User talk:Narking

Archive 2007–2009

You can also e-mail me via this link.

Vinnytsia Tramway

Thanks for starting that article. Now I am expanding it GK tramrunner (talk) 23:22, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I will take a look later! Närking (talk) 20:27, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

Happy new year. Keep looking forward in 2010!
— Mariah-Yulia • Talk to me! 18:19, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ilia Lagutenko

Hi. I see you disagree with redirecting Ilia Lagutenko to Mumiy Troll. I've put my thoughts about why a redirect is appropriate at Talk:Ilia Lagutenko. As you seem familiar with the subject, your perspective and thoughts on this would be valuable. Thanks! -- Whpq (talk) 18:41, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ukrainian names of Azarov people

Hi! First Azarov Government has the same "Composition"-table as Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine. This in case you where looking for things to do . — Mariah-Yulia • Talk to me! 12:13, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Ukrainian names always create debates. Seems like everyone has their own idea how to write them. And it's not only the letter Г! But I'm pretty sure the latter one should be written as H! And my old Ukrainian visa has a Г for the H in my names and not a Х as it is in my Russian visas. Närking (talk) 21:53, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Easter!

A pig responds!

Nothing wrong with pigs :) It's those PIGS with capital letters that worry me more. But maybe the new prime minister in Greece will work everything out now with the help from a former Swedish minister. And George Papandreou speaks fluent Swedish after several years in Sweden during the 1970s. Närking (talk) 19:47, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2008 South Ossetia war

I must admit that actually missed one very popular title wording which seems to outperform all others I have tried, so I actually rewrote move request now.--Staberinde (talk) 20:19, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dumbest advice in wikipedia in months

This "advice" to ask for a third opinion from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Russia during a edit conflict in the article about the Ukrainian President by Chzz has to be the dumbest advice in wikipedia in months. Apparently I live in a German Province and Finland is part of your Sweden or whatever... — Mariah-Yulia • Talk to me! 23:26, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

End of Swedish Pomerania

Formally, Swedish Pomerania ceased to be Swedish in Kiel, 1814, when it was ceded to Denmark. Denmark however ceded it to Prussia in Vienna without really taking possession of it before, and thus the Prussians took over the area from the Swedish, not from the Danish. I think the infobox should include both events, as it was before your edit, which I in part undid. I also agree that Vienna should be more emphasized, it was hidden under "Final settlement" in the box, so I added "(Vienna)" to it. Regards Skäpperöd (talk) 05:15, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In reality Swedish Pomerania was Swedish until October 23, 1815. The last Swedish governor Wilhelm Malte zu Putbus was appointed on March 8, 1815. The treaty in Kiel 1814 never came into effect since Norway didn't cede to Sweden without fight and therefore Denmark's right to Swedish Pomerania was lost. The treaty of Vienna in 1815 also shows this. Now the infobox says the Swedish rule ended in 1814 which is wrong and it doesn't correspond to the German or Swedish Wikipedias. Närking (talk) 07:42, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see where you are coming from, and I now realize that the end date value does not only affect the box timeline, but also the range at the box top, and I totally agree that the latter should read 1815 and not 1814. I however don't want Kiel to be taken out completely as you did, as it did affect the Vienna agreement due to Prussia's acceptance of the Danish claim resulting in Prussia paying off Denmark according to Kiel in the place of Sweden in turn for Swedish Pomerania being handed over to her from Sweden. Best would be to have the box timeline read Kiel - Vienna (DK-Prussia) - Vienna (Prussia-Sweden), and have the latter (7 June 1815) as end date? Or have the actual Prussian take-over as the box end date value? Skäpperöd (talk) 09:03, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I modified the timeline accordingly [1], do you think it is alright now? The template unfortunately allows only for four event values to be entered between the start and end values, so I had to throw out the wars. If you fell they should be re-inserted, look at the "trick" I used to get two events into the event4 field. I am uncertain whether or not the date Charles XIII dismissed his Pomeranian subjects should be included, and whether the period of Danish rule during the Great Northern War should be included. Skäpperöd (talk) 10:01, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think it looks much better now, also with the actual Prussian take-over as the end date. When I will get more time I will try to add more info to the article also. Närking (talk) 16:23, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Undo

Hi

Please do not do that. I undid his revision for much more than the spelling of Andriy. You could have dropped me a line or more simply corrected the name yourself without saying that I made a mistake with my revert.

