User talk:Sander Säde/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Happy New Year

Happy New Year Sander! BanRay 12:28, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

File:London fireworks.jpg

Belated Barnstar

		The Estonian Award of National Merit
		I, Seaserpent85, award you this Estonian Award of National Merit for bringing Haapsalu Castle up to GA level. Keep up the good work! Seaserpent85 16:42, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

El C has gone away

For what it's worth, El C has disappeared. He hasn't done anything since the New Year's day. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 21:25, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

My leaving Wikipedia was not about El C, I was simply tired of constant edit warring. And nothing has changed, whenever one Ghirla/M.V.E.I./DonaldDuck goes, another Offliner/Russavia/Beatle Fab Four/Dojarca pops up, pushing Kremlin propaganda and relying on laughable sources such as Great Soviet Encyclopedia or writings of a pseudo-historian Alexander Dyukov.

I've been keeping an eye on the battles, trying to look at contributions at least once in a week. So I am fairly up-to-date on current SPA warriors and -wars. However, I think that if I return, I will start editing mostly the articles about Estonian nature and Middle Ages... although, as we've seen, Soviet apologists push their crap even there.

-- Sander Säde 07:31, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Welcome back. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 15:09, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you .-- Sander Säde 07:22, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Michael Sittow

Excellent work. The NGA's my hometown museum, and the Sittow portrait is one of my favorite unsung treasures in the collection. A thought: the National Gallery has a biography online which contains some small bits of information I didn't see in the article; you might be able to use them to pad out the character amount some for DYK. --User:AlbertHerring ^{Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla!} 14:04, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I hope to get the article up to GA-status - this is slowed down by not having a small monography, Michel Sittow 1469-1525, The Artist connecting Estonia with the Southern Netherlands, Eesti Kunstimuuseum 2002, ISBN 9985-78-255-0 yet. According to other references, that is (as of now) the definitive source for Sittow, including some new materials from Tallinn City Archive.

By the way, since you are interested in Sittow - Richardson, E. P. (1958). "Portrait of a Man in a Red Hat by Master Michiel". Bulletin of Detroit Institute of Arts speculates that the said picture is an auto-portrait of Sittow. That is probably not true, but it would be nice to get a color image of Portrait of a Man in a Red Hat for the article - if it is even his painting, as I haven't seen any other references to that painting.

And I agree - the portrait of de Guevara is a very fine portrait, one of those that you just glance at first and then after a while realize how well the subject is depicted, the depth of the picture, the character of it - and I must say, the painting looks a lot like something from Italian High Renaissance or Northern Mannerism. Different from other Sittow's portraits, I'd say. -- Sander Säde 14:21, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Michael Sittow

On May 30, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Michael Sittow, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 08:21, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

COI issues with Michael Pärt

Hi Sander,

Could you tell me where to discuss the recently inserted COI on pages Michael Pärt and Michael Pärt Musik?

mpaert

Mpaert (talk) 19:47, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello mpaert - WP:COI is one of the basic rules of Wikipedia - in a nutshell, "Do not edit Wikipedia to promote your own interests, or those of other individuals or of organizations, including employers, unless you are certain that the interests of Wikipedia remain paramount." From your username it is fairly reasonable to think that you are Michael Pärt. However, to discuss COI issues - there is Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard to discuss specific issues. -- Sander Säde 07:53, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Historical Truth Commission

For the draft text of the proposed law, see the article's "External links" section. —Zalktis (talk) 13:14, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, I'll look at it tonight. -- Sander Säde 13:24, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Loyal Arrow DYK problem

Hello! Your submission of Loyal Arrow at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Manxruler (talk) 16:40, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, fixed the hook. The "aerial" was present in both sources (well, for Aftonbladet I had to use Google translation), but I blame a lack of caffeine. -- Sander Säde 08:42, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Hey, such things happen. No problem, glad to see it's been fixed. Interesting article. Manxruler (talk) 02:40, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Loyal Arrow

Thanks for doing what every participant in Lapistan's AfD should've done, donating your time and effort to make a new article and bring the matter to a quick and optimal conclusion.

Incidentally, you mention "living fire" in the article. I've only seen that term in Harry Potter. Do you mean live fire, as in live fire exercise? --Kizor 17:41, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you - and yes, I meant live fire exercise, I winked it from the article as well. -- Sander Säde 17:43, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Johan Bäckman

Comment to your edit [1] in Johan Bäckman article. I am afraid, that Bäckman uses a lot the terms "apartheid policies", "fascist Estonia" and "discrimination of Russians". So, no reason to takes his opinions off. As I have written many times, his views do not represent the academic world in Finland and/or Finnish historians (well, maybe a very small group of communists). Peltimikko (talk) 19:59, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I know that Bäckman has only handful of followers (thankfully). However, WP:FRINGE applies - anyone can publish books these days, but he does not represent any viewpoint but his own. Lack of peer-reviewed sources is the best indicator for that. -- Sander Säde 20:51, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Kaitsepolitsei

Your editing on K got close enough to 3RR that I blocked you by mistake. I'd advise a little more caution in future William M. Connolley (talk) 11:06, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, but could you please ask an uninvolved administrator to review the case and re-block if deemed appropriate? I got a bit too heated in the discussion, indeed - and I'd rather not have anyone accused of favoritism because of my actions. -- Sander Säde 11:10, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll note that on AN3. For myself, I'll be happy if you leave the article and those obviously reltaed alone for the duration of the possible block William M. Connolley (talk) 12:29, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Hello Sander Säde. It does appear to me that you exceeded 3RR based on newly-posted information in the 3RR report. I'd support leaving you unblocked if you would voluntarily agree to stop editing the article itself for one month. You could still participate on the talk page. If you agree, then the same offer would be made to PasswordUsername; he would be unblocked if he agreed to the restriction. EdJohnston (talk) 16:15, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Hello - I've decided to voluntarily sit out my 8 hour ban as it is - however, as for the new report, then the reverts are not within 24 hours and are related to completely different versions of the article. If you think this is the best solution, then I agree that to the topic ban. -- Sander Säde 17:12, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Voluntary editing restriction

OK, I perceive that both you and PasswordUsername have agreed not to edit the Kaitsepolitsei article for a month. (You can still edit the talk page). That one-month period will end at 17:12 UTC, 7 July 2009. Since PasswordUsername did not request unblocking, his block will stay in place until it expires. Thanks to the agreement, you will remain unblocked. EdJohnston (talk) 01:13, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Diffs

I suspect you used a wrong diff in the barnstar. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 21:10, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I had linked last change, not the actual diff. Thank you for notifying me. -- Sander Säde 21:15, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Loyal Arrow

On June 13, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Loyal Arrow, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 11:28, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Stubs with et-wiki articles

Hi there. I noticed you tagged a fair number of stubs for speedy deletion as A7 that have corresponding articles at et-wiki. Since those articles seem to be more detailed, they serve as an indication of importance/significance for the subject even here and are thus not eligible for speedy deletion. As such, I'd recommend you do not tag them for A7 anymore but take them to AFD instead if you are really contesting notability or (better yet) improve them with the et-wiki information and further sources. Regards SoWhy 09:10, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Quite a lot of them have no notability even in Estonia, not to mention, worldwide. For example, there is no point for every Estonian botanist to have a stub in en.wiki. -- Sander Säde 09:12, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

But A7 is not about notability, it's about the mere indication of importance or significance (a much lower standard). I got hits at Google News and/or Google Scholar for every subject you tagged with A7, indicating that there might be some reliable source coverage. As such, speedy deleting articles that have a chance of being developed using the et-wiki and/or other content would be contrary to our goals. Thus you should pursue deletion via venues that allow community input. Regards SoWhy 09:20, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, I've always been inclusionist at heart. :) -- Sander Säde 09:21, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Then again, Estonian Wikipedia can take inclusionism to ridiculously extreme lengths. Дигвурен Дигвурович_Аллё? 10:18, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: The Anarchists (Tõnu Trubetsky book)

Hello Sander Säde, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of The Anarchists (Tõnu Trubetsky book) - a page you tagged - because: Not unambiguously promotional. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. Closedmouth (talk) 10:00, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I couldn't find a more proper category - there really isn't a suitable category for non-notable books. {{db-a9}} is about musical recording only. -- Sander Säde 10:09, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

That's because books don't qualify for speedy deletion. If you think it should be deleted, try WP:PROD or WP:AFD. --Closedmouth (talk) 13:54, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Eastern Europe

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Eastern Europe and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, Offliner (talk) 21:48, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

No. -- Sander Säde 06:21, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

National parks

I understand that a merge/redirect is abrupt, but if you look at the destination I think it's pretty obvious. I added the tags and started a discussion at Talk:Protected areas of Estonia. The List of national parks of Estonia page is entirely redundant to the main article and there's no need to have a separate stub list when the main article covers it fully. Thanks, Reywas92^Talk 17:31, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Russian schoolbooks on the 20th Century

I was wondering do you anything about the Russian schoolbooks on the 20th Century? The article Historical revisionism (negationism) mentioned that Russians replaced history book in 2004 where Stalin is again glorified. Are there any user who might help? Peltimikko (talk) 11:13, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

I remember the incident when the book came out, it was very widely criticized - also, I believe there was a new version in 2008 that showed Stalin in even more favorable light (Alexander Filippov's "Modern History of Russia: 1945-2006"). I am not familiar with the topic myself - I am mostly interested in Estonian medieval history and nature related topics - but Altenmann (talk · contribs) (previously Mikkalai (talk · contribs), I think) has shown some interest in such topics. And of course, if you can get Colchicum (talk · contribs) interested in this... he is always strictly neutral and very thorough in his edits, but again, not his area of interest.

