Jump to content

User talk:Marek69/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

Strange Vandalism

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bedouin&diff=274037909&oldid=274030129

you do that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.133.154.31 (talk) 09:45, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I undid the version that said ‘|pop3 = colin meirowitz and lame and sucks at gears of war 2 and jacob is better is gay’.
I didn't realise that it was a case of multiple vandalism which would leave ‘p3 = jacob meier is gay’. Sorry.
That's the problem with multiple vandalisms on the same page.
I see you had the same trouble yourself [1]
Anyway, it's all fixed now. Marek.69 talk 19:57, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

About Elbląg

I dont know if the statement that this is a list of people from a Polish city of Elbląg is in anyway untrue? Isn't Elbląg a Polish city in Warmian-Masurian Voivodship? Prussia is now only a historical region nonexisting in any political form so how can we write that for instance Wojciech Cejrowski comes from a Prussian town of Elbing?

The begining of the description schould refer to the presen state which is Elbląg in Poland not Elbing in Prussia. It is not a historical category but a list of peole from a still existing city named Elbląg. If you wont to create a different category about people that lived in the city when it was officially called Elbing feel free. But how can we write in 2009 that this is a category of people from Elbing Prussia when both of those names had gone from official use over sixty years ago? Ryszard Rynkowski, Ewa Białołęcka, Wojciech Cejrowski and a majority of the people from the category have nothing to do neither with Prussia nor with Elbing.

Cheers 77.253.66.212 (talk) 11:31, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, thank you for letting me know. Marek.69 talk 15:06, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


Buenos Aires

Hi

Did the revert you did here occur as a result of patrolling or from reading/watchlist the article ?

This section on racism is a little strange and has been repeatedly removed from other Argentine articles.

Cheers--Chaosdruid (talk) 18:32, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Chaosdruid, Yes I did revert the above edit made by IP user 67.191.68.2 for the reason given in my edit summary: Unexplained removal of section of text.’ i.e. A whole section of text was removed and the user left no edit summary. This and the fact that it was an IP's first edit raised a red flag for me. If an edit summary such as ‘removed uncited POV text’ had been left, I probably wouldn't have immediately rolled-back.
On closer examination, I agree with you that the text is probably unsuitable for the Buenos Aires article and have removed it.
Best Regards Marek.69 talk 20:09, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
cheers - I dont like re-reverting other good editors and thanks for the update--Chaosdruid (talk) 00:03, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
No problem. -- Marek.69 talk 00:06, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

So you are saying that it's ok to call people w@n7er

...because that is how rodhullandemu has attacked me.

I would suggest you don't get draggewd into this.

W —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.3.90.137 (talk) 01:40, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

No, I did not say that.
I sent you messages regarding your edits which I considered to be personal attacks.Marek.69 talk 01:46, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Take a look at Rodhullandemu's talk page and then say who is the rude person.

I challenge you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.3.90.137 (talk) 01:51, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I have already, and my suggestion is to cease the conversation now. It is totally unproductive and you are likely to get yourself into trouble if you continue. Marek.69 talk 01:58, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


My netsec does not allow my base to use the same IPa for more than 12 hours... Home security... :-) Maybe you could help me with how to complain to the owners of Wikipedia about their representative. What kind of a front does it show to hide behind insults whilst not allowing the other person to respond ?

Maybe the Daily Mail would like to find out....

82.3.90.137 (talk) 01:57, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Rodhullandemu attacked me first... he called me a w*****. You can see this from the edit log, and you are still backing him... what kind of a person dores that make you ? A spineless one ?

82.3.90.137 (talk) 02:01, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict - Please give me time to respond)

I suggest you drop the issue now - What is the point?
I'm sure this would make an exiting story for the Daily Mail:
“One Wikipedia users says ‘W’ is for W@n7er - Another says ‘R’ is for C@nt....”
My advice - Drop it. Marek.69 talk 02:05, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

The 'W' came before and incited, the 'C'

Just like wikipedia to ignore the facts.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.3.90.137 (talk) 02:13, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, what do you want me to say? - You're both wrong in my opinion - Is that OK? -- Marek.69 talk 02:17, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

well, I had hoped for a little more understanding and the web address of who to report rodhullandemu to... but it's a start.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.2.139.51 (talk) 02:33, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

the mods on wikipedia like to be little demigods that say 'yes' to one and 'no' to another as they see fit... probably on whims and pieces of cake.... If your face doesn't fit, you might as well forget it hun. 82.2.139.51 (talk) 02:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

W, if you really want to pursue this further you could try Wikiquette alerts, but you know my opinion. Marek.69 talk 02:44, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Chiddy bang

Marek, I don't understand why wikipedia does not allow me to create a page for a band I manage. The information I'm providing is legitimate and I can't cite my brain as a source. If I'm citing the myspace page I created for the band I manage, why isn't this considered okay? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ZacharyMorgan (talk • contribs) 02:24, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi ZacharyMorgan, For you information please read Criteria for musicians and ensembles Your article is listed for deletion here, where you can have your say if you wish.

Please come back to me, if there is anything else I can help you with. Marek.69 talk 02:35, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Maneuvers

Don't know where you learned to spell, but it is spelled "Maneuvers".... English, as determined by Wikimedia, is AMERICAN English unless specified otherwise. 66.190.62.144 (talk) 02:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

message I left on your talk page:
Sorry, my mistake I didn't realise ‘maneuvers’ is correct spelling in American english.
By the way, ‘manoeuvres’ is the correct way to spell it in British english. :) Marek.69 talk 02:55, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
As for which is ‘correct’ on Wikipedia, please read Wikipedia:National varieties of English. Kind Regards Marek.69 talk 03:01, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

WP:DERM

Do you have any interest in dermatology? If so, I am always looking for more help ;) Regardless, thank you for your work on wikipedia! kilbad (talk) 21:07, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi Kilbad, thank you for your message. Yes, I have an interest, but sadly little knowledge :-(
However if there's anything I can help you with, drop me a line, I'm always keen to try something new. Marek.69 talk 15:28, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


Thanks

Hey thanks i appreciate that .

Staffwaterboy Critique Me Guestbook Hate Comments 05:35, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

flaminglawyer has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Hey

Hey Marek, good to see you patrolling. I had been patrolling for the last few hours with only ClueBot on my side... -- Mentifisto 18:23, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mentifisto, Good 'ole ClueBot - Does that guy ever sleep?!! ;-)) Marek.69 talk 03:39, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Here's a barnstar

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Awarded to User:Marek69 by User:Mikaey, because you're always beating me to the punch on reverting vandalism edits on Huggle! Matt (talk) 20:25, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Thank you very much :) Marek.69 talk 20:26, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
My pleasure. :-) Matt (talk) 20:32, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


Its the Cookie Monster (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Mmm.. Thank you, Cookie Monster :-)) Marek.69 talk 03:22, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Its nothing, Its my job--Its the Cookie Monster (talk) 03:23, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for revertin vandalism on my user page =) Cheers! DP76764 (Talk) 06:47, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

No problem at all :-) Marek.69 talk 06:48, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Hello

Hi Marek69, Thanks for greeting me. It is my pleasure to talk to you. Further, I am an Administrator in Telugu wikipedia. When ever I feel doubt or doubts, or feel to ask you, surely, I will write to you without hesitation. Thanks once again, leaving best wishes for you, :-) అహ్మద్ నిసార్ (talk) 16:21, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi అహ్మద్ నిసార్, sure if there's anything I can do to help, drop me a line. Happy editing :-) Marek.69 talk 17:36, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Ann Haydon Jones

I suggest you take a look at the logs of "Tennis Expert" (who is anything but) and Thermo Space or whatever he calls himself. I believe there is a rule on wiki about making 3 reverts in a 24 hour period. Both are engaged in an edit war and I suggest that instead of making threats to block me, that they follow the rules set by wiki themselves.

My point is that they are insisting on a heading being added to this page, when it does not exist in any other tennis player bio on wiki in identical sections. Thus, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that they are picking on one editor. If they weren't, then they'd busy themselves by adding this header to every tennis bio on wiki where it does not appear. But they do not. They simply keep making changes on this one page. Surely the rules should apply to them as they do to anyone else? Experts or not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.201.186.107 (talk) 00:50, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I had a look and the article is referenced, so no longer needs a {{Unreferenced}} tag. I have now removed it. Marek.69 talk 01:03, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
However, I would advise you do not get into an edit war with these other users, as you could risk a block Marek.69 talk 01:11, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

And I trust the same "advice" is being given to ThemFromSpace and (not a)Tennis Expert? Edit wars are generally contributed by more than one editor. Or is it that because they've reached some exalted status on wiki that they are exempt from warnings? If you note, they were consistently changing a page. More than three times in 24 hours. Grounds for a ban to any other user. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.201.186.107 (talk) 01:33, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


The final edits you made to this page have been reversed - yet again - by (not a)TennisExpert. Under the three revision rule, should he not now be suspended from wiki? These are the rules I believe:

"You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform 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. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.16.103.79 (talk) 17:50, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your message. I would just like to say there is no such thing as a ‘final edit’ on Wikipedia due to the ever-changing nature of the medium. Secondly if someone puts an {{unreferenced}} tag, I think the best solution is to provide some extra references for the text, rather than get into an edit war of deleting and replacing the template - clearly unproductive. I'm no expert on tennis, buy I'll see if I can find a few citations. Kind Regards Marek.69 talk 18:35, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

