of them are really lousy and definitely their informative value is close to none.

BTW, I wonder why isn't the Book Museum listed in the "Museums in Kiev" template. It's one of the most fascinating museums out there. Especially the Polish books published in Kraków in 19th century and labelled "Ukrainian books in foreign languages" by the museum staff :D Another nice addition could be the Museum of a Single Street, as far as I know the first privately-owned museum in (the) Ukraine. //Halibutt 23:53, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Parliamentary elections

Hey, can you help translate the article you're working on for the Ukrainian Wikipedia? — Alex^(T|C|E) 23:25, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I need time to have something semidecent here. But I can help when I am ready. I won't worry much. There are plenty of uk-wiki users who can write in Ukrainian and someone will likely write it there sooner than us. Just wait for the morning EET. --Irpen 23:28, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, I'm one of the ukwiki users, but as of now, my translation skills suck. I'm not in a hurry though. BTW, do you think this article will qualify for "in the news"? — Alex^(T|C|E) 23:31, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes. It will be in the news. I will help translate it but I need some hours to have anything here first. Later, --Irpen 23:33, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Already in the news. — Alex^(T|C|E) 23:36, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Not pushing you to write it or anything, just letting you know. :-) — Alex^(T|C|E) 23:39, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Wow, you're fast. How did you get the clip? I read the text of course but we can give a link to this in an article. Cheers, --Irpen 23:39, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Heh, http://5tv.com.ua/, http://5tv.com.ua/newsline/266/. :-) — Alex^(T|C|E) 00:11, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

The second link, вибір народу, is everything related to the 2007 elections. — Alex^(T|C|E) 00:15, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I know you're not up to writing the whole article, but can you at least help make it good enough to qualify for WP:ITN/C? I already added it to the list. — Alex^(T|C|E) 05:22, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

STB (channel)

I finished with the article about Ukrainian channel STB. YOu should read it and edit if it's needed (and I think it is needed:))) I finished with my User page too. You can also visit it.... Sakura-org 13:05, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Ukraine-politician-stub

Greetings Irpen

I notice you've created a new category for this template. I'd expressly avoided creating the specific Category:Ukrainian politician stubs since we don't have enough Ukrainian material for any such category to live up to the minimum standards normally used by WP:WSS (we're still missing 6-7 stub articles to pass the threshold of 60 stub articles), so this template was intended to remain without a specific category until we broke this threshold. I'll do the paperwork on WP:WSS and I guess it'll hardly be worth the effort to delete the category again (in particular if more people decide to run for office in the new elections) but please don't edit the stub categories without consulting with WP:WSS first; it saves a lot of clean up time, e.g. in keeping the list of templates and categories up to date. Happy editing. Valentinian ^{T / C} 22:25, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject

Hey, you want to start a Wikipedia:WikiProject Ukraine? I'm in if you're in. — Alex^(T|C|E) 03:11, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Not until we get at least 10 active users willing to sort out all the work. We now barely maintain the Portal:Ukraine and its sub-windows which would collapse without DDima. Also, the "New articles board" at the portal is already a substitute for a project as everyone follows it and announcements posted there get read. But I am glad that we got another user (you) who does some real work. Keep it up! --Irpen 03:16, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Okay, three down seven to go. :-) I just need to sort a few things out so that nothing will hold me back from contributing to Wikipedia. — Alex^(T|C|E) 03:29, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Tak (!) Count me in. There is an already existing WikiProject Ukrainian subdivisions, which we could transform into the Ukraine WikiProject, what do you think? But we should first ask the founders of the project (Mzajac and AlexPU) if they agree to that. BTW, there was a proposal to do that on the WikiProjects's talk.. —dima/talk/ 20:35, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I would enthusiastically welcome Michael's return to active editing but he seems busy with other things at this time of his life. From my past interactions with AlexPU, I have doubts that he is in a condition to make any positive contribution to any project but I cannot exclude the possibility that he undergoes just one more transformation. He used to be a, though opinionated, but productive editor before his more recent turning into a highly unproductive aggressive mode.