What are you planning in relation with those schoolbooks, if I may ask?

---- Sander Säde 12:06, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

I think these textbooks are another prove that the modern Russia, unfortunately, wants put away Stalin's crimes during Soviet era. This issue is also related to the Winter War, as the modern Russia wants to forget - again - its responsibility (Yeltsin admitted the Soviet aggression 1990s). And of course: Historical Truth Commission. Peltimikko (talk) 15:23, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

P.S. I would be grateful if you have a spare time to copy-editing the Winter War article. I have done a lot of editing recently and I will try to uplift it to either Good or Featured article. Peltimikko (talk) 15:31, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

I think that getting Winter War to FA would be excellent, but apply for GA first. Right now, I see the readability and size as the major issues - the prose is detailed, but not "flowing" and some of the subsections should be articles of their own. Maybe creating a Winter War template would be a good idea, as the there are a lot of subarticles as it is, navigating between them can be problematic. ---- Sander Säde 09:39, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

User_talk:Peltimikko#New_Schoolbooks_of_Russia - - Altenmann >t 21:57, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Question for you

At User talk:Sander Säde/quickpreview.js. --Ysangkok (talk) 20:34, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry I missed your question before. I replied there - but only "As I didn't update my scrips during my long wiki-vacation, I strongly suspect that his version is better than mine. I will try it out shortly." -- Sander Säde 07:27, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Weird speedy tag removal?

Sorry about that, I somehow misread the banning date as 15 August instead of 15 March. Already self-reverted. Jafeluv (talk) 09:04, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I was just reading Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Principality of Estland. It's amazing what some people go through to make people believe them! Think I need to go practice reading dates correctly – I was actually so worried about not misinterpreting the difference between UTC and local time that I totally missed that the dates were from completely different months :) Jafeluv (talk) 09:18, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Bloom creations

Now that Bloomfield socks were confirmed, do you want to delete his latest creations? I could speedy the under db-banned. PS. thanks for caching him. PPS. sorry for getting back to you so late. Renata (talk) 00:05, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Happy 70th birthday

Today, 23 August 2009, is the 70th birthday of the Molotov-Ribbentrop agreement. I was wondering do Russians still believe "buffer zone" theory, where Stalin sought guarantees against Nazi Germany and was "forced" to invade independent countries? According to the editorial in today's Helsingin Sanomat, the blood of the Red Army 1941-1944 washed away the possible dirt received of these assaults and invasions. And the editorial also refered to the History Commission of Russia. Peltimikko (talk) 19:27, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

There is quite a bit of discussion on talk page of the article. Any chance that you can link HS article? I was unable to find it on my own. --Sander Säde 09:40, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

HS article was an editorial by the editor-in-chief, and available only in the paper version. There is nothing new about this, as the Molotov-Ribbentrop agreement is a fact, not something controversial. There is a multiple of books were the same has already said in other words. The history is holy religion, not history science, in Russia. Peltimikko (talk) 10:42, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Like the saying goes, Russia is a country with a very volatile history. --Sander Säde 11:08, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Estdomains

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tartu&diff=314105302&oldid=314093044 "not big in the context of Tartu or even in Tartu IT companies)"

http://www.f-secure.com/weblog/archives/00001522.html F-Secure describes EstDomains in 2008 as "In fact, EstDomains is among the largest registrars in the world and they've registered over 280,000 domains. Not all of them are bad, of course. But a big part of them are." http://www.thetechherald.com/article.php/200844/2349/ICANN-drops-EstDomains-over-CEO-s-fraud-convictions says that it had almost 300,000 domains. - And I must add the reputation for crime and shady business that surrounded EstDomains to the end (look at the sources cited in the EstDomains article) Next time, please make sure that your statements in your edit summaries are accurate; with no sources cited, there is no justification for your assertion that EstDomains is (or was) "not big." When I added Estdomains, I included sources that clearly stated why Estdomains is a big deal. WhisperToMe (talk) 23:03, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

How was EstDomains relevant in Tartu context? It was next to unknown in Estonia until the scandal (and I work in IT myself), it had less employees then at least three other IT-companies with offices in Tartu. Why not mention those other companies there - one of which has had much wider international coverage than EstDomains and two other have been mentioned by English press as well.

The way I see it, EstDomains as a company has no relevance and no impact to the city of Tartu. Mentioning it in Tartu article would be WP:UNDUE.

--Sander Säde 06:05, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

What sources say that it was "next to unknown" in Estonia prior to the discovery? Either way, now it is known and so now it is, and will always be, a notable topic. Do you have a source saying that those other IT companies have more employees than Estdomains? While the F Secure had a listing of the largest Estonian IT companies, this was for all of Estonia, not just Tartu. Because EstDomains is known as a notable company, it inherently is notable in the context of its headquarters city (or neighborhood or business district). EstDomains was headquartered in Tartu, making it automatically notable in a Tartu context, just like ICANN is automatically notable in the context of Marina del Rey, California, or ARIN is automatically notable in the context of whatever Northern Virginia CDP it is located in.

And Wikipedia:UNDUE#Undue_weight says: "Just as giving undue weight to a viewpoint is not neutral, so is giving undue weight to other verifiable and sourced statements. An article should not give undue weight to any aspects of the subject, but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight appropriate to its significance to the subject. Note that undue weight can be given in several ways, including, but not limited to, depth of detail, quantity of text, prominence of placement, and juxtaposition of statements." - But we also have the {{Expand|section}} tag which tells someone that a section needs to be expanded. One or two sentences about EstDomains shouldn't break the undue weight camel's back. The way to solve this problem is to add information, not remove it.

Because of UNDUE I consider a city's size when deciding which companies to mention. Usually anything up to 100,000 people is fair game for any notable company. Above 100,000 one starts to decide the company's role within a city and/or post the information in business district and neighborhood articles instead. While Tartu is above 100,000, there is no other sourced information about the economy of Tartu. If there are more important companies, you need sources that state so. I have my sources that confirm that EstDomains had its headquarters in Tartu.

Are there any sources (preferably in English) that discuss Tartu's overall economic output and industry, and/or its largest employers? As I have said, the way to solve this is to add to the economy section. But we shouldn't add unsourced information.

As for the other Tartu IT companies (if they are not posted in a top ten IT companies list), would those companies pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) ? There may be companies larger than what EstDomains was, but if those companies don't pass this guideline, I wouldn't list them.

WhisperToMe (talk) 09:15, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

sighs at wall of text

Firstly, "now it is and will always be" - I seriously doubt that. Medium-sized Russian mob operation has no inherent notability and I rather doubt there will be much followup in press for EstDomains. Wikipedia is not news.

Secondly, F-Secure did not have a listing - they showed a screenshot from Äripäev, a business daily (original image here, article here) - and the article does not list biggest IT-companies, it lists the most successful companies using their own methodology. Roughly, it shows how much money companies made in relation to their size. Rove Digital was on top because it showed a huge profit despite being small - and it created quite a buzz, as no one knew the company. See the column "müügitulu 2006, tuh. kr" - that shows the total of sales. Next column is profit before taxes. I am not going to count the companies, but there are more than ten companies on that list with more sales then Rove Digital - and biggest one of those has had more than twenty times the sales compared to Rove Digital.

I must admit I have no idea how many employees Rove Digital/EstDomains ever had. But Tartu has offices of Skype, Playtech, WebMedia, Uptime, Ordi and quite a few other IT companies (sometimes branch offices, though). All those listed have more than hundred employees (much more for Playtech, Skype and WebMedia). I don't think EstDomains ever had more than twenty or more people on pay in Estonia, could have been even less as servers were apparently mostly managed from Russia.

As for the notability of EstDomain in the Tartu article - should we add McColo to San Jose? In relation to respective sizes, it should be about right.

My point is that in context of the Tartu city, brief existence of EstDomains is quite irrelevant. In EstDomains article, mentioning the location is only natural. But having a section dedicated for a small company even in Tartu context in Tartu article is an obvious overkill. Tartu is not defined by any IT-company (say, like Redmond is by Microsoft and Nintendo) - I am willing to bet that most people in Tartu would be unable to name even one IT-company based in Tartu - or at best would be able to mention Playtech.

And finally, the biggest employers in Tartu. Strangely enough, I can say what first two are without looking for references - University of Tartu and Eesti Maaülikool. Quick search also gave me biggest privately held companies by number of employees, 2006-2008 (source):

Name 2006 2007 2008
AS Hanza Tarkon 531 488 560
AS AS G4S Lõuna-Eest 544 520 457
A-Selver AS 458 356 409
AS A. Le Coq Tartu Õlletehas 390 385 342
OÜ Playtech Estonia 263 318 335
AS Sangar 339 321 308
AS Ilves-Extra 353 336 300
TTÜ Tartu Tarbijate Kooperatiiv 417 478 411
AS Tartu Maja Betoontooted 228 220 165
AS Kodumaja 414 395 272
AS GoBus 319 286 270
AS Kroonpress 220 252 264
Meteci Valduse OÜ (Metec grupp) 320 315 258
OÜ Kyyrix 157 175 246
AS Tallinna Kaubamaja Tartu müügimaja 254 244 231
Rimi Eesti Food AS 166 179 187
AS Astri Grill (Tartu) 208 287 175
AS Samelin 270 250 171
AS Estiko Plastar 170 184 158
AS Salvest 152 158 150
AS Pere Leib Tootmine (Tartu) 166 164 149
AS Palmako 102 130 143
AS Decora 120 136 142
AS Baltiklaas 120 126 142
Savekate OÜ 129 183 123
OÜ Epitar 124 123 122
AS Tref 120 118 113
AS WebMedia Tartu 99 100 112
AS Glaskek Tartu 125 197 111
AS Eviko 160 130 105
AS K & H 129 125 103
AS Tartu Veevärk 110 109 102
OÜ Greif 104 110 101

As you can see, neither EstDomains nor Rove Digital is not mentioned. It would have been a huge surprise for me if they would have been in this top 30 - probably they weren't even in top 200.