It puts a black mark against my name as it appears I was incorrect in reverting the editor when, in fact, I was correct on 3 out of 4 edits he made

Chaosdruid (talk) 21:39, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also - the english version I read has his name as Andrii :¬)

Yes, I know he had made changes to Kiev/Kyiv also, which I changed. But he was in fact correct about the spelling of Andriy (sometimes also spelled Andrii in English translations). Also in modern Russian prints of the book his name is spelled like that, to show the Ukrainian pronunciation. But there is surely no black mark against you! You´re doing a great job! Närking (talk) 06:21, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Varenyky

Sorry that was me lol - couldnt move it as the Varenyky page existed as a redirect after the move.

I had to request an admin do it - sry I forgot to let you all know :¬)

Chaosdruid (talk) 11:33, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as long as the varenyky is on the right place :) And I don't mean on my plate now :) Närking (talk) 19:12, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fred Turner

thank you for picking up this error

Digby scallops (talk) 18:12, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Moon Records Ukraine

Hi, I have nominated the article Moon Records Ukraine for deletion. The discussion can be found here. As you were the editor who declined the proposed deletion I thought you might like to have an input into the discussion. Cheers. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 20:59, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This reminds me of the editor that tried to delete Ilia Lagutenko [2]. I know that not everyone in Western Europe follows the musical scene in Eastern Europe but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Närking (talk) 18:32, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

State Seal

Hi, Can you have an academic source(s) for your addition [3],[4] - it's really strange seal - at all known existed actual papers with seal it look differ - see [5] - it has different shape of trident, double outside line. Also Government translated into Ukrainian as Уряд (again see image of actual wording at image of the paper above). Also list of Тимчасове Україньске правління на Західних українських землях members look quite differ . Seems to me source "The Restoration of the Ukrainian State in World War II" 1987 is not scholar one - can you advice an authors(s) name ond more detail about publisher- if any . If you would be grateful to help me with copyedit I can suggest your several recent scholar publications published by Institute of History (Ukrainian Academy of Sciences) Regards Jo0doe (talk) 08:04, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As said the seal is taken from the book "The restoration of the Ukrainian state in World War II" published by the Ukrainian Central Information Service, London in 1987. The book mainly contain copies of documents from the time. There are several different stamps used on the documents so there were obviously variants used during the short time of the existense of the Ukrainian government in 1941. The trident look about the same though. Närking (talk) 08:24, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Official seal was only one (see Lev Rebet texts) - and it's look differ. Image you've used is very similar (the same) as presented at page 200 at Y.Stetsko book - 30 червня 1941. Проголошення відновлення державности України. Ліга Визволення України. Торонто, 1967. May be it's a generic version used by Stetsko at Berlin from 11 July 1941. Actual seal remains with Rebet at Lemeberg. Does "The restoration of the Ukrainian state in World War II" has any scholar value? Does it contain 2 nd and 3 July 1941 Stetsko Decrees (like appeared at Institute of History of the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences) publications ThanksJo0doe (talk) 14:16, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also late seal (from 4 July) has a wording "Українська Держава" Jo0doe (talk) 14:38, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you gratefully confirm [6] - does "The Restoration... 1987" contains doctored on Nazi adherence text of the Act- [7] [8] and Sheptytsky pastoral letter (same as at Setetsko 1967 p.330-331) ? If yes - such publication listed amongst the "attempts to made a faked history by Bandera's OUN followers" at publications published by Institute of History (Ukrainian Academy of Sciences) RegardsJo0doe (talk) 14:53, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The book also includes the letter from July 4, 1941 that's authorising Volodymyr Stakhiv to represent the Ukrainian government in Germany. That document has a seal with the text "Українська Держава". Since the Ukrainian state really never came into being I'm sure there were little time to decide about the design of the state seal. If you prefer the one used on July 4 you might as well add that one. Närking (talk) 17:30, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Jo0doe (talk) 04:59, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User Russian science

Apparently User "Russian science" has a problem - and he/she IS a problem! Just I have seen this: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AAndre_Geim&action=historysubmit&diff=390957472&oldid=390945052 --Gladsmile (talk) 05:15, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, he/she surely has a problem. I know it's very popular in Russia to point out people as being Jewish and the only source for it is usually a non-Russian name. But as we know there were many nationalities in former Soviet union and not only Russian and Jewish which this editor seem to think. Anyway it might be time to report this uncivil editor. Närking (talk) 07:59, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would support a ban, arguing with him (or her) is a waste of time. P.S. See his talk page, he already has 4 warnings. --Therexbanner (talk) 17:26, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's surely a waste of time so I have reported him/her to an administrator. Närking (talk) 17:48, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Heroiv Dnipra (Kiev Metro)