But more precisely, is there anything we want to do through a project that we are not yet doing through a portal. They are bound to partially duplicate each other's function and we really don't want to spend our time on specifically keeping them consistent. Just putting meaningless "This page is being watched by the Ukraone wikiproject" all over article's talk pages is not exactly useful. Before we start the project, we should clearly define its scope, tasks and how it will interact with the Portal which I see as the most crucial window of Ukraine into Wikipedia. --Irpen 21:06, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

True, the WikiProject will likely duplicate the portal's functions... and putting WikiProject templates on talk wouldn't do much either, as there will only be a maximum of 3-6 editors.. Perhaps we should start recruiting Ukrainian users for Wikipedia :)) —dima/talk/ 04:13, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Map of Ukraine

Map of Ukraine

I just uploaded this. What do you think? — Alex^(T|C|E) 04:24, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Great, but why did you reduce the resolution? The original one has a higher resolution. --Irpen 04:37, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Your's is PNG, mine is SVG, you can blow it up to any resolution. :-) — Alex^(T|C|E) 04:45, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I would not know the difference. I am not too geeky :). --Irpen 04:46, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Example: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/03/Map_of_Ukraine_en.svg/1024px-Map_of_Ukraine_en.svg.png — Alex^(T|C|E) 04:47, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Plus, I can modify it any way I want easily. I can now easily make a map of all railways or highways in Ukraine. Let me know if you want me to. — Alex^(T|C|E) 04:48, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

By the way:

Modified versions of UNCS maps may be used provided that the UN name and reference number does not appear on any modified version and a link to the original map is provided.

Your map says "United Nations" at the bottom. :-) — Alex^(T|C|E) 04:49, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, then I guess the one I uploaded is redundant and useless. I will ask it deleted. --Irpen 04:50, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Want me to get started on a map of either railroads or highways? — Alex^(T|C|E) 04:52, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Such maps would be great but we do not have articles for those. We should write Transportation in Ukraine first. Or would you know where else to put it? --Irpen 04:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I was also thinking of developing those articles. By the way, for future reference, if I was to make a map of highways or railways, would you want the city names left on there? — Alex^(T|C|E) 04:56, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I would think the best is to have cities named the same way as the Wikipedia articles. The UN map has a mixed spelling. It anglicized Ukraine and Crimea but does not anglicize Dnieper. And of course K... You know what I mean :). But even the map with the imperfect choice of names is better than no map. I very much admire Halibutt's maps no matter how I disagree with him on POVs and terminology. --Irpen 04:58, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and raliroad/highway maps can go to transport in Ukraine even as it is now. --Irpen 05:01, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, looks like my map might need a font fix. Went to a sans-serif font for some reason. :-) Make a list of cities that need to be fixed, and I'll fix them. As for roads and railroads, give me an example of a map (another country) that you want the Ukrainian (rail)road map to look like. — Alex^(T|C|E) 05:11, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I am not a final say in the naming. Our naming conventions are. The rest is either bad faith attempts by some to ignore the conventions or good faith disagreements (by many more others) on their interpretations. IMO, the current names of the all Oblast center articles reflect the WP:NC correctly (see {{Tl:Ukraine}}) for the complete list. Also, the map would be better off with the main rivers anglicized and spelled as Dnieper, Dniester and Southern Buh. "Vdskh" should be replaced with "rsvr". But this is all less important than having some maps instead of none. --Irpen 05:35, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

ukwiki

Wow, you sure are a lot more active on ukwiki now. :-) — Alex^(T|C|E) 06:15, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, I just want to help a bit with bringing images into some orderly condition. As long as no one is pouncing at me, I am willing to help a little. --Irpen 06:24, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Heh, I'm not sure where to leave you messages now, there or here. — Alex^(T|C|E) 06:36, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Here. --Irpen 06:38, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

A UK Wiki? What's that? --Thus Spake Anittas 10:20, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Ukrainian Wikipedia, http://uk.wikipedia.org :-) — Alex^(T|C|E) 10:22, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Воистину Воскресе!

Пасибо! --Kuban Cossack 20:12, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

File:Eastereggs.jpg

Hmmm, we sometimes paint the eggs in the same style as you do. --Thus Spake Anittas 21:13, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Воистину Воскресе! — Alex^(T|C|E) 00:35, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Эхей!!! А я опоздал уже :(. Давайте яйцами стукнемся?Vlad fedorov 03:48, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Спасибо!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:10, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Diakuyu! Faustian 20:25, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Воистину Воскресе! Avade er iz ufgeshtanen! He is risen indeed!--Pan Gerwazy 22:02, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Спасибо! Errabee 22:38, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Ukraine

