User talk:Krsont

WikiProject Munich

Would you be interested in helping out atWikiProject Munich? And you don't have to know anything about Munich. Maybe you could help out on bringing Munich-related articles up to Wikipedia Policies and guidlines standards or maybe another area where you could help improve Munich-related articles. Kingjeff 23:18, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Zealand

Sorry for removing your content, I didn't mean to. I was removing the external link added after yours, and must have clicked on the wrong version.-gadfium 22:23, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing in Steve Irwin. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Viridae ^Talk 11:31, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. You are both being warned, so don't take it as a personal attack, you haven't broken it yet. This is just so you are aware fo the policy.

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Culture of India; Herrerasaurus; Tailtiu; Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi; Gamit language; Bhil languages; Bhili language; Malvi language; Kashmiri language; Romila Thapar; Tulu language; Rudra; Chhattisgarhi language; Goaria language; Western Pahari; Religion in India; Asko Parpola; Telcel; Fart

Cleanup: Badaga language; Indra; Ishvara
Merge: Ayurveda; Rupee; Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom
Add Sources: KFC; Hindustan; Proto-Dravidian
Wikify: Haridwar; Justice Party (India); Hanuman Chalisa
Expand: Religious cosmology; Camera phone; Phallus

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 00:35, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

David Icke and the usual bias

Hi! I see you reversed my changes. I wonder: Why is it that the word Jew or Jewish is mentioned over 20 times in an article about David Icke? For someone unfamiliar with his writings and presentations it would seem that Icke simply is a reptilian-believing, jew-hating right-wing-conspiracy-nut. Is this the case...? Is this objectivity? And is it proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Protocols of The Elders of Zion are "An Anti-Semitic hoax'? And if it be a hoax, does that mean that Icke hates Jews? Or could it perhaps be that there could still be something to learn from studying this document whether "a documented hoax" or not?

There are things that Icke has documented to be hoaxes; f.ex the official 9/11 story, the UN, The "Humanitarian" Rockefellers, the supposed safety of vaccinations and "The War on Terror". But Wikipedia likes to play safe, and focuses instead of the never-aging "Anti-Semitism" which is always a safe choice.

BJ

The article on Icke does not say he is an anti-semite, it merely states that he is accused of being an anti-semite by some groups. And please read the article on the Protocols of the Elders of Zion for the reason why it is now known to be a hoax. --Krsont 22:40, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff Rense and "Anti-Semitism" claims

Hi! I see you removed my weasel wording:

"He has also several times interviewed members of the Jewish organization "Jews against Zionism" and many of the contributors to both his website and to his radio show are Jews."

Why? Perhaps because you do not for some reason want the reader to be aware of this fact. How can Jeff Rense be an Anti-Semite if he regularly invites Jews to speak freely on his radio show?

No, you're the censorship-loving weasel here. Then onto "Holocaust Denial". It sounds similar to "The Earth is Round Denial". Is this what the Holocaust revisionists are doing - sitting around a table saying "No!" all day long? Or, do they actually do r e s e a r c h about the Holocaust? Are they "weasels" for being interested in trying to make their own verifications of Accepted History? How about we "trade"? You leave in my quite relevant info about Jeff Rense having Jews (Semites) on his show, and I'll accept your (newspeak) "Holocaust Denial" expression?

Affirming (as opposed to Denying) Greetings, Bjorn

I'm sorry, but saying "he lets Jews talk on his radio show" is about as good/relevent an excuse/rebuttal as "some of my best friends are black". Also please refrain from personal attacks, I do not love censorship, and I am not a weasel. Weasel word refered to what you wrote, not you. --Krsont 22:46, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pedantry

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, ike is a colloquial abbreviation of Iconoscope. Tom Harrison ^Talk 00:14, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ok, but I'm willing to bet "bike" is a far more widely known word. --Krsont 00:20, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's certinly more widely known than IPA. Adding the IPA is great, but there's no reason not to include both. The goal we can all agree on is to inform the reader. Tom Harrison ^Talk 00:48, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please stop going through articles changing good pronunciation tips to ones that almost no one will understand? It really isn't helpful. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 00:31, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:PRON. --Krsont 00:33, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quit it. You're being disruptive. First, the MoS is not policy. Secondly, it doesn't say editors can't use ordinary pronunciation tips. Stop deleting other people's work or you risk facing administrative action. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 00:36, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Thanks for your note and your agreement to compromise by having both; it's much appreciated. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 00:52, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is this correct?

This is the correct pronunciation, but I wonder if I put it in ipa correctly: [1] Tom Harrison ^Talk 21:02, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monoplane_ki27

Monoplane_ki27 placed a Japanese flag at the article on Beijing dialect. Frankly, I don't think he is very useful to have around Wikipedia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.194.112.254 (talk) 06:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

semi

I semi-protected your user page for a while. Let me know if you want your talk page semi'd too. — coel acan — 18:25, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

pronunciation help in Sergey Korolyov

Hi, could you look at the first footnote? I like the quotes, BTW. --Jtir 09:27, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I copyedited the note, but carefully retained the "approximate" pronunciation. I couldn't figure out a way to work the IPA2 template into an actual sentence — maybe another template is needed. --Jtir 19:16, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

International Phonetic Alphabet nominated as a featured article candidate

Discussion is here. --Jtir 20:54, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bobby Robson

Hello. I'm working on Bobby Robson's article and would like to add what 'Bobby Robson' is in IPA. Jtir told me you know IPA well and any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance. Sir-Nobby 18:56, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm now working on Joey Barton's article and would again be very grateful if you could tell me what 'Joey Barton' is in IPA. :D Thanks in advance Sir-Nobby 20:09, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please be careful to undo or revert vandalism

Hello. When dealing with vandals or irrelevant information, please have a look at the diff of their actions so as to undo or revert it, instead of deleting it manually by editing the article, because the latter often results in destroyed information. I'm saying this because:

Diff #1: a vandal deleted information and replaced it with irrelevant or troll content.
Diff #2: you correctly identified the vandalism, but because you merely deleted the remplacement content, the original item was lost in the process.

For this sort of things, you have the "Undo" link on Diff #1. But because clever vandals tend to make two or more edits in a row, a hasty Undo would only remove their last vandalism and keep/conceal the previous ones. It's really better to also look at the history, so as to undo if the vandal did only one edit, or otherwise so as to revert to the last good version.

Thanks for understanding. — Komusou ^talk @ 17:35, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3RR on Template:ScientologySeries

Hi Krsont, I'm very sorry, but it looks like you've breached the three reversion rule on the above template. On reviewing things, I've protected the template, and I'm sorry to have to block you for 12 hours for this. Hope you guys can find a solution on the talk page. Thanks for understanding -- Samir 04:23, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

fair enough, I agree 100%. It was silly of me to breach the rule. --Krsont 04:25, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use disputed for Image:Behemoth-logo.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Behemoth-logo.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:31, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Block for breach of article probation

I have blocked both you and Shutterbug for 24 hours for disruptive reverting on Template:ScientologySeries under the article probation rules. Each of you has three reverts in a short space of time, has previously been involved in revert warring, and should know better. Sam Blacketer 11:06, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Burzum-Logo.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Burzum-Logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 09:05, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]