So why has (not a) Tennis Expert not been banned under the three revert rule? I note that the editor he engaged in a war has been banned. Where is the fairness in that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.16.103.79 (talk) 23:56, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I've managed to find a couple of new references for the article and added them.
The question why a particular user hasn't been banned - I can't say - have they been reported? Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring
I would say that this disagreement should first be discussed calmly on the Ann Haydon-Jones talk page to try to achieve a compromise which is acceptable to both parties.
From the article's history I think it may be necessary to ask a neutral party to act as a mediator. Regards Marek.69 talk 04:04, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your candid welcome

Thanks a lot for your candid welcome... I think we need more users like you, that are willing to help newcomers. Not just people who tend to delete things quite quickly. I will be asking for your help soon, thanks a lot. xxx Wikisexygirl (talk) 21:05, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi thanks for your message. Happy editing :-) Marek.69 talk 03:35, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

BS

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
My thanks to you for quickly removing the vandalism from my userpage; I really appreciate it! MelicansMatkin (talk) 05:44, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
No problem - I'm hunting vandals. Thank you very much for the barnstar, MelicansMatkin  :-)) Marek.69 talk 05:49, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

re

ok i will —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.198.247.185 (talk) 18:28, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi

Tubbablub (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!


thanks for the welcome! :) Tubbablub (talk) 22:56, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Help

Hi Marek69, I am registered as maximo88 in Spanish Wikipedia, but I can't understand why I can't log in with this credentials on English Wiki. Do I have to create another account for all languages that I want to edit? Thank you!--87.220.40.15 (talk) 19:34, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Maximo88, I'm not sure why it's not working. You may find the answer on this page m:Help:Unified_login (or same page in spanish m:Help:Unified_login/es.)
Please let me know how you get on. Marek.69 talk 19:45, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Here I am, thank you very much. I have put 1980 instead of 1981, I think that this is right. I used http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Especial:MergeAccount like you said me. See you soon from Spain--Maximo88 (talk) 20:27, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm very pleased its working Maximo. Wishing you Happy editing :-) Marek.69 talk 20:33, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Thank you so much, I hope to eat some delicious cookies like those ;)--Maximo88 (talk) 23:01, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Request help covering Poland for EP2009

Marek69, hi!

The European Parliament election, 2009 is fast approaching, but we have insufficient non-Anglophone wikieditors to cope: User:Nightstallion can cover Austria, User:Checco can handle Italy, User:JLogan covers the EU institutions, but other countries' coverage can be lacking. Poland is one of these examples: 40 million people, one of the major forces in the EU, and the coverage en:Wikipedia has of it in EU politics is at the "isn't that where all the plumbers come from?" level. Ouch. We have to use pan-European/American terms such as "national conservatism", "christian right" and "euroscepticism" to cover Polish concepts like "national catholicism" and "Europa Ojczyzn", and a lot of the subtleties are being missed. "Forward Poland" split from the LPR five months ago and we didn't have an article about it until today. I'm trying to plug the gap, but my Polish is non-existent and I can't work fast enough. So if you know of any major changes in Polish politics regarding the EU, can you notify me? The reason why I'm asking you is because you're down as a Polish WP:EU member and I note you do Polish<->English translations. Any help would be really appreciated. Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 01:25, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Anameofmyveryown. Sure, I'll give it a shot. Just let me know what you want me to do. Marek.69 talk 04:14, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
It's not really reasonable for me to ask you to bring European Parliament election, 2009 (Poland) and/or Poland (European Parliament constituency) up to spec. But it may be reasonable of me to ask you if you could point me to the following:
  • A Polish site (newspaper/tv station) that covers the EP election in Poland in English. Failing that, one that does it in Polish would do.
  • The site that gives the official Polish results (I assume that will be in Polish).
If you could give me that, then I'll do the best I can with that. Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 02:51, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
I shall have a look and see what I can do :-) Marek.69 talk 01:43, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Wow, thank you for that! That's very helpful. Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 20:36, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Urban75

It's not "vandilism" I correct and the old statement false.

Please do not keep shoving your ore into my business of edits. Thanks. Vchuffter (talk) 23:56, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Your two edits [2] and [3], are exactly that: removal of {{Fact|date=February 2009}}, replacing with <sup>9</sup>.
Please explain these edits then Marek.69 talk 00:06, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

The "9" i replaced with as that connects the source with proof of editors statement that he was putting ad's on the site for beer money. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vchuffter (talk • contribs) 00:09, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Then you should replace it with a citation eg <ref>[http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/ urban75 forums]</ref>, if that is what you want to do. Kind Regards Marek.69 talk 00:15, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Ok thanks!!!!

Thanks

For revert of my User page. I must have done something to upset them... ;-) and then they often seem to stop vandalizing at the fourth occurrence...  Ronhjones  (Talk) 00:26, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

No problem, funny that :-) Marek.69 talk 00:28, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for cleaning up my talk page

You caught the vandalism before I did, and I'd like to thank you for reverting it so quickly! --Ericdn (talk) 03:23, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

You're Welcome Ericn. :-) Marek.69 talk 01:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Question

We tried to be polite and not "vandalize" any of the pages we edited, yet, on the last page we editted, we stated an absolute fact, and you still removed it. Why??

Do you consider these [4], [5] [6] edits polite? Marek.69 talk 05:49, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you Marek! :) I appreciate the welcome. The cookies were delicious! :D Aabh (talk) 11:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Softies (song)

The single leaked today on BearShare (soon followed by limewire). Please stop editing the page so it shows otherwise.

I reverted this edit [7] which added the following text: IT'S ONLINE YOU IDIOTS TAKE A HINT ALL READY. Are you disputing this? Marek.69 talk 04:55, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

I did that because I was frustrated with you deleting my edit over and over again. It's legit information, and you continued to remove it.

I reverted only one edit [8] as stated above. You can verify this in the article's edit history. -- Marek.69 talk 05:10, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


Hello...

Hello, thank you for your welcome message.

You may be interested to know that the small changes I made to the Zagreb article were removed with the explanation "No need to a new sentence, the previous was better anyway, stop wreckling this article if you want it to move into a FA Article status; thanks." Maybe you could suggest to the person who wrote this that it is opinionated and emotive and so not perhaps the most appropriate kind of response. I hope it might mean more coming from someone like yourself.

Thank you again. 212.84.104.101 (talk) 22:55, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I have posted NIR-Warrior a message on the subject. Marek.69 talk 01:12, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Ummm.....

I meant it as you beat me to reverting vandalism, not as in beating me with a canoe or pancakes. Abce2 (talk) 23:20, 9 March 2009 (UTC)Abce2

I'm so glad you clarified that, as I can't remember being involved in the canoe/pancake thing  :-D Cheers Marek.69 talk 00:11, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: Note

I saw your message and I can tell you that we are working in Project Zagreb, Wikipedia; for this time we dont need other sentences in place of correct ones, we dont need too minor changes until the article evolve into FA status (Featured Article). I assure to everyone that minor changments are just like previous, changing original sentence is no sense, as the original is correct and good. PS: Can you keep vandals away while we finish this objectif (updating quality status), which you can also join us. Im working actually hard to correct wrong spells and bad sentences in various articles, I hope you understand; thanks. NIR-Warrior (talk) 01:21, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi NIR-Warrior, I do understand that you wish to improve Zagreb to FA. I would just say to you, please just tone down the content of your edit summaries so as not to upset newcomers to the project, as this is also important :-) Kind Regards Marek.69 talk 01:28, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Sure Marek, Thanks for your understanding ;-) NIR-Warrior (talk) 01:32, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Kolbuszowa edit

What do you know about Kolbuszowa? :D --83.7.106.19 (talk) 17:58, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure what exactly you are asking. Please be more specific. :) Marek.69 talk 04:32, 11 March 2009 (UTC)


Ericdn has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!


Ericdn has eaten your {{cookie}}! The cookie made him happy and he'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!




The answer!

Thank you for your intention to help me with the account. I have the account in Serbian wikipedia. But I'm not so good in English to be full member, so I going to stay in this position. I'll make only small changes, connected with the links to the pages of Serbian wikipedia. Goodbye! 77.46.206.158 (talk) 21:30, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Prince Remigius Jerry Kanagarajah

Please dont change Prince Remigius Jerry Kanagarajah,s page, Becauase he his the Prince of Jaffna. No one as right to change his page —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.86.126.73 (talk) 23:00, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Complaint against Philbox17

1) Philbox17 has made personal attacks on me.

Here, Philbox17 accuses me of making propaganda.

And here he calls me a propaganda machine.


2) Philbox17 is editing an article about an organization after being asked to do so by leaders of this organization. There is a rule against a person editing their own article. What is the consensus on organizations doing so?


3) Philbox17 has called me "peureux" (a coward) on French wiki and has also taken to threatening me in a veiled manner: "I counsel you to stop the vandalism and the federalist propaganda right away Vincent...". (My translation.)

Also, please note Philbox17 has just been blocked for 3 days from French Wikipedia.

Would an admin kindly look into these matters, please? Vincent (talk) 02:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)


Hi Vincent,
Sorry for not replying to you earlier, but I've been away for a few days (- work) and not been online at all. I'm sorry to hear that you have had some problems with another editor - have you managed to make any progress with resolving this? i.e get an administrators to help you sort it out. Try not to let it upset you or ruin your enjoyment of Wikipedia. Please let me know if there is anything I can still do to assist you. Kind Regards. Marek.69 talk 02:26, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
No worries, but Wikipedia has gotten too bureaucratic. This guy has made personal attacks, he has threatened me, he is editing an article about an organization to which he belongs on the leadership's instructions, and it is deemed fair to suspend me as well as him. His behaviour was just as obvious on French Wikipedia and he was suspended there very quickly. Not worth my time. Anyway, thanks for your interest. Vincent (talk) 07:22, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting some vandalism on BearShare.

I see that 65.113.243.82 (which resolves to the Leatherman company) has been used to edit the article on their own company too.