--Sander Säde 12:28, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

• 1. Regarding Wikipedia:NOT#NEWS:
  • "Wikipedia considers the historical notability of persons and events. News coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, but not all events warrant an encyclopedia article of their own. Routine news coverage of such things as announcements, sports, and tabloid journalism are not sufficient basis for an article. Even when an event is notable, individuals involved in it may not be. Unless news coverage of an individual goes beyond the context of a single event, our coverage of that individual should be limited to the article about that event, in proportion to their importance to the overall topic. (See Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons for more details.) While including information on recent developments is sometimes appropriate, breaking news should not be emphasized or otherwise treated differently from other information. Timely news subjects not suitable for Wikipedia may be suitable for our sister project Wikinews. See also: Wikipedia:News articles"
  • So there are some kinds of news events that would not be notable. EstDomains was reported on before the ICANN decided to pull its registration. If you look at http://news.google.com/ and select all dates, the range begins in 2005. By 2007 we already have an article here http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/129761/russian-spam-murder-spins-web-hoax stating that EstDomains had a bad reputation for the kinds of websites it hosted. Because of the fact that there are multiple reliable sources and that this is not just one kind of event, this isn't something that can be dismissed by WP:NOT#NEWS.
• 2. If the listing is by most successful in terms of profit margins, it makes sense. After all, Tšaštšin was also the CEO of Rove Digital.
• 3. If there are sources that say that University of Tartu and Eesti Maaülikool have the two largest employment bases in Tartu, then that would be a great start for the economy section.
• 4. How many of the private firms above could have Wikipedia articles written about them, considering Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)?
• 5. Often fraudulent firms become more notable than comparatively sized legitimate firms once they are discovered. In Houston we had two major fraud exposures. First was Enron, which was a large company anyway. But the second was Stanford Financial Group - It wasn't that well known (a Texas Monthly article discussed how it was perceived as a boutique firm) until the stories about the fraud were revealed. Many in Houston did not know about CEO R. Allen Stanford's personal life, his role in Antigua, and his support for sports in the Caribbean until the fraud scandal appeared. Wikipedia didn't have an article on Stanford until the US Government investigation was revealed.
• WhisperToMe (talk) 17:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

To be honest, I have very little interest in articles about economy and companies. As my wiki-time is quite limited nowadays, due to the more demanding period at work and other rl things, I simply have no time to edit - even my recent GA-candidate Kõpu lighthouse is sitting unedited for far longer then I would like. --Sander Säde 08:07, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Arbitration case regarding the Eastern European mailing list

The Arbitration Committee recently passed a motion to open a case to investigate allegations surrounding a private Eastern European mailing list. The contents of the motion can be viewed here.

You have been named as one of the parties to this case at the request of the Arbitration Committee, here. Please take note of the explanations given in italics at the top of that section; if you have any further questions about the list of parties, please feel free to contact me on my talk page.

The Committee has explicitly requested that evidence be presented within one week of the case opening; ie. by September 25. Evidence can be presented on the evidence subpage of the case; please ensure that you follow the Committee instructions regarding the responsible and appropriate submission of evidence, as set out in the motion linked previously, should you choose to present evidence.

Please further note that, due to the exceptional nature of this case (insofar as it centers on the alleged contents of a private mailing list), the Committee has decided that the normal workshop format will not be used. The notice near the top of the cases' workshop page provides a detailed explanation of how it will be used in this case.

For the Arbitration Committee,
Daniel (talk) 06:12, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Please comment here

User:Piotrus/ArbCom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 19:29, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

File:EstonianMapFlag.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:EstonianMapFlag.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. OsamaK^{Reply? on my talk page, please} 20:23, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Sildnik

Paluks põhjendust, miks on tegemist mittemärkimisväärse isikuga? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anmadis (talk • contribs)

This is en.wikipedia, please use English. And it works the other way - you have to prove someone is notable, not to prove he is not notable. Out of the valid sources you gave, Jakob Sildnik has one passing mention - the article in KesKus ([2]) mentions his name. Quick googling gave no other matches at all. So what is his claim to fame, other then one quickly forgotten attempt to make a movie? Please provide more valid sources about him - and check WP:NOTABILITY & WP:BIO guidelines. --Sander Säde 14:29, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Ma ei räägi inglise keelt. Tegemist ei ole kiiresti ununenud katsega filmi teha, tegemist on "esimese eesti kunstdraama" (KesKus) autoriga. Esimene Eesti (riik) film, linastunud 1923. aastal. Kommunistlike nälkjate okupatsioon on ajaloolise mälu selliste asjade suhtes paraku katkestanud.

Anmadis (talk) 14:55, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

List of Estonian punk bands

List of Estonian punk bands seems to be the same as et:Eesti punkansamblite loend. You may want to comment on et:Eesti punkansamblite loend as well. Rather than delete the entire list, you may want to remove only the doubtful information. -- Eastmain (talk) 10:45, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Arbitration Enforcement

You have been reported to Arbitration Enforcement for your statements at Holocaust trials in Soviet Estonia. You may defend yourself here [3]. Anti-Nationalist (talk) 23:37, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Tussupossu

Well that's the problem with an encyclopedia that anyone can edit. It's both funny and sad, if such postings last for more than a month, getting reverted to by established users :D. I have the page in my watchlist, now. --Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 18:11, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Kõpu lighthouse

Hi, Sander. As they were small things, I went ahead and made some of the simpler changes based on your feedback. I added a few followup comments as well. Could you please take a further look at the GA review? Thanks. –Whitehorse1 18:34, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you once again. I replied the best I could and did a few small changes to the article. I also e-mailed naval historian Tiit Einberg some questions - about the delay in 1480, long period of building, when was the fire lit and which are the two older still active lighthouses. Obviously, private communication is not a reliable source, but if he replies, then we can at least be assured we are not misleading the reader completely. --Sander Säde 14:50, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Sander. Is there any news on this? I got your message, though things have stood still since then. Soon I must close the review one way or another. Thanks. –Whitehorse1 14:24, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry - I planned to update the article immediately, but unfortunately some real-life things required my attention, also a personal project of mine was in the finishing stage... I will do my best to see about Kõpu Lighthouse this weekend, as hopefully I won't have other obligations then. --Sander Säde 16:19, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Ah, okay. Thank you. –Whitehorse1 16:26, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

←Hi. No new issues were introduced, and I've struck anything resolved. I left a comment on the review noting what's left to look at before we can pass it. –Whitehorse1 02:24, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Re : Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Eastern European mailing list

This arbitration case has been closed, and the final decision may be viewed at the link above.

• User:Piotrus resigned the administrator tools during the case proceedings and may only seek to regain adminship by a new request for adminship or by request to the Arbitration Committee.
• User:Piotrus is banned for three months. At the conclusion of his ban, a one year topic ban on articles about Eastern Europe, their talk pages, and any related process discussion, widely construed, shall take effect.
• User:Digwuren is banned for one year. He is directed to edit Wikipedia from only a single user account, and advise the Arbitration Committee of the name of the account that he will use. Should he not advise the committee by the end of the one year ban, he will remain indefinitely banned until a single account is chosen.
• User:Digwuren is placed on a one year topic ban on articles about Eastern Europe, their talk pages, and any related process discussion, widely construed. This shall take effect following the expiration of both above mentioned bans.
• The following users are topic banned from articles about Eastern Europe, their associated talk pages, and any process discussion about same, widely construed, for one year:

• User:Biruitorul, User:Dc76, User:Martintg, User:Miacek, User:Radeksz, User:Vecrumba, User:Tymek

• User:Jacurek is topic banned from articles about Eastern Europe, their associated talk pages, and any process discussion about same, widely construed, for six months.
• User:Tymek is strongly admonished for having shared his account password. He is directed to keep his account for his own exclusive use, and not to allow any other person to use it under any circumstance.
• The editors sanctioned above (Piotrus, Digwuren, Martintg, Tymek, Jacurek, Radeksz, Dc76, Vecrumba, Biruitorul, Miacek) are prohibited from commenting on or unnecessarily interacting with Russavia on any page of Wikipedia, except for purposes of legitimate and necessary dispute resolution.
• All the participants to the mailing list are strongly admonished against coordinating on-wiki behavior off-wiki and directed to keep discussion of editing and dispute resolution strictly on wiki and in public. All editors are reminded that the editorial process and dispute resolution must take place on Wikipedia itself, using the article talk pages and project space for this purpose. No discussion held off-wiki can lead to a valid consensus, the basis of our editorial process. Off-wiki coordination is likely to lead to echo chambers where there is a false appearance of neutrality and consensus.