Hey, glad to see that you joined! As for Portal:Ukraine, the only thing that might be moved over to the WikiProject is the new article announcements, everything else about the portal will remain the same. — Alex^(T|C|E) 22:57, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Let's not move it without discussion. --Irpen 23:00, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't going to, I was just saying what might change. — Alex^(T|C|E) 23:52, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Organised persecution of ethnic Poles

Could you please change the template to the normal WP:AfD way? You'd have my conditional support on that one, but the way you did it I'd have to remove the template myself as it's definitely not used the way it was meant to be. {{AfD}} is the way to go here, but not the sneaky way. //Halibutt 20:39, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

If the PROD tl is removed, AFD will be the way, yes. I don't see your point. If you want to substitute one PROD reason for another, just do so. --Irpen 20:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Anyway, since the template was removed by the user, I AfDed the article. I am looking forward for your vote of the conditional support in the AfD debate. --Irpen 20:51, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

ICTV

I was gonna fill in ICTV, but did not have time. Thank you for puttind some basic info. I will fill it in soon. Per the template -- Let me make a template for only commercial national broadcast and cable tv stations so the National television in Ukraine template will have only UT1, UT2 and UT3. Sakura-org 23:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Mediation!

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Soviet occupation of Romania, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.

A gift

In between our usual fights, here's something you may enjoy.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  04:02, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I fully share the message of this box (see the top of my talk page) but I am no fan of userboxing the userspace since most userboxes are campaigning of some kind and I disagree with using the userspace for it. You won't find any boxes in my space even in favor of things I support unequivocally, like FC Dynamo Kyiv or Democracy in Ukraine. --Irpen

Advise

Irpen, is it possible in Wikipedia to give different punishments just because user has a story of blocks in Wikipedia.

Yes.

Do admin have to consider the situation over which a block was given?

Yes but many don't.

Are blocks used in Wikipedia as slave marks?

Yes.

if so I would consider making other account.Vlad fedorov 04:28, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

No comment. Abandoning an account and starting to use a different one is allowed. What is not allowed is to edit from several accounts, especially if all accounts edit one or related articles. Also, banned or blocked users are not allowed to edit and returning under the new username is considered a block evasion. It is impossible to strictly enforce and if the past problem user returns as a new account but no problematic behavior reccures, there is no way to connect the dots, which may actually be a good thing. However, since problem users usually reflect a problematic personality, I don't think we have many permabanned users now editing now happily under new identities. --Irpen 04:40, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Ukraine portal

Hey, I see you voted as "other" about the page move. I just came to reassure you not to worry, that I won't let that portal to be absorbed by the WikiProject. :-) — Alex^(T|C|E) 04:45, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

RFA

I inform you that I added your name at "involved parts" at the RFA between me and Mauco, as I consider you as an involved part. As you know I supported your proposal to allow Mauco to defend himself, however I should state that the apologies he offered to you don't impress me. He never appologied to ME, and I am the main person to whom he should ask forgiveness. I've sent him an e-mail after he was caught, asking if he plead guilty or not guilty and he never replied.--MariusM 08:21, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Need assistance

Hi, thanks for welcoming me here. Since you are a senior member here and know how things get done, in addition I believe you have the best relationship with local stalinists that will no doubt oppose me in this respect, I need your assistance in reverting or deleting this map which insults Ukrainian history and subsequently people. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/Premongol.png it dates 1200 and has "Russian Principalities" written over what was Ukrainian territories. It would be most historically correct to write Pre-Ukrainian or Old Ukrainian territories, but I think we can compromise to Kyivska Rus' or Kyivan Rus', or Kievan Rus' - which I will agree to. Заранее благодарен.--Sylius 03:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC) я там оставил сообщение в статье где карта используется.

To answer your question, the name "Russian principalities" was likely put there not due the Russian chauvinism of the map's creator (who is not even Russian) but due to the fact that Medieval Russia and Medieval Rus’ happen to be usable in English historiography interchangeably. This source is the best proof, the Janet Martin's classical study called "Medieval Russia, 980-1584", Cambridge University, 1995, ISBN 0521368324. This usage does not create any confusion among the specialists since they unmistakably realize that in the medieval and the modern context the two words do not mean

the same thing and are rather treated as homonyms.