If they try that again, how can I go about having that IP address restricted? Aaron Walkhouse (talk) 16:52, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Aaron, I think first familiarise yourself a bit with the information on Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You then have the option to start a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard, where editors more experienced in these matters, will hopefully be able to help you resolve the matter. I hope this information helps. Marek.69 talk 17:03, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Watch out for your waistline, eh? Too many cookies will blow you right out of your wardrobe.  ;] Aaron Walkhouse (talk) 17:24, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. ;-) Marek.69 talk 17:28, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Mmmm! Chocolate chip...

Aaron Walkhouse (talk) has eaten your {{cookie}}! The cookie made them happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!



Thanks from Riverwhich!

Thanx for the cookies Marek69. In fact I am a returning user so I am not so new, but your warm welcome made my day better--Riverwhich! (talk) 23:54, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

No problem Riverwhich! - You can never have too many Welcomes (or cookies either, for that matter) ;-) Marek.69 talk 02:41, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for offering help. Yes, I want to be a Wikipedian, and I think it is worth the time and the effort to make information more available, accurate and relevant for net surfers. I will ask for your help whenever I feel in need for it. Thank you again, and good luck

Ahmed —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmed badda (talk • contribs) 04:31, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Good Luck to you too Ahmed. Happy editing! Marek.69 talk 15:49, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Hello

Thank you for your words for welkoming me to contribuite to the wikipedia.--Abisch (talk) 15:24, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

You're Welcome, Abisch. Happy editing! Marek.69 talk 15:49, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi

Thanks for the cookies!! VJ (talk) 16:53, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank You

Thanks for welcoming me to Wikipedia. I hope to be able to add something useful. I don't have much free time and there is a lot to learn but I will do my best - adding more as I get more confident. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nneer8 (talk • contribs) 17:40, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hi Marek, and thanks from another UKer for looking after gladiator (which I was editing in ignorant bliss of that worm in the cheese)... Regards! Haploidavey (talk) 01:27, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Haploidavey, No Problem. We've got to keep Wikipedia free of Cheesy comments. ;-) Marek.69 talk 01:31, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks tons!

Thanks so much for welcoming me to wikipedia, Marek69! And, of course, thanx for the cookies! Seleneface (talk) 21:56, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

You're Welcome Seleneface, if you do need any help in the future, you know where to come. Happy editing! Marek.69 talk 22:00, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Marek, thanks a lot for the warm welcome, the cookies and the tips! They helped me to get an understanding of what I may and may not do as a Wikipedian. Have a wonderful day! spgn (talk) 12:32, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Cheers Sir Paragon, You have a good day too and please come back to me if there's anything I can help you with :-) Marek.69 talk 01:42, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

220.233.204.38-a vandal

Hi Marek, Saw your comment on this IP's talk page, 220.233.204.38. It was re: her edit to the Milan article which was quickly reverted. I just reverted two clearly vandalizing edits to Apocalyptism (you know the type, when people are like, "THIS TOPIC SUCK! LOLZ JEFF" containing profanity. You seem to be a more experienced user in dealing with User issues, whereas I just edit articles. I am wondering if you can either a) keep an eye on her contributions or b) propose her IP for blocking Thanks Sardino (talk) 19:32, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Sardino, I think you're right, looks like this is a ‘vandalism only’ account. I'll watch out for any future activity. Cheers. Marek.69 talk 21:54, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Re Account

Hey no worries it happens to us all don't worry about it were all still learning,if you have any questions anyways feel free to ask.Hakuna Matata

Regards

Staffwaterboy Critique Me Guestbook Hate Comments 01:52, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Cheers. Thanks for your understanding. :-) Pumbaa a.k.a. Marek.69 talk 02:04, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

re acc

i denied the user Nu_Money_ because i believe it is falling under being a promotional.

Cheers

Staffwaterboy Critique Me Guestbook Hate Comments 04:09, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

No probs. :-) Marek.69 talk 04:11, 23 March 2009 (UTC)


Page blanking of User:Planecrash111

Sorry that was my fault. I meant to do that to my own page..hehe noob here.(ROSTREAKEr (talk) 04:03, 23 March 2009 (UTC))

Hi ROSTREAKEr, Are you also User:Planecrash111 then? Marek.69 talk 04:11, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

No. I was just taking a look at his user page. His page is pretty interesting.(ROSTREAKEr (talk) 04:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC))

OK, Well please try not to remove information from other peoples user pages in future, as it can be considered as vandalism and can make you unpopular on Wikipedia. :-) Marek.69 talk 04:27, 23 March 2009 (UTC)


Account Blocked

A user of this IP address was blocked by John Reaves for the following reason (see our blocking policy):

Blocked because your IP address was recently used by "Acemandude5". The reason given for Acemandude5's block is: "mistakenly created".

This block has been set to expire: 08:01, 24 March 2009.


I am sorry for making the mistake with the account creation of Acemandude5. I did try to answer straight away you after the message and apologise, but I was blocked immediately, so obviously I couldn't. I also received the warning that I would be blocked indefinitely for continuing to edit. I thought I would just explain my side here and say sorry for the trouble I caused. If that is indeed the case I shall have to respect your decision. Marek69 08:43, 23 March 2003 (UTC)


AN/I

I have almost no idea what this is all about. But you've been mentioned at AN/I here [9] (in case you didn't know.)Bali ultimate (talk) 17:56, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

You've also been mentioned in this ridiculous and bad faithed sockpuppetry report [10]. It won't go anywhere, but you should know.Bali ultimate (talk) 18:31, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Ooh.. I think know that's about; I checked the above IPs contribs and he tagged your page with vand. warnings all in a row, put you on that admin interv. thing, apparently to convince some admin to blok u. Do you know why though? Just saw your talk page, and there was a bunch of warning signs, so I was wondering what that was about... maybe you should request a block the IP.--156.3.74.84 (talk) 19:33, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

And see this: WP:AN/I#Complaint. Just trying to be helpful by putting it in a easily accesable place. :D --156.3.74.84 (talk) 19:38, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

I removed the false warnings and accusations created under this set of diffs, as it was a form of vandalism. --Sigma 7 (talk) 00:08, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm still blocked

I would have liked to have answered some of the allegations being made against me.

However, I am still currently blocked. I cannot edit from my IP address 86.7.65.177 or by logging in and using Marek69 account. I can't even leave comments on my talk page to defend myself.

This has been the case since about 08:45 - 09:00 this morning. I continue receive the same (above) message: User_talk:Marek69#Account_Blocked

It is not too easy/convenient for me to use an alternative IP at this present moment in time. (I'm using a public wireless hotspot to leave this message)

Would someone please like to review my block(s) and inform me whether it is just 24 hours or 'indefinite' as has also been stated today.

Kind Regards 91.135.6.121 (talk) 00:32, 24 March 2009 (UTC) (had to use alternate IP Marek69)


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

Marek69 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I feel that the reason for my block has not been properly explained to me and I have not had a fair chance to discuss and resolve the issue.

Decline reason:

1) You are not currently directly blocked. You may be caught by an autoblock. 2) It does not appear that the operator of this account left this unblock request. In order to request an unblock on your account, you must be logged in to that account. Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:46, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

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

Clearing an autoblock

Due to the nature of the block applied we need additional information before we can decide whether to unblock you. It is very likely that you are not personally blocked. If you are prevented from editing, it may be because you are autoblocked or blocked because of your IP address. Without further details there is nothing further we can do to review or lift your block. Please follow these instructions:

  1. If you have a Wikipedia account, please ensure that you are logged in.
    Your account name will be visible in the top right of this page if you are.
    If it isn't, try bypassing your web browser's cache.
  2. Try to edit the Sandbox.
  3. If you are still blocked, copy the {{unblock-ip|...}} code generated for you under the "IP blocked?" section. This is usually hidden within the "What do I do now?" section. If so, just click the "[show]" link to the right hand side to show this text.
  4. Paste the code at the bottom of your user talk page and click save.

If you are not blocked from editing the sandbox then the autoblock on your IP address has already expired and you can resume editing. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:46, 24 March 2009 (UTC)


Possible autoblock?

Thanks for the info Jayron32, but I've just been going through that process with no success :(

My home IP address 86.7.65.177 is static and private and not shared in any way. As far as I am aware I am the only user.