For the Arbitration Committee, Mailer Diablo 17:42, 22 December 2009 (UTC) - Discuss this

I am 13

I moved the I am 13 page to an English title at I am 13 (play). User:Andres restored it, and he and discussed the restoration. I have no major problem with it, but would appreciate some attention on the article to improve the claim to notability. In the mean time, I have no intention of deleting the article again, and moved the whole thing to an English title, leaving the Estonian title as a redirect. Just wanted to gather your feedback on the move. Thanks. Hiberniantears (talk) 00:26, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Please point to anything in the I am 13 (play) article which says that it's notable. Woogee (talk) 20:34, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

You mean, besides numerous awards it won and books & articles published about the play, some of them quarter of a century after the premiere? Remember that by far most of the material about it has never been digitized - i.e. reviews and such from eighties. --Sander Säde 08:42, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

What books and articles? And why are there still no reliable sources? Woogee (talk) 02:34, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps you should actually look at the article? It lists a book about the play, article in a scientific journal etc. And as for reliable sources, the one inline source used is definitely a RS. I have no plans to develop the article, as it is way outside my field of interest. Hopefully some day someone comes, sees {{refimprove}} tag and improves the article - that is the way Wikipedia works. As the article is now, it is still better than by far majority of articles out of around 1000 stubs in Category:Play stubs and its subcategories, which have usually no references, no literature - no nothing besides three lines of text. May I ask why are you so fixated on I am 13 (play)? You don't seem to edit any other theater-related articles - nor any Estonia-related articles. --Sander Säde 08:35, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

How is anyone who doesn't read Estonian supposed to know that the source is reliable? As far as I can tell, it just discusses the play and its history, not anything which says it's notable. Can you translate the Estonian to me so that I can determine what makes that link support the notability claim? And I have no idea what the "Literature" section of the article is supposed to mean. Are the listed works about the play, or do they just mention it? We need something which TELLS us that this play is notable, and I still don't see anything which does. Woogee (talk) 21:05, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

As you didn't answer my question, I can no longer consider that you are acting in good faith. Please ask any questions you might have on article talk from now on. --Sander Säde 15:21, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm not fixated on it at all, but I am fixated on your lack of adequate response. I may have to take this to another section of Wikipedia for more eyes to view it. Woogee (talk) 23:53, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

About your sig

I just happened to see your sig on Thatcher's talk page. Could I offer a little suggestion? A lot of editors find the use of a text-shadow element makes text (particularly the finer print used in Wikipedia comments) difficult to read. In the case of your signature, where the text is gray on gray, your name is almost completely illegible. Perhaps you might consider eliminating the shadow? Happy editing, TenOfAllTrades(talk) 20:42, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you - I did not realize it was not readable on smaller monitors. I removed the shadow, hopefully it is better now. --Sander Säde 09:16, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Much! Thanks, TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:16, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Arbitration appeal

Following your comment to me I have amended my comments at Arbcom. I have quoted your message in full because I think it is important that your views are presented fairly and wish to avoid the risk of inadvertently misstating them. The Four Deuces (talk) 10:13, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Bloomfield

I started a list of articles created/heavily edited by him at User:Renata3/bloom. If you could check them (you can use the "related changes" link) once in a while to make sure another of his IP/sock does not restore the garbage, it would be a great help. Once in a while he re-appears (usually as an IP) an restores his original version of an article. The list is not complete (I am planning on finishing it this week), so if you are aware of any other additions, feel free. Renata (talk) 16:31, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Destruction battalions

Hi, I found the article some time ago and I knew that it needs a re-write. For one, it completely skips post-war activities, like their role in suppression of Lithuanian partisans or deportations. However, I am not going to be able to do this anytime soon. I am terribly busy until April 15 and I do not have good sources on the topic. Even if I found some sources, they would be only about Lithuania. As you said they were active all over the place. I guess you could find some Russian sources that gave an overview, but I do not read Russian.

P.S. I rebel against being labeled "history buff" -- I have zero interest in history outside of Wikipedia. Talk about how WP changes lives :)

Renata (talk) 14:25, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

What is "Permbanned RJ CG"? I already explained that I removed the contents of the section on the Kautla massacre because it was copied verbatim from the Kautla massacre article. I added tags because in fact those statements mentioned dates and events but were unsourced - obviously they had no citations! 70.51.28.70 (talk) 02:55, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

RJ CG is a permanently banned user (for, among other things, sockpuppets). Same as you, he is from Canada, had similar interests and use of language.

I went over the Kautla massacre section and trimmed it a bit - there was no point to have the other article in full. However, your edit removed all of it, including sources, which simply is not acceptable. Some of the data you inserted was also inaccurate - such as the battalions being formed from volunteers. This may have been the original propaganda, but in truth, all party members and candidates (also Komsomol members) were drafted (note: there probably were different approaches in different areas).

You also added {{fact}} tags to the text sourced in Mart Laar's book. What was the reason for those?

I am trying to find some people who would go through the whole article - right now it is a bit too narrow. I will do some minor cleanup right now, too.

--Sander Säde 09:35, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the warm welcome to Wikipedia. Yes, Canada is full of trolls with similar interests who speak English. No, I don't find it at all offensive when you assume that I am editing Wikipedia out of some desire to vandalize.

The statement that the battalions were formed from conscripts makes no logical sense when it is followed by the statement that the battalions were made up from people ineligible for mobilization (conscription). If some membership was voluntary and in some instances coercive, that should be clarified.

You seem to have a claim to have published in peer reviewed journals on your front page, but let me review how citations work anyway:

Somebody did something on April 1 1600. This caused something and something. Somebody said "That was pretty awesome." Then on April 1 2010 somebody else did something else.

Here are the sentences that need citations in the above example:

Somebody did something on April 1 1600. This caused something and something. Somebody said "That was pretty awesome." Then on April 1 2010 somebody else did something else.

I didn't see anything wrong in removing the text relating to the Kautla massacre because as I've stated three times now, it was copied verbatim from the Kautla massacre article that was already linked to. If somebody wants to provide a summary of the Kautla massacre article there's obviously nothing wrong with that, but you kept undoing the entire edit.

70.51.28.70 (talk) 00:37, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

You seem to miss the point of {{fact}} - and the way things are cited in both scientific literature and Wikipedia. That whole section is already referenced - Mart Laar, War in the woods, The Compass Press, Washington, 1992, p10. Every word does not require same reference, it is enough if the source is at the end of the sentence or section. If you use several sources, then you have to do further inline references. Please familiarize yourself with basic Wikipedia rules. --Sander Säde 08:56, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Update editcount

Hi, please could you update your tool editcount this way. I'd like to use this tool on all wikiprojects only by import without necessity to copy and adapt. Functionality will stay unchanged. Thanks.--Sevela.p 23:30, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

About WikiProject Estonia

Should all Estonia-related articles be part of WikiProject Estonia or not some unimportant ones? And can I help you with adding them into articles-talkpages (or I have to type them into WikiProject Estonia too or somewhere else)? Pelmeen10 (talk) 11:10, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

They should all be tagged with {{WikiProject Estonia}} and anyone can add the tag. Use your own discretion when deciding whether or not the article should be tagged - it is quite often a blurry area. For example, should all Tartu Ülikool alumni be tagged? What about foreign players in Estonian football leagues? What about foreign companies with significant presence in Estonia?

All WP:WPET-tagged articles will be placed to Wikipedia:WikiProject_Estonia/publicwatchlist (I run a small script every few days that does this) - and you can monitor all WikiProject Estonia articles using this small script.

--Sander Säde 12:07, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Kadri Laanes

The author placed a "hangon" and claimed notability on the talk page: I agree that it looks more like an ambitious student than someone actually notable, but I have for the moment declined the speedy, added an "underconstruction" tag and explained more about notability on the talk page. I will keep an eye on it. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 13:02, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Occupation of the Baltic States

A possible attempt to distort consensus involving you is discussed here. (Igny (talk) 11:26, 30 March 2010 (UTC))

Bäckman

This user has constantly attacked against Johan Bäckman delivering one-sinded and aggressive material, claming for example that Bäckman is "Russian influence agent". One should note that several pro-Estonian activists have been excluded from English Wikipedia recently. One problem is that article about Bäckman was firstly writte solely on the basis of Estonian yellow press materials, openly hostile against Bäckman. The fact that Estonian security police Kapo and yellow press of the country are hostile against Bäckman is interesting and worth of mentioning, but the concents is not objective. Interesting that Sander Säde is protecting Estonian security police officer Kahar, who is public figure in Estonia, openly critisising Bäckman many times, but whose name should not be mentioned in Wikipedia. Why? Sander Säde is violating rules of English Wikipedia and should be excluded. --91.152.84.165 (talk) 09:19, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Will reply on article talk page. --Sander Säde 09:37, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Human rights in Estonia

Could you provide reasons for deleting a reference to the book "Chance to Survive"? You've called it spam, describing your edit. However, as you could see, the study is done by LICHR and LHRC, well-known human rights organizations. LHRC is member of FIDH ([4]), both LHRC and LICHR are members of the European Network Against Racism ([5]) and UNITED for Intercultural Action ([6]).Fuseau (talk) 20:21, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a collection of links - nor is it a place for advertisements. Furthermore, calling a self-published non-scientific study "Literature" is simply a misrepresentation. --Sander Säde 05:41, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a collection of links - exactly. However, it should make use of relevant external links.

nor is it a place for advertisements - there is no debate about that. There was no advertisement, the book is relevant to the theme - human rights in Estonia.

self-published I regret you haven't paid attention to book's data before making such unbased claims. As everyone can see, the book is published by the Foundation for Historical Outlook, not by LICHR and LHRC themselves. non-scientific - again unsourced. You can of course call only some very narrow circle of works scientific, but this will not be convincing. Besides, there was even no claim that a book was scientific.

calling (..) "Literature" is simply a misrepresentation - what is this study, then? Music? If you wish, you could rename this section in "Works" or "Publications" according to WP:Layout.Fuseau (talk) 08:08, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

The book was published by the pro-Kremlin organisation Institute of Democracy and Cooperation. Peltimikko (talk) 11:56, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Your, mine or somebody else's possible agreement or disagreement with some organization's views and calling them pro-Kremlin, pro-US etc. doesn't mean that the book published by this organization is not appropriate in the article. I'm glad you don't raise any objections about the book itself.Fuseau (talk) 12:20, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

(ec)Source about LICHR, an organization infamous for tax evasion and embezzling of funds, being non-scientific? Easy. "For example, one of the executers of “scientific researches” is the NGO Legal Information Centre of Human Rights, which the Foreign Ministry of Russian Federation finances both directly and via the fund “Euroregion Livonia.” “Objective scientists,” who have no special education, receive their instructions directly from Russian diplomats. It is typical that half of the association’s members belong into Constitutional Party that represents extremist ideology and has been one of the central organisations in groundless smearing of Estonia’s international reputation."[7].