Of course there are people (that include some Wikipedia users and RL politicians) who claim that Rus' and Russia (in modern sense) are just one and the same but such claims are unrelated to the historic science and not considered seriously among historians. I am saddened to see you making similar claims except you propose to replace Russia by Ukraine in the Rus' context. Such exclusivity claims are equally non-scholarly, although you can easily find the writings of nationalist Ukrainian and Russian historians who make such respective exclusivity claim.

But this question goes by far beyond the trivial dispute of the map you raise. I would support you if you say that in the particular map the "Russian principalities" should be replaced with the "Principalities of Rus’" as this removes the ambiguity that a non-specialist may see there and would help the world peace at the same time.

It would be wrong, however, to call Rus' as Kievan (or Kyivan) in this particular context as the addition of "Kievan" is a later one and made by historians. The contemporary usage that would have been Rus' or Rus('s)kaya zemlya did not include Kiev in any form. So, the term Kievan Rus is OK to use in a specific context but not left and right. I will contact the author of the map with the request to accommodate your concern. Regards, --Irpen 04:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Do not call other users "Stalinists". This is a serious offense and the breach of the wikirules which call to avoid discussing the contributors and concentrate on content. --Irpen

I didn't know about that rule, I thought the user wouldn't be offended since he has a picture of this "political figure" in his profile. I also think that it should be prohibited to have pictures of stalin or hitler in profiles, but what can one do. Anyway, that's irrelevent. Thanks for your help. About the use of Russia to mean Ukraine, I understand how some may use it based on other sources, but those initial sources had chauvinistic pretext. Besides, most users of Wikipedia are not historians, and when reading "Priciapility of Russia" will assume that it is .. principality of Russia. I will draw attention to these cases, as a citizen of my country Ukraine, and as a Russian national dedicated to keeping peace between our nations. About Kievan Rus being a term developed later, that's only partially correct. By the way, the word Ukraine was first mentioned in chronicles of 12th century, so it isn't totally incorrect to refer to Rus' as Ukraine, the only problem with this is that it's unclear to what exactly both terms refer to. Again, thanks for your assistance. --Sylius 01:22, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Talk:The Wehrmacht War Crimes Bureau, 1939-1945

Xx236 12:59, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Map-related

Could you please make a small change to a map you once made by replacing the Russian principalities with Principalities of Rus’. Your version is not "wrong" but slight modification will not compromise the correctness but would appease some of my nationally conscious compatriots. See [10]. TIA, --Irpen 04:22, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

For you, tovarisch, anything. ;-)

It's done. I'm amazed at what gets some people riled up though. In any case I'll eventually get around to replacing the map altogether with a better, less pixel-obvious version. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 13:24, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm sure it sounds "amazing" to a non-involved party, unfortunately historical inaccuracies are often used for political provocations in modern world. It's my firm belief that they should not be allowed. --Sylius 01:26, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I do not agree that the original phrasing was inaccurate. In common academic usage the principalities of the 13th century were "Russian". Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 14:32, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

And this usage is inaccurate, because nobody outside historic circles knows that Russian back in the 13th century didn't mean the same nation as modern Russia. Which is exactly how it is being used for political purposes.--Sylius 02:07, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Anti-Russian sentiment

It is under attack, I need your help ASAP. --Kuban Cossack 22:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

And also keep and eye out on GUAM. --Kuban Cossack 21:53, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

And now this [11]. --Kuban Cossack 00:20, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Also something completely on a side note, but Care to comment? --Kuban Cossack 22:45, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Request

Hello. Could I prevail upon you to express agreement or disagreement on going forward with mediation? Thank you. Biruitorul 05:31, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Transnistria

Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Transnistria. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Transnistria/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Transnistria/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, David Mestel^(Talk) 22:09, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey

What do you think of this? Khoikhoi 06:01, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Same with this. Khoikhoi 03:19, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Hello Irpen, thank you for supporting my RfA!
I was promoted with a final tally of 68/12/0.
Also, please wish a Happy Birthday to Her Majesty the Queen. Vivat Regina!