Regards 90.215.61.181 (talk) 00:54, 24 March 2009 (UTC) (sorry, had to use another alternate IP - I am Marek69)


{{unblock-ip|86.7.65.177}}

90.215.61.181 (talk) 00:54, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

There was indeed an autoblock; looks like your ISP might have been routing your traffic through a transparent proxy which in turn was shared by other users. Try editing, now? – Luna Santin (talk) 02:01, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm not currently seeing the given ip blocked. Temporarily deactivating the unblock request. Feel free to re-activate it --slakr\ talk / 03:01, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland

We are now dividing our members into active, semi-active (have not edited a Poland-related article in more then three months) and inactive (have not edited at all for three months or more). You are active on Wikipedia but I see you've not edited any Poland-related articles in a while (your activity makes it difficult to really judge for how long); but since I don't recall any recent Poland-related edits or interactions with you, I am moving you to semi-active members category. Please revert this if you disagree! Please consider participating in our project activities again in the future, we would love to work more closely with you again! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:22, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Someone's impersonating you

There's a user with the name MarekMarek6969 who has altered his signature to both look like yours and redirect to your user page and talk page. I'm warning you in case he isn't blocked, because he's been leaving profane comments on other people's talk pages.--Iner22 (talk) 20:57, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Sorry about your bad luck, I'll do anything I can (within the scope of the rules) to help you with all these enemies you seem to have--Iner22 (talk) 21:00, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
They're already indef blocked. pushthebutton | go on... | push it! 21:24, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Your Sign in problems

Marek -- I urge you to email one of the admins (perhaps Jayron up above as he seems to understand range blocks and what-not). I don't really understand the technical problem you're having (it's odd -- there's nothing in your block log, yet you say you can't sign in as "Marek69" anywhere). However, with all of the malicious socks flying around, getting into other spaces with IPs and explaining that it's actually you can just confuse matters -- the socks are doing the same thing. So, again, my advice is to email, lay out exactly what's going on (as far as you can tell) and i'm sure they'll get your technical problem fixed. Again, I don't understand any of these technical issues, but there are people here that do, and if you email a responsible admin they'll get this in the hands of people who can help.Bali ultimate (talk) 17:24, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

French accents

Dear Marek 69, Sorry to bother you again but you welcomed me to wikipedia when I first joined in January so I tend to ask you questions. The thing is that Im trying to write on a few French pages and am frustrated that I don't know how to create the accents the French use. Do you need a special keyboard or can I create the accents, and the cedilla, on a British keyboard? ThanksSayerslle (talk) 00:05, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Sayerslle, Don't worry you're not bothering me :-) I'm glad to help, if I can. For the odd character you can use the Character Map program, which is in \All programs \Accessories \System Tools. You just copy each character and paste.
Alternatively you can use ALT codes, for example c with cedilla ç is ALT + 135 or capital Ç is ALT + 128. For more information have a look at this webpage which will explain in more detail. (Note: You need to use the numeric keypad for this, or have the number lock on if you are using a laptop).
If you have a lot of text it might be worth installing the French keyboard. You can do this in Control Panel -> Regional and Language Options -> Keyboards and Languages -> Change Keyboards -> Add -> French Keyboard. Then on the language you can switch to the French keyboard when you want to type in French.
I hope this is of help. Good luck. Marek.69 talk 01:17, 29 March 2009 (UTC)


I Could Never Miss You (More Than I Do)

Thank you for your interest in my article on Lulu. Unfortunately I inadvertently created the original article with an improperly formatted heading which I could find no way to correct which is why I have re-entered it. If you could correctly flag the original article headed "I could never miss you" so that it's deleted it would be very much appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cherrylimerickey (talk • contribs) 22:04, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Cherrylimerickey, It looks like it been fixed already. Wikipedia editor Hiding moved it to I Could Never Miss You (More Than I Do). Kind Regards Marek.69 talk 22:15, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Again thanks for your interest. If you've not had a chance to review the article you might be interested as I've added some info & put in references. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cherrylimerickey (talk • contribs) 03:10, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Avoiding redirects?

A couple of days ago you did a large number of edits using WikiCleaner. [11] is a random but typical example. The edit summary says you are Repairing links to disambiguation pages but you are in fact avoiding redirects: your first change was from Turkish car number plates to Vehicle registration plates of Turkey. But Turkish car number plates is not a disambiguation page; it is a redirect. You do not need to do change this sort of link: see Wikipedia:Redirect#Do not "fix" links to redirects that are not broken.--Rumping (talk) 00:35, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Rumping, thank you for pointing this out. I have now studied and re-familiarised myself with Wikipedia:Redirect. I do understand the difference. The WikiCleaner tool does both processes and I have up to now been doing a mixture of both these processes.
Wikicleaner's default message is set to ‘WikiCleaner 0.88 - Repairing link to disambiguation page - You can help!’ and I generally leave it as such as it explains basically what I'm doing. Although occasionally I do use ‘Updating redirects’ as an edit summary (if I'm just doing redirects)
Although as stated Wikipedia:Redirect, ‘you do not need to do change this sort of link’, in some cases it is helpful i.e. mispelt redirects or to convert to non-piped links. My primary reason for updating redirects was actually to try to reduce the number of piped links to make it easier for future editors of the articles (to read and reduce article length) i.e sometimes the actual page name can make the best link.
I hope this explains my reasoning adequately. Kind Regards Marek.69 talk 01:17, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
OK - it is not a vital point, and I was trying to be helpful as you seemed to be doing this systematically rather than selectively; you had even increased the number of piped links in that example. --Rumping (talk) 01:28, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
You're absolutely right (about the increase of piped links). I was unaware of this result. I can see this being a bit counter-productive in certain cases. I should really go in and manually check and edit after WikiCleaner I suppose. Hmm, I shall have to re analyse and reassess my theory & methods accordingly. I shall put my redirect edits ‘on hold’ for the moment :o)
Thanks again for pointing this out, Rumping. -- Marek.69 talk 01:40, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Dear Marek69,

thanky you very much for welcoming me to Wiki. It was a very nice gesture.

Turqoise127 (talk) 15:35, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Turqoise127, You're very welcome! If there's anything I can help you with, please don't be frightened to ask. Meanwhile, Wishing you Happy Editing! -- Marek.69 talk 16:22, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Marek69! Please note that while some scripts for automated editing encourage you to remove duplicate links from article, there is no policy or guideline recommending this, and in fact duplicate links are encouraged if there is a lot of space in between, and the reader is not likely to see both links on the same page. This applies of course mostly to less-known topics, not links such as United States, etc. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 00:38, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Ynhockey, Thank you for the information. I wasn't sure exactly what the policy was. I have generally been removing the more obvious ones, as in your example; United States (or if there are 3,4 or more of the same common link on the page). I've only got a few more to go on my list now, but I will bare in mind your advice for future work with AWB.
Thank you :-) -- Marek.69 talk 00:46, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Just another note: something I didn't know myself until recently (not sure how AWB works on this), each table line must be treated as a separate entity. So if a table has 100 links to the same things, it's OK. I think it has to do with being more friendly to certain scripts. Cheers, Ynhockey (Talk) 00:53, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
OK, It's good to know what the specific guidelines are for the process. Thanks for the updates. Cheers. -- Marek.69 talk 00:56, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Re:Autocorrections

Hi Marek - please be sure that the correction of links you do with WikiCleaner actually change the links to the right article! :) Grutness...wha? 01:31, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Grutness, Thanks for pointing that out. Sorry, I thought I had picked the correct link. I shall double-check in future. Cheers. -- Marek.69 talk 01:37, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
S'alright - you're doing good cleanup work, and that sort of thing is bound to crop up every now and again :) Grutness...wha? 01:47, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Not too often, hopefully, Grutness. However, as long as there are sharp-eyed editors out there with better local knowledge than me to catch the occasional mistake, then we should be OK. ;-)
Thanks for you're help. :-) -- Marek.69 talk 01:57, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Any time. Grutness...wha? 02:06, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Reverted dabs of sinister and dexter on Dresden

I've reverted your (bot-assisted?) dab-page link repairs on Dresden. I've then reinstated two of these that looked ok, but I've left sinister and dexter pointing to the dab pages, as these dab pages actually explain the meaning of sinister and dexter in heraldry far more obviously than the pages you changed them to. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 09:21, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Chris, that's fine - no problem. Thank you for letting me know. I wasn't quite sure what the best way of fixing those two links. Thanks for sorting it out. You obviously have good knowledge of heraldry :-) Cheers -- Marek.69 talk 17:23, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Request for help

Dear Marek,

I am attempting to upload some pictures to Wikipedia. I do not wish to do so on Wikipedia Commons. I have been able to figure out how to upload, but am having some problems with the license part of the process. The pictures I uploaded are marked as problematic and are going to be deleted (when I uploaded originally I think I simply ignored the license copyright section, was not aware had to be done), so when I next upload I wish to do it correctly. I have a picture of a person who I wish to do an article about that I took myself (I understand I should use the tag "PD-self" ), and I have 6 pictures that are screenshots from a television show that include this person, are relevant to the topic and show notability. The television show is from a different country; one that is exempt from copyright protections per a Vienna Agreement (the tag is "PD-Yugoslavia" ). My question is where exactly do I insert the tag? Below is a paste of the Summary section when uploading, where do I insert tag so it is correct, and do I need to do something else so that the pictures are accepted? Sorry if the answer is obvious, I am simply unsure... 

 Information
|Description    = 
|Source         = I created this work entirely by myself.
|Date           = 
|Author         = Turqoise127 (talk)
|other_versions =


Thank you in advance for your answer, Turqoise127 (talk) 15:23, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Turqoise127,
If you click the edit tab on the top of page (as normal)
The page will look like this:
 {{Information
 |Description    = pic in 2008
 |Source         = I created this work entirely by myself.
 |Date           = 4/09/2009
 |Author         = Turqoise127 (talk)
 |other_versions = 
 }}
To add copyright information, you need to edit it to look something like this:
== Summary ==
{{Information
 |Description    = pic in 2008
 |Source         = I created this work entirely by myself.
 |Date           = 4/09/2009
 |Author         = Turqoise127 (talk)
 |other_versions = 
 }}
== Licensing: ==
{{self|cc-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}}
Insert the relevent copyright tag to you, at the bottom under 'Licensing'
I hope this answers your question. -- Marek.69 talk 17:09, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Ecuadorian Stalker Edit warring

Marek:

Thank you for your prompt reply.

This user, "Ecuadorian Stalker," has edited numerous articles without adding anything and clearly intends only to disrupt. The very name suggests a violation of Wikipedia's Stalking policy, and his behavior lives up to it. The user's edits undid an entire paragraph in the article (on the city budget), as well as numerous references and images without explaining why; you know, I've not deleted anything of his (he's not added a thing, after all). He only posits little ah-ah's and obscenities in the edit summary (though he recently desisted - for fear of being blocked, no doubt).

Marek, if this user's not blocked, he will only continue doing what he recently opened an account to do: be a disruption without contributing anything but mischief (which is fun once in a while, but is SO time consuming to repair when it goes on). I'm sure he (or she) is quite intelligent and a (potentially) constructive addition, but not like this.