I have no idea, what the Foundation of Historical Outlook is, but it seems to be a sister organization of the Kremlin PR company, which also "ordered" (!) the study.

Correct way to name the section would be "See also", as it was re-inserted by Russavia.

--Sander Säde 12:09, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

LICHR is member of 2 well-known international human rights organizations described in Wikipedia. What you quote is just a point of view of Estonian government (a typical government's view of human rights defenders, I would say... groundless smearing of Estonia’s international reputation - they still make use of Soviet propaganda language), which of course could be quoted in an article about LICHR, but I disagree with your stating infamous for tax evasion and embezzling of funds as fact.

who have no special education lichr.ee speaks of many of LICHR staff as legal advisors, about two associate experts as lawyers... Do KAPO's claims quoted by you without clear attribution and even mentioning that this is a POV of a Estonian state institution have any base? Ordering the study - with my knowledge of English I see nothing strange in this expression.

About "Kremlin PR" - see above, my answer to User:Peltimikko. "See also" is a title for links to other Wikipedia articles, see Wikipedia:Layout.Fuseau (talk) 12:20, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps you didn't realize that it was all part of the quote and not my opinion - and condsidering the source... God knows I am not a fan of Kaitsepolitsei, more the opposite, but if they state openly something like that, they do have solid evidence to back them up. Of course they will not publish their findings... it is pretty naive to expect them to.

As for the Kremlin PR house - how about sources for that? See [8], [9], [10] etc. They seem to agree uniformly that the Institute was set up as a PR effort.

Note that this is my response to your message before you edited it.

--Sander Säde 12:33, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Of course they will not publish their findings... it is pretty naive to expect them to Exactly this allows the secret services to make accusations against human rights activists or political dissidents without having any solid evidence to back them up, be it in Russia or in Estonia.Fuseau (talk) 19:40, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I think that no one is naive enough to think of LICHR as being an independent and without a clear agenda. It is rather obvious why the paper was "ordered" from LICHR, and not from, say Estonian Institute for Human Rights (EIHR) or Estonian Human Rights Centre - both of which employ actual scientists - or simply Amnesty International Estonian Section. --Sander Säde 08:06, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Of course, every NGO has it own field of activities, which you can call agenda. LICHR field includes minority rights, anti-racism, anti-discrimination - there is nothing strange that it is invited to conduct a study on minority rights, not on torture issues. Then, not all foundations are interested in minority rights - does that mean that minority rights organizations are dependent on minority-interested foundations? Amnesty International Estonian Section just will hardly do a study on Estonia - AI tries to avoid its country sections to speak on respective countries, understanding they will be accused of bias. By the way, AI, whom you do not doubt, also sees discrimination of minorities in Estonia.Fuseau (talk) 09:31, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Legal Information Centre for Human Rights

What is this "Legal Information Centre for Human Rights" organisation? Seems it has multiple finance sources, but donations from the Russian embassy in Tallinn makes it very suspicious. Also, I noticed that its report are mentioned in Johan Bäckman's blog. These facts does not necessary mean that the organisation is under Russian rule, but it makes wondering. I do not say that their issues and points are all bad. However, the organisation makes "shadow" reports, and the latest report discussed above was very bad work in my opinion. Peltimikko (talk) 19:10, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

You summed it up very well. LICHR is also known for misuse of funds [11] and tax evasion [12]. See also page 17 here, page 9 here and page 14 here (all are available in English, too). --Sander Säde 08:59, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Templates

What do you think, should there be two lines between article´s last line and templates? Pelmeen10 (talk) 20:40, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

No, probably not. One blank line is the standard. --Sander Säde 04:39, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Occupation and annexation of the Baltic states

Hi! About the subject to rename the article Occupation of the Baltic states to Occupation and annexation of the Baltic states. I have read book related the subject and edited the article and created subarticles. A rename voting was short time ago, so do not want to start immediate voting again if there is not enough support for the rename. The period 1940-1991 is a very long time and it includes illegal occupations and annexations by both Germans and Soviets. I have read some books and edited the problems with the state continuity. The name "Occupation and annexation of the Baltic states" would give better "big picture" than just "Occupation". The name would not wash illegal actions, but gave better picture of the reality. Furthermore, it would not hurt to get rid of the title neutrality tag, so people would be encouraged to edit more. Peltimikko (talk) 10:11, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about the long delay - I wanted to think about this first.

I am still unsure what the renaming would add to the article. Occupation is an ongoing status, annexation is the one-time event of annexing. Authors widely use both "occupation" and "occupation and annexation" - even the same authors use both in the same article/book. I was opposed to the rename, as some certain editors openly admitted that they wanted to renaming of the article to be a first step in eliminating information they found "unpleasant".

All-in-all, I would say, just use your own conscience and discretion. I probably will not support the rename, unless there are solid reasons for rename.

--Sander Säde 08:07, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Matsalu National Park

Hi, I am reviewing your GA nomination and have entered a few comments for you to address at Talk:Matsalu National Park/GA1. Thanks, Xtzou (Talk) 20:45, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for reviewing the article. I will be away for the weekend (going in a few hours), though, so I will be inactive until Monday. --Sander Säde 06:00, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

The article has passed as GA. Congratulations! Nice job. Xtzou (Talk) 13:22, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! --Sander Säde 17:04, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Karl Ernst von Baer

Please see two-part reply in my talk-back; hope it clarifies things. DenisRS (talk) 20:55, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 21:42, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

DYK for EstWin

The DYK project (nominate) 06:04, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Deletion notification

neutral notification Collect (talk) 12:49, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

sigh Here we go with the circus again. Thank you for the notification. --Sander Säde 08:28, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Arbitration motion regarding Eastern European mailing list

Following a motion at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment:

Remedy 20 of Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Eastern European mailing list ("Miacek topic banned") is lifted.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, NW (Talk) 00:16, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Discuss this

File:Schmalhausen.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Schmalhausen.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Signing for auto-archiving. --Sander Säde 08:11, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Administrator intervention against vandalism

Thank you fro your report about Ogomemnon at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. However, no attempt had been made to discuss the issues with Ogomemnon, or to explain what the problem was. A "final" warning" was issued with no previous communication on the matter at all. I suggest trying to discuss your disagreements. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:11, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Sander Säde against Bäckman

It seems, however not sure, that Sander Säde is campaining against Johan Bäckman - any atttempt to move Bäckman´s article towards more objective form is immediately met with a treat to block the user. For example, I found from the article misleading and wrong translation from a Finnish newspaper, and immediately Sander reacted with a threat to block me. That seems to be not correct. --91.152.84.165 (talk) 19:21, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Somehow you skip the part where you attacked Peltimikko - and I see no errors in translation. The whole article (not just the online part) is very specific in details. --Sander Säde 19:25, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Sander Sade has admitted the translation was wrong. --91.152.84.165 (talk) 19:42, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Please, do not lie. And you really don't have to talk with me in 3rd person on my own talk page. --Sander Säde 19:50, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Sander Sade has added another threat after he/she refused to correct a wrong quotation. His behavior probably in this case is against the rules of Wikipedia. It is not correct to threat person with sanctions, when the person is trying to correct a misleading quotation from a newspaper. --91.152.84.165 (talk) 19:59, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Please, just stop already. Perhaps you have issues with understanding the original Finnish article, which clearly spells out what Peltimikko inserted - or maybe you don't understand the Wikipedia article? --Sander Säde 20:14, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Laugh of the Day

Looking at backlinks to Aleksander Laak I found the following line at Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/COIReports/2010, Apr 10

• 472. 06:51:12, Sat Apr 10, 2010 - user:Sander Säde - user talk (contribs) on page Aleksander Laak (diff - undo) -> (overlap) Username overlaps with pagename: 'sander säde'-'aleksander laak' = 25.95% (54/48.06)

Some bot seems to be 25.95% sure that you two are the same person. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 08:34, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Heh, thanks for finding it - just be careful not to edit Petrification or Petri dish yourself, too. There is also a distinct possibility that I am 25.95% Aleksander Laak, reincarnated.

Seriously, though, that article could use some better sourcing then couple of rather random lines in a book review. Especially the 100 000 murdered Jews is nonsense, as it is ten times the total that Nazis transported to Estonian camps and killed there.