Hello! Maybe you have an alternative suggestion for this image's placement in the article? Being displayed in its very bottom with 175-pixel size it looks really unseemly, and moving it to another section without enabled centering doesn't change things. --Microcell (talk) 19:38, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, on my screen using Explorer it does look ok, but now I checked using Chrome and it does not look good. I will see how to solve that. But you also did delete the Russian version of the name. Närking (talk) 19:46, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, now it looks OK generally, but I'd make it larger anyway (like, say, mine in Holosiivska (Kiev Metro)) - of course, if it doesn't affect the appearance; I think it's no need to make a reader click one more time to see the details, don't you? --Microcell (talk) 20:39, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but it's hard to make it look good because of those boxes to the right. But feel free to find a solution. Närking (talk) 21:02, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What about this solution using the gallery template?--Microcell (talk) 17:36, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks great! I will certainly remember that solution! Närking (talk) 19:52, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, then I'll add it to the article. By the way, if you're interested in something about technical features, it can be a good idea to search for WP:SOMETHING redirect. :) In this case, WP:GALLERY really helped.--Microcell (talk) 20:23, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Belarus election

It doesnt seem your new to wikipedia, but are you new to the election pages? You made some good edits, but, just an heads up, that i just copy edited for consistency.(Lihaas (talk) 20:56, 19 December 2010 (UTC)).[reply]

Thank you. I just try to follow the news right now, which isn't so easy. Seems like Lukashenka will use brutal force now after given a carte blanche by Putin last week. Have you seen any reactions by other political leaders? So far I've only seen Carl Bildt's statement. Närking (talk) 21:07, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ive heard of whathisname disappearing from hospital and al jazeera interviewed his wife. You could perhaps get the cite from there, or cite the TV news.(Lihaas (talk) 21:41, 26 December 2010 (UTC)).[reply]

I've seen reports he is at the KGB jail, but I wait until it's known for sure. Närking (talk) 21:49, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays!

Narva

Where is the quote from Robert Eklund about the milita force not participating?Alphasinus (talk) 13:26, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please buy Peter Englund's book and read it instead of using search strings at Google Books. But even better if you read books about the battle of Narva. Englund's book is about the battle of Poltava. Närking (talk) 13:48, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Russian WP

Privet, have you noticed anything weird with RuWP? I can't load pages. Has it been taken out or sth? Malick78 (talk) 22:11, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I guess it was just down temporarily. But it seems like Greyhood is running wild now and revert anything that doesn't praise the master. It's good that many other editors have noticed the article now after it was on the front page, because it's impossible to fight editors that can edit 24 hours. Närking (talk) 20:41, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you liked the joke :) As for G, yep - the more editors on that page to dilute his influence the better. Malick78 (talk) 20:25, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, jokes like that surely cheers up the day! And the funny thing is that Putin´s fans even like such pictures! I will try to edit more when there is time. I do follow the Russian news closely and since I know people in Moscow I get news that way also (unfurtunately some of it can't be used here). But I guess it will be less the coming weeks since I will be off for some research and lecturing in Ukraine. Närking (talk) 20:49, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for backing me up. None of the others seems to have an argument other than that including allegations is "yellow press"... yet there's nothing in WP policy regarding that. Please leave a comment on the article's talk page if you have time. Spasibo! Malick78 (talk) 21:15, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TB

Hello, Narking. You have new messages at Talk:Ukrainians#Roxelana_Vs._Anne_of_Kiev.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 14:28, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Lesnaya