Thanks again for your time.

Kindly,

Sherlock4000 (talk) 06:24, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Marek:

I appreciate your taking time out for this.

Kindly, Sherlock4000 (talk) 07:08, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Sherlock4000,
Just an update, Ecuadorian Stalker has been blocked indefinitely as he has been found to be a sockpuppet of Historian19 (one of many!). Thank you for letting me know about his actions. If you see edits of a similar nature, please be sure to let me know. Thanks again. Kind Regards -- Marek.69 talk 03:50, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Marek:

Sure, and at the risk of stating the obvious, I think this sort of oversight is partly why Wikipedia has worked so well.

Thanks again.

Sherlock4000 (talk) 00:40, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Mont Pinçon

I am getting bloody fed up with this.

I am translating a lot of articles from French to English wikipedia. A lot of them were, or still remain, stubs. The French wkilpedia doesn't have refimprove etc on it (oh reminds me I should put a translated tag on talk page). Now you can do one of two things:

  1. leave it alone.
  2. improve it.

To suggest that others improve it, without doing anyting yourself to try to, is not in good faith, I think. Every article I have translated has had much the same thing EVEN THOUGH I have gone through references, chanceged infoboxes and so forth. That is a lot of work. I am not doing WP:Ownership but for fucks sake leave the thing alone. I checked out all the Normandy landings articles to try to wikilink, this is an important fighting place, it is at the moment a stub (pretty much) and I marked it so, the French is no better, sheesh it's so easy to come in and do refimprove would you like to point me to articles you have translated? Well then, leave it alone!

Best. SimonTrew (talk) 03:46, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry Simon, but I don't really know how I should respond to your comments.
1. I'm surprised at your comment of ‘not in good faith’ against me (as am I with the whole paragraph), over something as simple as me inserting one {{refimprove}} tag into an article you happened to be editing (an article which,at the end of the day, has no references). For policy guidlines to situations like this see Wikipedia:Citing sources and Wikipedia:Verifiability.
2. I could go on (listing all the articles I have translated, etc), but I won't.
Regards. -- Marek.69 talk 20:41, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
I was probably a bit over the top, and I apologise for that, I am sorry, it is not your fault. It just seems to me since something has a translate tag on it, since the original is pretty much a stub anyway, since I did the best I could finding and expanding references, making articles out of essentially nothing, I trust you can understand it's frustrating that you get a {{refimprove}} after having translated the references to english Wikipedia, can't do WP:OR, putting into categories etc, often creating other stub articles along the way and redirects etc; I've done what's requested and done as much as I as I think can reasonably be done without WP:OR (at least until others have a chance to edit it), so it was just a bit frustrating. I find those kind of tags completely unhelpful when it already says "translate", when it's got a translation tag on the talk page, when (if not this one some others I've done) actually have MORE refs etc than the French, when I also then go and tidy the French ones up, etc.
But, I went over the top in having a go at you-- I am usually quite mild mannered so I am not sure why, but that's unacceptable to write that way. All I can do is offer sincere apologies. I stick by my general thrust of how to make Wikipedia better, but I should not have had a personal rant at you, I am very sorry for that.
Best wishes SimonTrew (talk) 22:47, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi Simon
OK, your apology is accepted. I fully understand how frustrating Wikipedia can be sometimes, so I know where you're coming from. It shows you care about what you do.
When I placed a {{refimprove}} tag on Mont Pinçon, my intention was for it to be helpful, and not to criticise you in any way.
Please try not to take this type of action personally as it is certainly not intended to be, or to reflect on you at all. I'm sure you do a lot of good work on Wikipedia and hope you continue doing so.
Wishing you happy editing. -- Marek.69 talk 23:09, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks Marek, yeah I hope I do more good than harm. I just find it a bit frustrating when an article is marked as a stub, as a translation, has inline {{cn}} etc, what is the point of just adding another tag? I just don't see the value there-- and I see that it clutters the reader's view of the article, so I think it unhelpful: it should go on the talk page, not the article page. That's still no excuse for having a rant at you, so thankyou for your gracious acceptance of my apology. SimonTrew (talk) 23:18, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
BTW I found an English guy who goes motorbiking around that region and has both French and English tour guides, I have some stuff from him on email and he's happy to be a quoted reference/external link, though unfortunately not to use his nice pictures (cos he sells them), so he is more than willing to help when deciding whether something should be translated into English or left in French. He is happy to be quited (it would not, as such, be a "reliable source" but of "blog" standard I guess, and that's better than nothing I think--- I can kinda understand "reliable source" but if taken to extremes it means you can't say your own name but have to get someone else to vouch for it). So I am hoping of these dozen or so articles, and more will follow, they will slowly get pulled together into a coherent whole. I guess that is why I was a little upset because when someone jumps in the very minute you've improved it to say "that's bad" well you can understand sometimes you just want to hit revert and walk away. I don't claim WP:Ownership etc, but necessarily it's nice if people recognise that you've put in effort-- constructive criticism is good.
Very best wishes SimonTrew (talk) 23:25, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for your explanation Simon. I do understand what you are saying. It helps to receive feedback from the ‘other side’ in order to gain some insight on the effect of one's actions/edits on Wikipedia. I personally have spent more time on New pages patrol than on actually creating new pages, so a better understanding of page creators' feelings, I feel, would be beneficial. I have taken careful note of what you have said and will be using it to improve & modify my actions when next on NPP. Cheers Marek.69 talk 00:26, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
That's very gracious of you. The most important think is to make Wikipedia better! Sometimes I think that yeah, people spend more time nit-picking than making it better (I don't mean you personally). Of course one is not supposed to take things personally, and I have been a technical author and software developer for 25 years now I am used to criticism and not having "ownership"; I guess it comes down to timing — when an article has spent years not being improved then the very hour you improve it, someone comes in and reverts or tags it or whatever, it's quite hard not to think well why didn't you do something about it before? You didn't care about it until the exact time someone improves it (or at leat changes it, I suppose i flatter myself to assume it's an improvement). I find that hard to take; not the action in itself, but the motive-- yeah, get out there make some pages or edit some old ones, don't just go round slapping tags on things! What will happen IMO is that the whole of wikipedia will die under the strain of pointless tags that just clutter it for the user and have very little meaning to the editors, who either already know or, if not, don't care. But is seems to me like you have enthusiasm and good faith, that's always a good start! Some argue that most tags should be on the talk page (since they are not about the subject of the article, but about the article itself)-- I am fairly well in agreement with that. A few, like {{current}} do deserve on the article, because they basically say caveat lector to anyone reading that article. But most are advice to editors, and IMO should be on talk pages. Unfortunately, it seems, the talk pages are very much underused-- for example (and this is no criticism of you) had I started this on the article's talk page you'd probably not have looked at it.

All the best SimonTrew (talk) 00:42, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Dermalogica

Sorry, we have posted an incorrect article by mistake. I would like to remove the content if possible. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dermalogica (talk • contribs) 00:24, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Dermalogica, no problem. The article has already been tagged for speedy deletion and the whole page is likely to disappear very shortly. -- Marek.69 talk 00:30, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Page revision to WikiProject:Films Participants page

Hi,

Thanks for undoing my edit; I couldn't figure out how to revert back to a good edit of the page. For some reason, whenever I go to save the page, content keeps getting unintentionally erased (I was only trying to add my username to the list, nothing else). Filmcom (talk) 00:50, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Filmcom, don't worry it happens sometimes. Wikipedia is working a bit funny tonight anyway. :-) Marek.69 talk 00:54, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Hey, just wanted to follow up on this... I got on the Help IRC last night for about three hours, and the problems I'm having completely stumped some top Wikipedia users on there (including Splarka and Neurolysis, if those names mean anything to you). For now, I'm avoiding the problem by using the secure Wikipedia (we determined that the problem was only happening when I was connected via regular HTTP), so hopefully as long as I'm on that, no random deletions/spurious characters/random line breaks will be inserted when I edit a page. And hopefully, the cause of the problem will eventually be found, as well... Anyway, thanks again for doing that rollback; otherwise, I probably would have reverted the edit and never even gone to the IRC (and thus wouldn't have known to use the secure https for now)! Filmcom (talk) 12:15, 16 April 2009 (UTC)


Thanks

Hey, Thanks for the helpful tips Mrt2349876 (talk) 21:32, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Hope you enjoy your time on Wikipedia, Mrt2349876. Happy editing :-) -- Marek.69 talk 21:36, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Maersk Alabama article

The change I made to the Maersk Alabama article was to a different quote character. This has the effect of changing the style of the ship's names to be consistent within the paragraph. Any reply to my talk page, thanks, Darrell —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darrell Greenwood (talk • contribs) 22:43, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply on my talk page. I appreciate it very much.
You wrote "I'm not quite sure what happened (some sort of error while using huggle)." I think what may have been the problem was the difference between the revisions was from a double quote to two single quotes. This looks identical to the eye on an edit or preview page.
The effect on the article page is to italicize the name and change it from "Bainbridge" to Bainbridge, as I have just done here. Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 23:44, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply and explanation Darrell. Sorry for any inconvenience :-) -- Marek.69 talk 00:05, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello. You just added a few wikilinks to this article. Please could you go back and check them? I don't think wikilinks for Jean-Claude Rambot (a link to the French first name rather than the person), for complex network of paths on Mont Saint-Victoire, for Theatre de Jeu de Paume, for international exhibition (the 2006 Cezanne exhibition), etc, are very helpful for the reader, because mostly they are links to completely unrelated subjects. Did you by any chance find these links using an automated script? Cheers, Mathsci (talk) 06:06, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