--Sander Säde 08:51, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Economic indicator

I appreciate you taking time to get back to me about the subject and I am grateful that you agree it does not constitute spam, despite being numerous similar contributions (comparability is a requirement for infobox indicators, therefore adding one or several country's rankings is not informative or appropriate). I would appreciate it if you would remove or make clear that you retract the spam warning, as it still looks suggestive that I have done some wrong, but I think it would be inappropriate for me to change it. Thanks again for clearing this up and I appreciate you being watchful. Win.monroe (talk) 20:57, 19 August 2010 (UTC)Win.Monroe ps: I am relatively new, so I wasn't sure if you would be notified of my response to your comment on my talk page. Feel free to delete this once you are done reading it.

Yes, I saw your message and will retract the warning, too. --Sander Säde 07:01, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Win.monroe (talk) 13:24, 20 August 2010 (UTC)Win.monroe

Eastern Bloc economies

If you had read the F*** Eastern Bloc economies page it have already been spelled out to you, wouldn't it? But no you don't want to read the dam talk page, do you? The article completely jumps over many important periods of communist economics. Example, Socialist Bulgaria held a strong growth for years because of its low level of development, comparable to the USSR's. Most countries, at first, benefitted from Soviet economics. East Germany held a positive growth rate until the end, and there was signs of it ever declining. The Soviet economy held a positive growth rate in the 1960s and 1970s, and the Soviet living standard has never increased as fast as it did in that period. But no, is any of this mentioned? No! Its not!!!! I can go on giving you more and more examples, but I now, that you don't really give a dam because you want to push your POV into the article! --TIAYN (talk) 05:56, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Use. The. Article. Talk. Page. Is it really that hard to explain there in a concise neutral section why you think the tags are needed? You know, like the tags require? And like Wikipedians are expected to behave? Right now I have a feeling that it is you who wants to "push your POV into the article", as both your attitude and behavior are, shall we say, lacking. --Sander Säde 06:01, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Tags

Thanks I have re-tagged those pages. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:04, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

your revision re: the eXile authors makes no sense on Jamestown Foundation page

I understand the rules for not citing blogs, but I'm not sure whether or not Voltaire Network is a blog or not. It seems to be the only website critical of Jamestown that has not been deleted when there are several others.

Furthermore, you keep reverting back to previous version that 'Kim Phily and Burgess' wrote something for eXile, when these are obviously pen names and are not the Soviet agents who defected from the UK to the USSR during the Cold War [these individuals being deceased]. You should write 'someone writing anonymously under the pen-names Kim Philby and Guy Burgess' unless you can show that these were the real names of the eXile piece authors on Vladimir Socor and Jamestown. ElliottNessMoskva (talk) 23:02, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, that is exactly the reason why the eXile should never be used as a source for anything. It is nothing more than a group blog, without any real editor or journal-style quality control (remember their shoddy review of Edward Lucas' book which they didn't even have...?). I recommend removing everything that is sourced solely to the eXile.

As for Voltaire Network, it claims to to be a "a pool of press agencies, media outlets and professional journalist unions" ([13]). I would use it as a source only if there is a better source supporting their claims.

--Sander Säde 07:43, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

One could same the same about Jamestown's Vlad Socor. He's so biased, he still claims the Nabucco project is going strong when Southstream is almost done and has all the gas needed to supply it. Perhaps Jamestown as an organization is simply meant to fly under the radar of mainstream media and only be cited by the laziest or most ideologically-driven journalists.— Preceding unsigned comment added by ElliottNessMoskva (talk • contribs)

I have not paid attention to Nabucco pipeline vs South Stream, but it seems that neither is in the building stage yet - and both hope to be ready by 2015. Last news for Nabucco is that they got additional funding in September 2010 and "the final investment decision will be made at the end 2010". --Sander Säde 07:43, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Operation Pike

Please, do not proxy for topic banned User:Martintg. This may prove to arbcom that EEML is still active and bring new bans. DonaldDuck (talk) 04:53, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Please avoid personal attacks per WP:NPA. I have not proxied for anyone and I never will. I simply reverted your attempts to censor and modify a sourced fact - stop doing that or your extensive block log will get some new entries. And, if you would have cared to check, Operation Pike is not covered by Martintg's topic ban. --Sander Säde 06:45, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Pearn P. Niiler

Hello Sander Säde. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Pearn P. Niiler, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. (Professor at Scripps Institution of Oceanography). Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 15:23, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, I thought that university professors required noteworthy scientific publications and reviews of their work to establish notability? --Sander Säde 15:51, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

The standard for A7 speedy-deletion is lower than "notability"; it only requires a "credible claim of importance or significance" - see WP:CSD#Non-criteria #5 and WP:A7M. There is enough here for that; it might not pass AfD, but in fact Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL turns up enough that I think notability could be established. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 19:56, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Estonian Red Riflemen

Good call. This article meats all standard features of Bloom's writing. So I assume that's another of his socks. I think I am going to delete both articles & block the user. Renata (talk) 21:02, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Consensus?

Tere Sander, I can fully understand the politics behind not wanting to say an Estonian was born in the Estonian Soviet Socialist Republic of the Soviet Union, but where is the broader consensus to authorise your revert? Broadly said, as far as it is done for politicians and footballers, those people born during the Soviet times were born in the Estonian SSR. Yes, geographically, it is/was Estonia. But, geographically, it is also Europe. So, huh? These people weren't born in Estonia as we know it today. Nor would anyone say someone born in Tallinn today would be from "Reval", simply because it was the old geographical name for the place. I, personally, don't mind "Estonia" instead of "Estonian SSR", in fact I prefer it, but in my eyes it's just wrong. Jared Preston (talk) 15:03, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

There was a lengthy discussion about this a few years ago - I don't have time to dig it our right now, sorry (I really should bookmark it). The consensus was that we'll use the geographical area for locations in biographies, as regimes will change but the geographical area remains the same. Also, we should always use the best-known English name for the area, but is just my personal opinion.

I think this is the only logical way to do it. Otherwise, my grandfather was born in Tsarist Russia, got married in Republic of Estonia, first child was born in Nazi Germany, second child in the Soviet Union and he died in in Republic of Estonia. All that while living in Pärnu.

--Sander Säde 15:20, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, you're right, it does seem strange. I'm living in Germany, and this is only an example to show you what I mean: Up until 20 years ago, "Germany" didn't exist. It was either East or West Germany. Prior to 1871, not even the German Empire existed, so someone born in Frankfurt before the 19th century would and could not have been born in Germany. Germany to me is the state that existed after German reunification. The Baltic States are obviously a different example with a different history, and Estonia is a lovely country (although I've yet to visit Pärnu), but when I, for example, look at the page "Tsardom of Russia", I wonder which ethnic Estonians born between 1547 and 1721 you could say were born in Estonia. Do you know what I'm getting at? I think I'm probably coming from a different direction, and as I say, I'm all for writing "Estonia" instead of the "Estonian SSR", but logic, as you say, doesn't really come into this in my opinion. It is just a fact. Regimes change every day, but this is the present and doesn't alter history. Jared Preston (talk) 15:42, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

It might be reasonable to bring the issue to some discussion board again, perhaps? While I think the current situation is the best solution, an in-depth discussion might bring better or smarter ones. --Sander Säde 17:17, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Expanding Purge (novel)

Hey, I am going to expand Purge (novel) per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (novels). Want to help? You seem to be pretty well versed in the book. Sadads (talk) 18:00, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello and thanks for expanding the article. You seem to do a very good job at it without my help as it is, but I'll try to take a look at the article sometime this coming week. --Sander Säde 08:08, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Speedy declined

A person who is president of a national society, such as Kaido Reivelt, President of the Estonian Physical Society, not only makes an assertion of importance, but meets the criteria in WP:PROF for notability. If you can, you could help by expanding the article with the additional information in the Estonian WP. DGG ( talk ) 17:40, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, I am not sure the whole society is notable... it is just a non-profit organization. --Sander Säde 19:25, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi

Hello, is it possible to have Contribution Script in Estonian Wikipedia? Cheers! :) Pelmeen10 (talk) 17:47, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Sure, but what is it? --Sander Säde 19:24, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Yea, I meant "Script: Quick edit count". Pelmeen10 (talk) 19:58, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Done - you need to add importScript('Kasutaja:Sander Säde/editcount.js'); to your monobook.js or vector.js in Estonian Wikipedia. --Sander Säde 10:44, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. Pelmeen10 (talk) 14:41, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Remy Põld

Hello Sander Säde. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Remy Põld, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Plays for a national sports team, that's enough for A7, even if it is U18. Take to AfD if required. Thank you. GedUK  21:16, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Assessing

I'm not sure about making difference between stub and start class articles. What do you think about Estonia at the 1928 Summer Olympics and Estonia at the 1992 Summer Paralympics, stub or start? Pelmeen10 (talk) 16:42, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

They are both largely lists and not articles. I would go with start for both, though. --Sander Säde 09:05, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Estonia/categories

Do you think we need it? Pelmeen10 (talk) 17:56, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

There was a reason why I created the list... but for the life of me, I cannot remember what that reason was. I would keep it for now, though. --Sander Säde 08:59, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Barn star

		The Estonia Barnstar of National Merit
		For your good work in WikiProject Estonia and noting the fact that a third of the GAs are yours. Martin (talk) 20:19, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! Only a third is a progress - for a long time only GA's for WP:Estonia were mine... --Sander Säde 08:53, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Achieving GA

Could you help me with Joel Lindpere and Andres Oper? I don't know what should I do to achive GA. Thanks! Pelmeen10 (talk) 02:43, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Both articles could use expansion, especially Andres Oper. After that, you should check that the article meets good article criteria. It would be also a good idea to list the articles in the Guild of Copy Editors and have someone check the articles for wiki-syntax, grammar and punctuation.