ArbCom case: Betacommand

Paul August expanded the finding of fact related to your unwarned, unwarranted block (in response to your talk page comments). Also, I'd like to point out that obligations for admins to communicate have been made more explicit. I do not think they will take on off-Wiki conduct, but the communications requirements make the ability to plot off-wiki less valuable. Jd2718 07:25, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Image:Eastereggs.jpg

Greetings, Irpen. I noticed that you uploaded the excellent image Image:Eastereggs.jpg for Easter. The source currently provided is not really adequate. Could you provide a URL for a page which the image is located in and a URL directly to the image? Thanks, Iamunknown 20:19, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

It was at the site's front page at the Easter day, that's when I got it but now it is obviously not there. Never makes sense to give and URL to the dynamic page. --Irpen 02:08, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

What text on podrobnosti.ua indicates that images hosted on the site are freely-licensed? --Iamunknown 16:22, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

The text at the bottom of the page says that the only restriction to any use (any use included every possibility including the derivative work) is the acknowledgment of the source's url: podrobnosti.ua. However, if you are still unconvinced, do as you please. The image was used only to leave some Easter greetings to users who I know to have observed it and would be have been pleased to receive such message. Mainspace content, which is my primary concern, won't be affected and you are welcome to proceed as you please. What brought your attention to this particular image out of thousands is also not the matter that is going to concern me in this particular case. Happy edits, --Irpen 18:30, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm confused by your last sentence, What brought your attention to this particular image out of thousands is also not the matter that is going to concern me in this particular case. What do you mean? --Iamunknown 22:15, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Nothing else but what it says. --Irpen 22:30, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I can't parse it. Are you wondering how I came across this particular image? --Iamunknown 00:08, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

No, I made a point that despite the most likely scenario is obvious, I do not care in this particular case. I made a mistake of raising the subject myself and stating at the same time that I don't care. Thus, I made it seem like I do. Anyway, if you are satisfied with the info you received, the image can continue to beautify a couple of userpages. If not, feel free to do whatever you want with it. This image is not high on my priority list to investigate, search, defend or discuss at length. --Irpen 00:28, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I really am still unsure what the most likely scenario is. Is the most likely scenario: I saw you add it to an editor's talk page I had commented on previously and thus had on my watchlist? I am browsing through upload logs? I am still in a tiffy after the ANI incident and am finding ways to be malicious?

Well, I saw you add it to an editor's talk page I had commented on previously and thus had on my watchlist. Looked at it, thought, "That is a beautiful photograph", and then, like I almost automatically do now (its a curse), thought about the copyright license. That said I am unsure about it, but there is not much I can currently do, what with being unable to read Ukrainian. Regardless, I decided to correspond with you about the image first given our history of interactions, the messages at the top of your talk page and a desire to make amends. I apologise for the inconvenience, Iamunknown 00:39, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, if you want, I can elaborate. You do not need to apologize. You acted with good intentions and the inconvenience was minimal. No, copyright is not a curse and I take it with the utmost care. The best proof is that several committed "image upload checkers" (I would not elaborate anything on that further and, no, I do not consider everyone who asks me about an image to be a stalker) were able to rid the WP of no more than two (maybe three, but I think two) images out of hundreds I uploaded and those were fairuse ones, rather than the free tags I "falsified", while this possibility was also studied by my shadows. The rationalized in detail fairuse image like those were, can never be plain and simple and the ultimate decision is often a matter of luck. So, I had some grief (merely an unpleasant feeling that I have to waste time to defend each image and worry where the next attack would come from) thanks to those fellows but you were not one of them and I never said you were. You did not communicate by templates, you complemented the image and tried to make it less of a hassle, and I appreciate that. True enough, lack of exact URL, while there was a reason in this case, might have been an oversight and you brought it to my attention. A little less clear to me were the reasons of the followup question about where exactly is the free statement at the site. It may have been either checking whether I had lied or. with hundreds of images uploaded, I still did not know what I was doing or whatever. Anyway, I hope that when you decide to put the this issue to rest, it would be not due to your not knowing Russian or Ukrainian but because my translation of the statement is accepted, especially in view of the Babel tl on my userpage that asserts that I know these language senough. Lost my train of thought here. Too tired. --Irpen 09:45, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom/Soviet occupation of Romania [12]

Filed. Please confirm awareness. -- Biruitorul 16:17, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Soviet occupation of Romania. For the Mediation Committee, ^demon[omg plz] 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.

This message delivered: 18:33, 23 April 2007 (UTC).

Some comments...

I have been staying away from the article, partly to give the Romanian editors some room for improving the article as requested by them, but also to save my nerves. Seems that the article has seen no major improvement. I only now noted the archiving of the talk page. It seems to me, that this edit may indeed have been made in an effort to suppress the discussion. -- Petri Krohn 00:21, 24 April 2007 (UTC)