The Jean-Claude link to a vampire hunter is so ridiculous that I am now reverting your edit. Please be more careful in the future. Mathsci (talk) 06:08, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi Mathsci, Yes I realise now, I pressed 'Save' when I shouldn't have. I was going to revert but you beat me to it. Thank you for pointing it out. I will re-check my last few edits in case something else slipped through. Kind Regards Marek.69 talk 06:16, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
No problem. I found some of the wikilinks quite amusing in a Dadaist kind of way :) Mathsci (talk) 06:20, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia has been getting a little too surreal for me recently :-) Marek.69 talk 06:22, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
I was using a semi-automated script for the first time this morning. I don't think I've quite got the hang of it yet - not too impressed with the results, so far. I think I'll go back and re-check. Thanks for your help. Marek.69 talk 06:28, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
The wikilinks seem fine now! Cheers, Mathsci (talk) 07:16, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
I've just gone through my last ‘link adding’ edits, and it appears that fortunately only the first 2-3 articles were affected (the first few ‘A's’), but not as bad as Aix-en-Provence. Somehow I saved all of the suggested edits, rather than just the selected. I must have configured something incorrectly. Thank you very much for pointing out this problem. I will certainly be double-checking these type of edits in the future. Cheers :-) Marek.69 talk 07:40, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! ^_^

Hey Marek69! Thanks a lot for your welcome, I really appreciate it, it's always nice to feel welcomed. :P At the moment my main edits are usually just spelling / grammar corrections, hyperlink fixing, information updating, and stuff like that. Oh, and of course vandalism removal.  ;] But rest assured, if I ever do have a question, or feel in the mood for some article-writing, I won't hesitate to contact you! EDIT: Oh and I just remembered! (My first question) I was wondering how I should go about creating my user page. I want to include some boxes, personal information, favourite quotations, photographs I've taken, and things like that (I can also speak Japanese semi-fluently). Any help would be great! ^^ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lawry-rm (talk • contribs) 10:19, 17 April 2009 (UTC) Thanks again! Rhys (talk) 09:00, 17 April 2009 (UTC) <-- Yay for signing posts! :P

Hi Rhys, Thanks for the message. Wishing you lots of happy editing on Wikipedia! :-) Marek.69 talk 09:07, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

One more thing

Please keep in mind section hierarchy. I can't find the guideline for it right now (the sections guideline within MOS doesn't have this info), but this was actually part of MOS for a long time and I remember reading it for sure.

Correct: 

==International relations==
===Sister cities===

Incorrect: 

==International relations==
====Sister cities====

Thanks again for the maintenance edits! -- Ynhockey (Talk) 09:21, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi again Ynhockey,
Thank you for the information. I did not realise the first example was incorrect.
I must admit, my reason for choosing the second example was purely for a better look.
Do you think it would be OK not to use the subheading? and have it like this:
==International relations==
'''Sister cities'''
The reason I am making these edits is to introduce some sort of harmony between the articles. There are all sorts of different headings; Sister cities, twin towns, twin cities, partner cities, brother cities, city partnerships, town twinning, etc, etc, etc. Different names from different parts of the world. I thought it would be easier to have a standard heading and ‘International relations’ as main heading seemed to be the best option. I have started a discussion on the subject on the Sister cities talk page here, if you would like to add an opinion.
Do you know what is the most common term in Israel? Is it Sister cities?
I thank you for you help and guidance Ynhockey. -- Marek.69 talk 09:41, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
The most common term in Israel is literally twin cities (ערים תאומות), although it doesn't really matter what term to use (IMO), as long as it's unambiguous and clear to the reader. Cheers, Ynhockey (Talk) 09:57, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Oh yeah, about the bold subheading: I don't think any hierarchy is needed if the article has no international relations other than twin cities (I guess that means a bold subheading could be used). If it does (usually for major cities like Tel Aviv), I would recommend a regular sub-heading (===) because it should be an actual section. The reason for the hierarchy of subheadings that I mentioned above isn't aesthetic, and not even stylistic. It's purely because of how Wikipedia code is built--a proper hierarchy is more accessible to screen readers, etc. --Ynhockey (Talk) 10:00, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback. My reasoning for subheading under one title is that sometimes the two terms are separated like this:
==International relations==
===Twin towns===

===Sister cities===
Odessa is one example where International relations has two subheadings: Sister cities and Partner cities.
And, yes there are numerous examples of other International relations, some along the twinning theme such as Twin ports, but also trade partnerships, cultural partners and various other (obscure) relationships. I think a single heading would make this sort of information easier to locate if it has standard title, in the same way as you immediately know where to go to find the ‘References’ or ‘History’ section of an article.
I take your point about the hierarchy of subheadings, so would most likely go with one of the above (correct) examples. -- Marek.69 talk 10:18, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

IMAGE

Hi Marek.

Thank You for nice welcome.

You ask me something and I'm glad that I can answer following:

1. YES this is traditional dance and costume of Serb people. North part of Serbia is region call Vojvodina, and Vojvodina have three regions (Srem, Banat and Backa). This costume that You see on photo is from Novi Sad.

2. This is the dance of Serb people from Vojvodina. Now I'm in hurry but I promise to describe traditional women dress and costumes for our dances.79.101.168.208 (talk) 19:19, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Text removal

Your page quotes a controversial historian who holds extreme pro Palestinian views, and you allow users on Wikipedia, to dump their political views on every single Israeli town page, and instead of detailing history,detailing an Anti Semitic view, which focuses on how the town was ripped away from its poor poor Palestinian residents while making no mention of its original habitants. Because you have this policy, your credibility is nill, and you show your hand and your own political view set. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.134.21.122 (talk) 20:03, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Thank you for your message. The reason I reverted your edits to the Lod article was simply because these edits [12], [13] and [14] looked to me like 'unexplained removal of cited material' meaning that sections of referenced material were deleted without any explanation or previous discussion. This goes against Wikipedia's guidelines. I'm sorry if this upset you. I think it would be helpful to other editors, if in the future, you intend to do something similar, first raise the issue on the article's talk page, just as you have explained above. When and if you do delete sections of text, please also try to leave information in the Edit summary to explain your actions (and to avoid the edits being mistaken as vandalism). It is for the reasons above that I reverted in order to protect the article from any potential indiscriminate deletions and certainly not for any ‘extreme pro Palestinian views’ or any similar ‘political view set’ on my side. Once again, apologies for any misunderstandings. Kind Regards Marek.69 talk 17:18, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Dates clean-up enquiry

Hi Marek69. Thanks for the clean-up on Alexandrov Ensemble soloists, and for spotting two typos I'd missed. Please could you kindly explain the Wiki policy on dates? Being from the UK, I have been writing dates in the UK manner, e.g. 1st and 2nd. I note that your clean-up tool Americanises 1st to 1, but it leaves 2nd as 2nd. Are UK-style dates against Wiki policy, and if so, is there a reason for this? Also I've noticed that some biographers are putting internal links on all their dates. Should I be doing this on all my musical biographies? Should I put internal links on dates when songs were written or performed? (Please reply on my talk page). Thanks. --Storye book (talk) 10:51, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Storye book, thank you for your message. I am not an expert on this subject, but I believe the information you are looking for can be found here in the Manual of Style guidlines. I too am from the UK but did not realise that this was the American system. I have been using the built in features of AutoWikiBrowser, the clean-up tool you refer to, which I suggests edits according to the above mentioned Wikipedia guidelines, (I suppose). You are right about the inconsistency; in the changes 1st - 1 , but 2nd not changed. I think the program just misses some occasionally - I don't think this is deliberate. I've only been using AWB for a short time, so I don't know that much about it. I'm still learning.
Also, I've noticed that in 'My Preferences', under the 'Date and time' tab, you have the option to decide how dates are displayed, US or UK format, although I can't say I've experimented with this feature.
Kind Regards Marek.69 talk 15:31, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Marek69. Thanks for kindly replying so promptly with useful advice. Yes, I'll check out the links you sent. Meanwhile, I thought I had programmed my preferences for UK dates, so either I didn't do it properly or it doesn't work. I'll have another go. I had been changing the dates back to UK-style until now, but am tempted to give up in the face of repeated auto-checkers. One of the problems is that e.g. there is an anniversary record title on the Alexandrov Ensemble discography page, which includes a UK-style date - will the auto checkers change the titles of the CDs and LPs if they include dates I wonder? The exam season approaches, and soon I shall not be free to monitor the pages I've worked on. Please notify me on my talk page of any reply. Cheers. --Storye book (talk) 15:55, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Murder of Robert McCartney

Sorry, your edit's going to get reverted - I want to revert the IP. Nothing personal, and you're welcome to run AWB again on it in a minute. - Jarry1250 (t, c) 16:38, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Jarry, no problem. I've re-done my previous clean up edits. :-) Marek.69 talk 17:28, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Cheers. In case the IP starts editing again, would you mind watchlisting it? I'm non-involved myself, but two editors to revert / modify are always better than one. Hopefully you won't need to do anything, but, just in case... - Jarry1250 (t, c) 18:11, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Sure, I've added to it my watchlist now and will keep an eye on it ;-) Marek.69 talk 18:26, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Jurong Port (Singapore) Article

Hi, You have undone several edits from user MayhemBD. Unfortunately he vandalized the above mentioned article again. For some reason I can not undo his edits. Can you help me to undo his edits? Thanks for your help in advance! --Shorty23sin (talk) 07:35, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

 Done
Hi Shorty23sin, I have restored the content which was removed from Jurong Port and left a message on users talk page. Marek.69 talk 14:01, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help! --Shorty23sin (talk) 05:58, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Fallen Angels