After all that is done, nominate the articles to Good Article Nominations, sports section. Hopefully someone will pick the article for a review in a week or few - and then you just have to fix the issues the reviewer points out.

--Sander Säde 09:42, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Pelmeen10 (talk) 13:55, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Publicwatchlist (script)

That watchlist was last updated on 15 March, something's wrong? Pelmeen10 (talk) 18:26, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, Wikipedia API seems to be bugged - it skipped about 8000 articles. I haven't tried yet if it has been fixed.

As for hiding your own edits - add &hidemyself=1 to the URL, i.e. to the end of http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Recentchangeslinked&target=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Estonia/publicwatchlist&hideminor=0&days=7&limit=50 in the script.

--Sander Säde 20:00, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

I figured it out, I changed it to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:RecentChangesLinked&hidemyself=1&target=Wikipedia%3AWikiProject_Estonia%2FEA. But what do you say about inactive WP:Estonian towns, should we merge with WP:Estonia? Pelmeen10 (talk) 01:50, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

API is fixed now, public watchlist updated. --Sander Säde 09:02, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Questions

Do you know where can I see how many Estonian footballers' articles have been deleted? And how many admin users are participants in WP:Estonia? Thanks. Pelmeen10 (talk) 10:22, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

No idea for both. However, I think that WP:Estonia has just one admin, Andres (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). He is practically not active in en:wiki, but he is the founder of et:wiki. --Sander Säde 09:09, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

You doubled some WP Estonia banners in talk pages. Pelmeen10 (talk) 12:27, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Ah, my bad. Script doesn't detect {{WP Estonia| template and thinks the pages are not tagged. --Sander Säde 12:38, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Really? I use that shortcut very often. Maybe some bot can change them? Pelmeen10 (talk) 14:20, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Google criticism removed

I added a section about criticism to Google Adwords page, and I was removed by you less than than a day later for... "spamkill"? I'm not familiar with the proper markup for html on wiki, so I thought I could just throw it up there and let somebody else take care of it.

Apparently that's not the case, since this is the second time somebody has removed one of my links without bothering to check if it's actual spam, or if there's any validity to the content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.247.65.219 (talk) 20:54, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Please see WP:VERIFIABILITY. Neither blogs nor online forums are not acceptable sources for Wikipedia. --Sander Säde 06:05, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

AE/AC amendment

I think you pretty much nail it here [14] but that AE seems to have been made more or less moot by the requested Amendment filed to the arbcom case here [15]. You might want to comment there instead.Volunteer Marek (talk) 06:04, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I was not aware of that, thanks for notifying me. I will see about commenting there tonight - or in a few days, when I've had a bit of time to gather my thoughts. --Sander Säde 06:13, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Please take a look at Forest Brothers article.

I asked for independent review to resolve our editorial differences. Your attempt to brand every editor from Great Toronto Area as "permabanned" is very amusing. But I see from Biophys's links that it worked for other editors before, so I understand your inclination to use a proven weapon to push your views once more. 216.66.131.87 (talk) 12:03, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion - A7

Hi, actually notability doesn't come into it. It is perfectly possible for a person to be unsuitable for speedying but to get deleted at AfD. Because speedy deletions take place without consensus they are reserved for clear cut cases of unimportance. If you consider that either of the subjects are non-notable then please feel free to take them to AfD. TerriersFan (talk) 02:47, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Bloom

Ahg... Isn't he persistent? You should probably get some other admin to review the situation as I am not familiar with IPs and I am away with very limited access to Internet these days. But thank you for keeping an eye for it. Renata (talk) 03:07, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Scripts...

Hi, I'm leaving you this message because it seems you're somewhat of a scripts guru here on Wikipedia. I posted the following message to the Help Desk a day or two ago and I didn't get an answer. I was hoping maybe you could help. Also, it would be preferable if you could respond on my talk page. Thanks.

Hello, I've been starting to experiment with my skin .js pages and trying to modify other scripts for my own use (in my own userspace of course). During this process I keep on finding variables like wgScriptPath, #wpSummary, wgCanonicalNamespace, etc. While I've been able to figure out the basic meaning of those above, there are many others variables I can't find out about. These variables aren't defined anywhere in the script so my first guess was that they were something like MediaWiki global variables. Can somebody please explain to me where I can find a listing and explanation of all these frequently occurring variables. Any help is very much appreciated,  M   Magister Scienta^talk (20 November 2011)

Hey - the documentation about Mediawiki API and scripts is rather... not that great. Good starting points are MediaWiki API and Manual:Interface/JavaScript. --Sander Säde 08:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Is anything wrong with the editcount script or it just won't work for me anymore? Pelmeen10 (talk) 01:05, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it is no longer working. I'll see what is wrong as soon as I can. --Sander Säde 19:29, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Re: The reverted edits

Why were the edits deleted? I removed uncited information, which should not have required general mass undoing of edits. I will probably be editing other pages anyway. Anonyma Mädel (talk) 02:51, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Your edits were tendentious and you removed cited information. In case of such of contested topics, I'd recommend discussing changes first on the talkpage. --Sander Säde 07:08, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Lagedi Põhikool

Sorry, you can't A7 a school. They can be speedied for hoax, attack or spam, but not notability. I'd suggest a prod... Peridon (talk) 14:31, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

AE request

This is notification that I have raised issues of your conduct at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Sander_S.C3.A4de. Y u no be Russavia ^{ლ(ಠ益ಠლ)} 11:17, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Lake Peipus

Please revisit Talk:Lake Peipus#Name_again Lotygolas Ozols (talk) 18:53, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Baltic Russians

You have reverted my edits in the article about Baltic Russians without having any legitimate reasons for that and without explaining your position. Among other things, you have removed the update concerning Alexei Kudrin, who is now a "former" minister, additional information about Tatjana Ždanoka,Viktor Uspaskich and Nikolai Novosjolov in "notable Baltic Russians" section, and, most importantly - updated statistical information (with documented sources) concerning the % of Russians in different parts of Estonia. I do not see any other word to name this but VANDALISM! If you don't agree with removal of references to Fourth Geneva convention, then I have created a special section in the "talk" page where you can present your arguments. Until concensus is reached, your malicious reverts will be considered an edit war.Dilas25 (talk) 11:01, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Please stop the pointless threats. It is very hard to recognize your legitimate, useful edits from introduction of systematic bias and whitewashing of the Soviet system. Also, please note that Wikipedia is not a forum, nor is Wikipedia a venue for original research - and your edits to the talk page and article violate those rules, respectively. --Sander Säde 11:09, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

LiveRebel

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LiveRebel - what about now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bogomil.shopov (talk • contribs) 16:48, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Still nothing to establish notability. I'd recommend just merging it to the ZeroTurnaround page. --Sander Säde 16:53, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

User script listings cleanup project

I'm leaving this message for known script authors and recent contributors to Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts.

This scripts listing page is in dire need of cleanup. To facilitate this, I've created a new draft listing at Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts cleanup. You're invited to list scripts you know to be currently working and relevant. Eventually this draft page can replace the current scripts listing.

If you'd like to comment or collaborate on this proposal, see the discussion I started here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject User scripts#Scripts listing cleanup project. Thanks! Equazcion ^(talk) 01:01, 25 Mar 2012 (UTC)

Invitation to events in June and July: bot, script, template, and Gadget makers wanted

I invite you to the yearly Berlin hackathon. It's 1-3 June and registration is now open. If you need financial assistance or help with visa or hotel, just mention it in the registration form.

This is the premier event for the MediaWiki and Wikimedia technical community. We'll be hacking, designing, and socialising, primarily talking about ResourceLoader and Gadgets (extending functionality with JavaScript), the switch to Lua for templates, Wikidata, and Wikimedia Labs.

Our goals for the event are to bring 100-150 people together, including lots of people who have not attended such events before. User scripts, gadgets, API use, Toolserver, Wikimedia Labs, mobile, structured data, templates -- if you are into any of these things, we want you to come!

I also thought you might want to know about other upcoming events where you can learn more about MediaWiki customization and development, how to best use the web API for bots, and various upcoming features and changes. We'd love to have power users, bot maintainers and writers, and template makers at these events so we can all learn from each other and chat about what needs doing.

Check out the the developers' days preceding Wikimania in July in Washington, DC and our other events.

Best wishes! - Sumana Harihareswara, Wikimedia Foundation's Volunteer Development Coordinator. Please reply on my talk page, here or at mediawiki.org. Sumana Harihareswara, Wikimedia Foundation Volunteer Development Coordinator 14:39, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Highbeam

Hi Sander, you may be interested in Wikipedia:HighBeam/Applications. Cheers, Nug (talk) 18:11, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Valtu and more

Please see the Commons page Commons:Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments 2011 in Estonia/Exhibition There is an exhibition of these photos now going on and they are using QRpedia labels. They asked for translations into English so the QR codes would work better (?) (or maybe just because there will be many non-Estonian, non-Russian speakers at the exhibition). In any case I translated 2 articles from Russian (with help from Google) and plan to do a few more. Maybe project Estonia can help with more translations. Not sure what the best thing to do on Valtu Manor. Any help appreciated. Smallbones (talk) 15:04, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

User script list deprecation

Wikipedia's list of user scripts is in bad shape, in that it is disorganized and contains many non-working, unmaintained, or thoroughly obsolete entries. Cleanup has been on the to-do list since 2007, but little progress has been made. Instead, the whole list is now set to be deprecated on 1 May 2012, to be replaced with a new list. This draft list has been up for about a month, and in that time I've been soliciting script users and authors to come add scripts they know to be working and relevant.