Narking, those numbers on casualties for the Swedish troops you provided in the battle of Lesnaya (2010) is completely wrong. The number of 2,500 dead and wounded Swedes as you refer it to, is actually only dead, and not only during the battle but also during the march to the main army. As you know this, why did you include that number? Without any notes or anything it's highly unreliable. I want to change the casualties with 1,000 dead Swedes (in the actual battle) to start with, according to most of the Swedish modern authors as Peter Ullgren, Olle Larsson and Peter From. However, I don't want to change anything without your notice to avoid "Undid Edits" Imonoz (talk) 16:18, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You should know that Ullgren, Larsson and From haven't done any new research but are just repeating old research. That also explains why Larsson on page 192 has a picture of Jan Kazimierz Sapieha claiming it is Ivan Mazepa although it has been known for centuries that the identification of the painting at Gripsholm was wrong. The only ones that have made a thoroughly new research is Konovaltjuk/Lyth. If you don't have the book they write on page 233: "Om man antar att svenskarna, som Petre uppger, vid stridens början var 13000 man, och om av dessa 6500 fortsatte marschen från Propoisk, 2500 skingrades och 500 dödades vid Propoisk och cirka 1000 blev krigsfångar (rysk uppgift) så skulle högst 2500 svenskar ha stupat eller på annat sätt omkommit den 29 september på slagfältet och längs vägen till Propoisk. Därefter skulle – som redan nämnts – 500 ha gått förlorade på vägen mellan Propoisk och huvudarmén." Before I made the changes according to Konovaltjuk/Lyth we had the popular figure among Russian editors "6,397 killed and wounded". Närking (talk) 18:32, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

These authors choosed to go after Lewenhaupt's numbers on killed Swedes, from what I know, 1,000 killed Swedes is the only estimated number we know of from the Swedish side. Konovaltjuk choosed to go after Petres version of numbers, even though 13,000 probably includes sick and other none fight-able soldiers. Konovaltjuk also doesn't think Weiner's and Lewenhaupt's numbers as reliable because '1,000 killed Swedes is way too few for a battle like this' yet, only 1,200 dead Russians are comfirmed (excluding the irregulars). Petre also claims around 6,500 Swedish soldiers were in good shape to fight at Protiosk (excluding the wounded and sick), however, Konovaltjuk refers all of the 2,500 as dead. Now I know you put in dead and wounded which is also probably more correct. Also, the article in its former shape includes the ones captured at protiosk but not the killed ones (500), should be take away the 1,000 captured at Protiosk and instead put them in the 'aftermath' as it didn't include the battle, or shall we include the 500 dead at Proitosk? Further, Lewenhaupt estimates 1,674 Swedes either captured or dead at the battlefield to Protiosk (page 231). Question is, why doesn't Konovaltjuk find this number reliable thus no more than 2,500 Swedes were wounded or died during the battle? The numbers of Russian regulars "1,200" dead is probably more unreliable since the Russians overestimated the Swedish strenght and casualties and the Russian strenght to their favors, why wouldn't they do the same with the Russian casualties? However, I aslo want to maybe sort out the article infobox a bit, making it easier to read (it's kind of difficult now). Imonoz (talk) 16:26, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hej igen Närking. Tänkte fråga dig här (istället för att starta en ny topic) om du vet om det var några milisförband med svenskarna under Battle of Erastfer utöver de 2200 soldaterna? Såg att du använde dig av Otto Sjögrens "W. A. v. Schlippenbachs lifländska här" står det något där kanske? Imonoz (talk) 20:07, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:40, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic)

Hi. I was wondering if you would be interested in contributing articles to Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic)? It needs contributors to increase diversity of content from different countries and bring about large scale improvements. The idea at some point will be to host a National Contest related to your country of interest. Thanks. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:15, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Europe 10,000 Challenge invite

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:09, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Narking. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Top left flag ?

Sorry to disturb you at home, am just keen to know what country the top-left flag represents (in "countries I've visited section"), if possible. Boeing720 (User talk:talk) 19:10, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's the Autonomous Republic of Adjara which is a part of Georgia. Närking (talk) 19:22, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've heared about Abchasia, but never of this before. The main part of the flag (the stripes) led me to guess somewhere in the Caribbean, but I can see it makes sense, since there's a Georgian flag in its top left corner. Thanks ! Boeing720 (talk) 18:04, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

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

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

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

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Narking. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Help with Ukraine related wikipedia article

Hey, Nakring! I've noticed you are a great contributor to Ukraine wiki project and topics connected with Ukraine. I wanna ask your assistance in protection from speedy deletion of Ukrainian software company Agiliway. I hope you will join the dispute and help it remain published on Wikipedia. --Crazyalien (talk) 15:57, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from WikiProject:Ukraine

	Have a good day!
	Thank you for your contributions! As a random observer of this project I want you to know that your edits are appreciated -- Ата ^(talk) 11:35, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! :) Even though I haven't been that active lately. Will try to be more active in the future :) Närking (talk) 14:41, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]