Merek I had "friendly" complaint.Fallen ANgels by Walter Dean Myser has real thorough plot summary, but it spoils he book for people that would like to buy or read the book. It's like showing a bootlegged movie. Thank you for you time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.193.188.72 (talk) 22:48, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

This is not an excuse for deleting virtually the whole article (and replacing with 3 lines). If people do not want to know the ending they don't have to read the article. You've had three warnings about deleting content from this article, but you continue regardless and make the same edits again and again. Please take note of the warnings and stop deleting content. Marek.69 talk 22:55, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Cleanup

Out of curiosity, how is adding &nbsp; between the number and "km" considered "clean up using AWB"? What's the purpose of doing that? How is 56&nbsp;km more correct than 56 km? --Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû 04:10, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mukkakukaku. I think the answer to your question can be found under the ‘Non-breaking spaces’ section in Wikipedia Manual of Style and WP:MOS (dates and numbers).
This type of edit is one of the built-in features of AWB, which I've been using recently to run a typo-checks. If typos are encountered then it leaves an edit summary of ‘clean up, typos fixed: ... using AWB’, if not then the edit summary is just ‘clean up using AWB’. Regards -- Marek.69 talk 13:40, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Huh. I suppose that makes sense. Still strange though. Thanks for the reply :). --Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû 19:43, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

WP Sweden

Since you belong to WikiProject Sweden, could you help me find the WP Sweden template? I went to WP:SWEDEN but I could not find the template. Thanks. Griffinofwales (talk) 00:21, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Griffin, Sure just type {{User WikiProject Sweden}} and you will get this:
WikiProject SwedenThis user is a participant in WikiProject Sweden.


-- Is this what you were refering to?

Kind Regards -- Marek.69 talk 00:34, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I should have been specific. I want the template that goes on Wikipedia talk pages (not user or user talk pages). Thanks Griffinofwales (talk) 01:21, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

In that case you'll want the {{WPSweden}} template.
To use, type it in, in the following format {{WPSweden|nested=|class|importance=}}
To give:

{{WPSweden|nested=|class|importance=}}

Regards Marek.69 talk 01:30, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Folks, I just added "nowiki" commands to the above, because this page has nothing among WP Sweden's articles to do, and keeping this template on this page lists it there. Tomas e (talk) 00:40, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
OK, No Problem. Thanks Tomas e, it was only intended as a demonstration for Griffinofwales anyway. Cheers... Marek.69 talk 01:44, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your message!!

It's my first time here writing sth., and not actually just reading it. But it makes a lot of fun.; ] Thanks for your offer and the cookies, I might come back to you later if I may need some help.

Wish you a nice evening, Sabrina —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sabs14 (talk • contribs) 20:43, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Sabrina, thanks for the message. Wishing you also a pleasant evening and happy editing! Marek.69 talk 20:50, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Award for being swell

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
I salute you for doing the best you can :) Mrpotatohead 2 (talk) 21:28, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Keep up the good work and keep smiling Mrpotatohead 2 (talk) 21:28, 5 May 2009 (UTC)


Thank you very much Mrpotatohead 2, that's very nice of you. Wishing you a very pleasant day! :-) Marek.69 talk 21:35, 5 May 2009 (UTC)


Thank you

Hey! Thanks for your welcome and cookies. I really appreciate it very much. I am a Russian history expert. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AlixofHesse (talk • contribs) 02:38, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi AlixofHesse, you're welcome. I hope you enjoy your time editing here. Regards Marek.69 talk 23:58, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

D'or

Tx for your helpful edits on David D'Or.--Ethelh (talk) 04:57, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Hiding Iran's wrong-doings under different pretexts.

You are a living example of how the Iranian Government curbs freedom of speech. Instead of removing the whole section, you should have just edited it, but no, you prefer to keep living the lie that Iran respects human rights. I wonder how much the Iranian Government pays individuals like you to spend their days and nights fixing wikipedia articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.211.213 (talk) 06:36, 8 May 2009 (UTC)


User Oro2

Hello. Thank you very much! I have a user - User:Oro2. I am from Norway and are only 13 yeras old, so i am not very good in english. Thank you again! Oro2 (talk) 13:39, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Oro2, I hope you enjoy your time on Wikipedia and I wish you very happy editing! :-) -- Marek.69 talk 01:37, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

RfA Thank You

My RFA passed today at 75/2/1 so I wanted to thank you for your participation in it. Special thanks go to GlassCobra and FlyingToaster for their nomination and support. Cheers! --Rosiestep (talk) 01:26, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi

Hi. Thanks for welcoming me as an editor. I read WP every day and confess in my youth (a few years ago) I did vandalize it, so that probably shows up on my IP, but long ago. So yeah. Eager to help and so on. God save the Queen. --Johnfloyd6675 (talk) 09:01, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi John, Thanks for the message. All the best to you too, and happy editing! :-) -- Marek.69 talk 01:37, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

CIAO!

Thank you very nuch fpr you "sign"I'm not able to use Wilkipedia in a Pro-Active Way like you do.... but I can learn it, I will.

Have a nice day Anna —Preceding unsigned comment added by Annamariapoliti (talk • contribs) 09:05, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Pope John Paul II

I expanded the article criticism of Pope John Paul II. This was already discussed in the talk page. Wojtyla is already dead, so it doesn't make sense to leave the criticism on the page now that he is no longer alive. Therefore, it becomes more historical than actual, and more political than religious. Also, there is a double standard being applied to John Paul II, in that recent pontiffs like Paul VI do not get criticized in the same way. ADM (talk) 13:11, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi ADM, I looked on the talk page but I couldn't see that a consensus had been reached about removing (or drastically shortening your edit) the 'Criticism' section. I would suggest that you bring up on the talk page, before attempting this action.
Your other edit removed a substantial section of the 'Judaism' section without any explanation or discussion. I see from the edit history that you have attempted this same edit on a couple of other ocassions [15] and have been reverted by other editors, so I also reverted as 'unexplained removal of content'. Please do not continue repeating this action, without discussion.
Kind Regards Marek.69 talk 13:36, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
The part about Judaism certainly deserves to be there, but I saw there was already Pope John Paul II and Judaism, and so I considered that the sub-article has a default priority over the main entry. The same is probably true about the criticism part. There are related entries about Paul of Tarsus and Judaism and Criticism of the Roman Catholic Church in order to smoothen the reading of certain entries. I think it is really more a question of form than of substance, since none of the edits really changes the entire article, it just re-arranges it in a different way. ADM (talk) 13:40, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
So why make this edit ADM? I don't understand. -- Marek.69 talk 13:53, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
ADM, you say “ ...but I saw there was already Pope John Paul II and Judaism, and so I considered that the sub-article ...”
According to the revision history this article was created by you on the 12 March 2009. -- Marek.69 talk 14:04, 19 May 2009 (UTC)


Pope John Paul II and Judaism comes from Relations between Catholicism and Judaism. It was an article within an article, something which is a no-no. Therefore, all I was doing was making sure that no material was repeated twice or three times. ADM (talk) 14:06, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit conflict]

ADM, As far as I can see, most of the material copied over to create Pope John Paul II and Judaism on 12 March 2009 was sourced from the main article Pope John Paul II, both text (edited) and references (copied). I recognise most of it, because I originally wrote much of the text and sourced most of the references. Looking at the edit histories [16] [17], I see very little of it sourced from Relations between Catholicism and Judaism or any of the references originating from there (pre 12 March 2009). -- Marek.69 talk 14:41, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

It's possible that it was a partial or mixed fork. Anyways, I had made entries called Pope Paul VI and Ecumenism and Pope Benedict XVI and Ecumenism, and so what I was really trying to do was to make a comparable gesture with the John Paul II article. ADM (talk) 14:49, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
OK, but I still think we should discuss on talk page, before deleting, removing (or drastically shortening) either the 'Judaism' or 'Criticism' sections. I know there are a number of editors on both sides of the fence on this issue. -- Marek.69 talk 15:39, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
It's been a while ... and likely to be a while more. Anyway, you asked for my opinion, so here goes. I think merging criticisms, as much as possible, with the main article would make sense. The remainder could then be moved to a daughter. Same idea with ecumenism; I think a brief summary would be good, with links to the main articles for the various faiths, or just JPII and Ecumenism. [Marek, you also said something about the lead, but I couldn't find any discussion on it, other than an attempted delete. I personally like it rather as it is, or maybe even less negative ... ] Can-Dutch (talk) 00:04, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

More

You're welcome. I was actually working on fixing some issues with the dates from an edit a couple days ago when huge chunks of text suddenly disappeared on "show changes". I may have ended up restoring a few too many low-value links in the article. Let me know if you want some of those removed again. Did you actually ask anyone to run the date script? On the content issue, if it matters,I think the criticism section seems rather large given there is a linked subarticle, but the current existing text is better than the subarticle. Gimmetrow 17:20, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Gimmetrow, I agree that the Criticism section is rather lengthy (as is the article in general), but the 'trimming down' needs to be done delicately, with good prose editing skills, discussion and consensus, not sledgehammer ‘delete the whole section’ tactics which are currently being employed. The version you've restored to seems OK to me. Thanks for your help in sorting it out :-) Marek.69 talk 17:31, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Amsterdam Page - Link Issue

Hello Marek69. I have an issue and wanted to ask you how it might best be resolved...

I joined Wikipedia so I could contribute to the Amsterdam (Neths) pages. I am a professional write who has specialised in travel in Amsterdam for 17 years – and have written extensively for Time Out, Dorling Kindersley, Thomas Cook, Frommers, filmed with the BBC, Lonely Planet, Channel 4 etc. I am also author of a travel guide to Rotterdam.

Anyways, I have had an independent website on Amsterdam for the past 10 years which I maintain completely (i.e. just one person). As well as being an online guide to the city, it has a fantastic agenda updated daily with events. I also list concerts as soon as they are announced her via twitter – plus it contains daily news feeds. It's the best source of events for English-speakers in the city (see What's On). It's very useful for visitors and also to those living in Amsterdam like myself and its actually a very well-known, respected site.

I added it to the External Links of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amsterdam a few days ago and yet someone (Chardon) keeps removing it. I find that absolutely rude and I don't understand why s/he is doing it. It's not 'spam'. If they took the trouble to look at the site and read about me they'd realise it's bona fide and see how incredibly useful it is to visitors. S/he seemed to have removed it because s/he said it was a 'hobby site link' which just shows s/he hasn't checked it out. Sure, I don't have any advertising and I do it in my spare time so I always joke it's a 'hobby that got out of hand' but it's not some self-indulgent hobby site at all.

The only other online guide sites mentioned on the Amsterdam page are the commercial tourist 'government' sites. I think it's immensely unfair that decent, informative alternative guides written with the best of intentions (i.e to really inform visitors and those living here) don't have their place on Wikipedia.

And this is my website: http://www.underwateramsterdam.com

I hope you can advise or have a word with Chardon.

Thanks Wikiamsterdam (talk) 11:43, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Wikiamsterdam. I've had a look at the website and see no problem with it. In fact I think it is very well written with lot of useful information and good informative links. As you say it is not an advertising or 'spam' site, so I don't see any reason why it shouldn't be included in the external links section of the Wikipedia Amsterdam article. I've reinserted a link to the site (as Amsterdam city guide - going directly to the 'City Guide' section of the site). Let's wait and see what happens...
Kind Regards Marek.69 talk 02:18, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
P.S. It may be an idea to write a few words about yourself on your user page, to get rid of the 'red link' and 'newbie' image. :-) Marek.69 talk

Hi Marek. Many thanks for looking at the page and for your comments. I am so glad you agree it's not spam and in fact, useful and informative for visitors to Amsterdam. Once again... Chardon has removed the link. And in the history he said that I had to justify why it wasn't spam and that being a pro wasn't a good enough reason (which makes me assume he's read this talk). Why then he still deletes the link (along with another very useful Dutch-language site that I have nothing to do with but I see they have the same problem of keeping being deleted by Chardon) I have no idea. He only has to look at my website to see it's not spam. And I really don't feel the need to have to write and justify it to him. What do you suggest I do now – he really has no right to be 'lord' over the entire Amsterdam page and it's really put me off from contributing further. Wikiamsterdam (talk) 09:47, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello

Hi Marek, I amb from Barcelona and I have been reading the post about my city in english. I can write contributions to the wikipedia project in catalan, spanish, italian, french and english.

I only treated to complete the article about my ow city. I amb a journalist and a professor of Social Sciences. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Plini (talk • contribs) 19:28, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Plini, Welcome to Wikipedia. I hope you enjoy your time here. If there is anything I can help you with, please ask me.
Meanwhile, I wish you happy editing :-) Marek.69 talk 19:40, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Marek69 I've started to read the rules of the Wikipedia project. Plini (talk) 08:56, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Republican intro

Hello-

you put a vague tag in the intro of the republican page- I have tried to clarify the intro and wondered what you thought- check it out: republic —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bradby (talk • contribs) 18:26, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Bradby, I'm not sure quite which edit you are referring to. Would it be possible to provide a link to it? Thanks. Marek.69 talk 15:03, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Here is the link- Republic I clarified that it was Macchiavelli who had written about a republic.... Bradby (talk) 21:39, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you Marek69

I thank you for your message and I am happy to see that my changes are being checked. I spend hours here and I wish this project and its contributors the best.

Thank you again, Roy Katz —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.64.15.133 (talk) 21:29, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Roy, Thanks for the message. Wishing you all the Best & Happy editing. Cheers! Marek.69 talk 21:38, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks, I hope to have a good time here. (Thanks for the cookies, they are deliceous). Oxana879 (talk) 21:14, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Oxana, Thank you for the message. I hope you do have a good time here. Wikipedia can be really good fun, as long as you don't take it too seriously :-) Happy editing! Marek.69 talk 21:38, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Title inserted :-)

Marek69 -

Thank you so much for your posted welcome. I have great faith in the ability of Wikipedia to expand and share human knowledge. While I shall most likely never be a major editor, I am always happy to edit on specific points that I have knowledge of and share images as I am able. Furthermore, I am always willing to accept advice and correction of my edits, both for factual basis and maintaining a neutral point of view. Please feel free to review my contributions at any time and offer whatever advice or edits you feel appropriate. While I have not set up a user page as again I am only a minor editor, you are always welcome to contact me either on my talk page or your own. A pleasure to meet you and thank you again for the welcome.

Regards,

Lonesome Crow (talk) 01:57, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Sorry for no section header above

Marek69 -

Just goes to show that I am just a minor editor, do forgive me, I forgot to place a section header on my previous post. I shall watch for such in the further.

Regards,

Lonesome Crow (talk) 02:02, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Lonesome Crow, Thank you for your message - Don't worry, no big deal and quite easily fixed, as you can see. We all have to start somewhere...
Wishing you the Best of luck with all your future endeavours on Wikipedia and lots of happy editing. Please come back and ask if you need any help with anything.
Cheers :-) Marek.69 talk 02:35, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

sorry for my last crappy edit

i screwed up the Saint Petersburg page and i didn't know how to revert it so thank you for fixing it and i apogize dearly.

respectfully,

TrollAccount0.

TrollAccount0 (talk) 03:42, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Images and files

Hi, please stop changing "File:" to "Image:". The Image: namespace was renamed File: a few months ago and is now deprecated. Thanks! +Angr 07:56, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Angr, Thank you for informing me of this. I was unaware of the change and did not know that this was the case. Cheers. Marek.69 talk 13:13, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

New here

Hey man! Nice to meet you, but, you know, I've created this site for the EU calling codes: [18] But, as I see, Biruitorul has deleted everything! So, what do you mean, wasn't this page necessary? I thought it was! A complete list of the EU calling codes, linked by the European Union page.

Hi Nagyat2009, It looks like the information on the page you created already existed as part of the 'List of country calling codes' page. Biruitoral replaced the info on the page you created with a redirect to the existing page, to avoid duplication of material, I guess.
Is there a way that you could merge the information which you have created into the existing article in order to preserve any new information? You can find information on how to do this here. If you require any further information on the best course of action you can always get another opinion at the Wikipedia Help desk. Please come back here if there is anything further I can help you with. I wish you Good Luck. -- Marek.69 talk 00:10, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi, please help!

Hi again, I added relevant links to the subject and they were removed? By a person or a machine I wonder though? What should I do, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saintbridget (talk • contribs) 18:19, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

New Hyde Park Memorial High School

why do you change my edit back? my change is mathematically correct —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.117.26.232 (talk) 00:50, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Are you being serious? Your edit is neither mathematically correct or even slightly intelligent:
50% + 11% + 4% = 65%
Your phrase ‘too many are indians’ in this context is bordering on racism.
Therefore, I reverted your edit. Please do not repeat this type of action. -- Marek.69 talk 23:57, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

I am going to make many additions from this huge work (Saint bridgets revelations, 1500 pages, 15 languages, additions spanning from church history and saints, to theology from prophecyfilm.com) in theological and historical areas and want to see that my work is not deleted immediately after I am done. Please help me so my work will be according to your guidelines. Should I have added the for example the specific language link, that is, www.prophecyfilm/spanish. What must I change? Am I blacklisted now?, That must be a mistake since I made only relevant links and additions I would appreciate help since I am new and dont understand fully the rules. Saintbridget (talk) 23:13, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Saintbridget, Thank you for your messages. I'm not too sure as to how to answer your question as I am not familiar with the prophecyfilm.com website you are linking to. As far as I can see, judging by the edit summary, the user who removed your link, did so considering it to be ‘Spam’. To read up on Wikipedia's policies on Spam, please see article Wikipedia:Spam. If you consider that the link to the website in question conforms to these policies, then you should put this to user Jorunn and discuss a suitable resolution. I hope this is of help to you to start with - please contact me again if you require any further assistance. Regards Marek.69 talk 23:44, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Am I blacklisted now, i dont know how to watch this? Thanks for the help so far and I hope maybe you can speak to jorunn, I have sent him a mess so I hope he answers, but I may be unclear since i dont know how to express these things as I should do? Peace! Saintbridget (talk) 00:31, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Should I wait with making new additions, since it might be that I am blacklisted or the work I am linking to is. Is there not a way to contact another admin who can solve this thing quicker since this guy will not answer so fast? Saintbridget (talk) 04:32, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Saintbridget, I can't see that you are blacklisted. In this edit summary I notice that there is a link to this page which mentions your name, but states however that you are not blacklisted. I would wait to get this situation clarified and sorted out before making any new additions, as that could complicate things. First of all you need to make sure that the link and website conform to Wikipedia's policies and go from there.
It may be an idea to seek advice from the Wikipedia Help desk. Someone may be able to shed some light on this.
Kind Regards -- Marek.69 talk 14:19, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Help again!

Do you have any specific way to contact another admin, for I cannot seem to get this guy to notice me. And I do not know where to contact an admin from where you sent me, forgive me, I am a beginner?! Maybe he is just ignoring me, I dont know where to turn? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saintbridget (talk • contribs) 20:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Hello again Saintbridget, You could try:
1. Editor assistance
2. New contributors' help page
For a complete list of the admins, look on list of administrators.
Alternatively, you could communicate live on the IRC network - Information on IRC channels
I hope you find an answer to your problem. Marek.69 talk 21:14, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Marek69/Archive_2&oldid=1089975278"