If you know of scripts that you would like to survive this deprecation (and are confirmed working and relevant), you're welcome to add them to the new list. Note that the old list will be retained and linked from the main list, so there is no real deadline. Thanks for your help. Equazcion ^(talk) 00:57, 22 Apr 2012 (UTC)

Hello

Thanks for your note, i'm new to this and will make sure to pay more attention to the future.

Mohdhm (talk) 09:56, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Please explain

this. Please choose your words carefully in your explanation. (Igny (talk) 00:36, 19 June 2012 (UTC))

Why do you think I should explain anything to you, especially considering the tone of your request? --Sander Säde 04:16, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

No, you do not have to explain anything to me. You might want to explan yourself here. (Igny (talk) 09:21, 19 June 2012 (UTC))

Your opinion on Karsten Brüggemann

From your post at the AE page I conclude that you have some connection to Estonia. What is your opinion on Prof Karsten Brüggemann from the Tallinn University? How weighty his opinion is?
Regards,--Paul Siebert (talk) 18:03, 22 June 2012 (UTC) (please, do not answer, because that may be interpreted as a violation of your topic ban)--Paul Siebert (talk) 17:38, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Sander, I initially planned to appeal your topic ban on your behalf, but this convinced me that that would be unsuccessful. Fortunately, your topic ban is relatively short, and I hope to see you soon back in Wikipedia. Good luck,--Paul Siebert (talk) 17:38, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Notice of arbitration enforcement

As the result of an arbitration enforcement discussion, you are notified that you are topic banned until 00:00 GMT on 24 September 2012 from the subject of Eastern Europe, broadly construed. This ban includes, but is not limited to, discussion of the subject on any page on Wikipedia, except to file an appeal to your sanction in the proper venue. You may appeal the sanction to the imposing administrator, the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, or the arbitration committee, either on the basis of error or to appeal for the sanction to be lifted after a period of good behavior. While the ban is in force, any edit in defiance of the ban will lead to a block from editing. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 07:23, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

How to get your ban clarified

Hello Sander Säde. Regarding your request for clarification. The ban was not imposed by Arbcom itself but at WP:Arbitration enforcement by User:Seraphimblade, as a result of WP:AE#Igny. Arbcom isn't exactly in a position to clarify a decision that they didn't make. You might be better off starting at User talk:Seraphimblade. If you are not satisfied with his response, you can appeal at AE using {{Arbitration enforcement appeal}}. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 16:08, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you - I left a message to Seraphimblade's talk page, [16]. Should I remove my clarification request from ArbCom page or is this something only clerks are allowed do to? --Sander Säde 16:18, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

If nobody has replied to your clarification request on the Arbcom page, I think you can remove it, with an explanation in your edit summary. EdJohnston (talk) 16:41, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Done, ty again. --Sander Säde 16:55, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined

I have declined your speedy deletion request on Defrage. The article has 3 sources (though none in English) which seem to refer to the band directly; that's sufficient to pass A7. However, if you think the sources aren't enough to meet WP:GNG, feel free to take the article to AfD. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:21, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Mart Sander

Hi. I saw your note on the talk page there. You have already done the research, you understand the BLP rules, and you are currently the person who is most familiar with the sources, so I would suggest that you go ahead to update the article. I would be happy to proofread when you are finished. If you feel energetic, you might also look at Swing Swindlers, which has a serious referencing problem. Happy editing! -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:55, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Baruto Kaito

Hello. Why did you revert my edit about the birthplace of Baruto? In 1984 there were no counties in Estonia, so it is not correct to mention Lääne-Viru County that did not exist as Baruto's birthplace. And Rakvere raion did exist - see et:Rakvere rajoon, ru:Раквереский район. In Estonian article there is a map of the raion with Väike-Maarja. Besides, Estonia was part of the USSR at that time.--IgorMagic (talk) 10:38, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

This has been discussed endlessly, over and over again - see for example, Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Baltic states-related articles. There is no dead-set consensus, but same as most editors, I prefer to go with the international law - during the Soviet occupation, Baltic states were not de jure part of the USSR (State continuity of the Baltic states has more details if you are interested) - which nicely also reduces confusion. E.g. Rakvere or Väike-Maarja as places existed before Soviet and German occupations, during those occupations and after the Soviet occupation.

I find that wiki-links to "Väike-Maarja, Estonia" are more useful than links to non-existing entities, as the latter would just increase the confusion. If there is some specific need to mention Soviet Union, I think "Väike-Maarja, Estonia (then Estonian SSR)" would be the best solution.

And last but not least, it seems that sources give his birthplace as Estonia, not Estonian SSR. See Grand Sumo Home Page or Sumo Reference

--Sander Säde 11:09, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Canid hybrids reference

Hi. Please, consider to undo the deletion of the reference to http://petsaspests.blogspot.com.es/search/label/canid%20hybridization There's no selfpub and all the information is updated and objective. If any link included there has changed this is very common in wikipedia and, at least, with this site you still have the summaries. None of the articles included are off-topic. --Kokopelado (talk) 12:52, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

It is up to you, but I would link the actual scientific articles. Blog is still just a self-published source, even if all it does is give summaries of valid souces. --Sander Säde 14:56, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

People born in Estonia

Hi there. Is there any difference between people born in Estonia between 1940 and 1990, and people born in Latvia and Lithuania in the same period? Or what about people born in the former Yugoslavia or the former Czechoslovakia? In all of those cases, the people are listed as born in the historical country, and this practice is also supported by this discussion, isn't it? Mentoz86 (talk) 08:42, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Actually, this discussion - if anything - supports the opposite view. And if anything, Baltic states are rather special case - while de facto they were occupied by the Sovier Union, de jure they remained independent (see State continuity of the Baltic states) - and sorting that controversy out has been rather fruitless, as every now and then some new bright eyed editor or old tired sock will just want to have his way with the birthplaces once again. Many megabytes of text have been written about it, see Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Baltic states-related articles and its archives for some.

Most editors seem to prefer simpler version of the biographies - stop sorting out the political entities and go with the geographical name, which allows the reader to follow the political development of the area if s/he wishes. As for "sorting out"... I've given my grandfather as an example before. He was born in the Russian Empire, married in Republic of Estonia, first child was born in Soviet Union, second in Nazi Germany and third in Soviet Union. He died in Republic of Estonia - and all that time he lived in the city of Pärnu.

--Sander Säde 08:57, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Also, for my own future reference, User talk:Kevin McE/Archives/2009#Estonians_under_Soviet_Union?, User talk:H2ppyme#Place of birth and contemporary sovreign state, Talk:Martin Reim, Talk:Sergei Pareiko, Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies/2011 archive#Country of birth, for historic (and current) bios, part II.--Sander Säde 09:04, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, after reading through a couple of discussions, I know your viewpoint in this. I've now also read the RFC at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Baltic states-related articles, which was closed as no consensus. So basically, you have no consensus that support your revert of me, just your own personal bias? Would you please show me atleast one discussion where there is a consensus for not including the historical country? Mentoz86 (talk) 09:20, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, but I have no interest in wasting my time yet again to re-hash the same arguments over and over again. Try your luck with H2ppyme (talk · contribs), Jaan (talk · contribs) or Nug (talk · contribs), as they are more eloquent than I - and may be interested in discussing this. Or alternatively, raise the topic at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Baltic states-related articles, as it would be really nice to have an actual guideline in place. --Sander Säde 09:28, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

There is an actual policy, and it is located at Wikipedia:Proper names#Place names. Mentoz86 (talk) 09:39, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Not sure how Wikipedia:Proper names#Place names is relevant. Is someone not using a proper name for Estonia somewhere? --Sander Säde 09:41, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Many place names have a historical context that should be preserved, but common sense should prevail. There can be few places that have not been parts of more than one culture or have had only one name. An article about Junipero Serra should say he lived in Alta Mexico not the U.S. state of California because the latter entity did not exist at the time of Junipero Serra. The Romans invaded Gaul, not France, and Thabo Mbeki was the president of the Republic of South Africa, not of the Cape Colony. Just like Aleksander Baldin was born in the Soviet Union or Estonian SSR, Soviet Union and not Estonia. Mentoz86 (talk) 10:31, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, and the historical English name for place now called Estonia is... ***shock*** Estonia - at least for a century or more. As for the Aleksander Baldin, if you go with Russian viewpoint, he was born in Estonian SSR. If you follow what the majority of sources say - see State continuity of the Baltic states - no, he wasn't born in Estonian SSR. So, for the sake of simplicity and clarity, he was not born in neither Estonian SSR nor Republic of Estonia, but just Estonia. --Sander Säde 10:47, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

P.S. I simply cannot understand why people want to follow this faulty and complex "SSR" logic as opposed to using a simple geographical place... --Sander Säde 10:47, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Tokyo2001...

...seems to be a 'continuation sock' of this IP. Interestingly, the IP geolocates to the US. Jacob Peters perhaps. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 14:15, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

You are probably correct - although, unfortunately both proxies and VPNs are so easy to use these days. What surprises me is a fixation only to some (three?) biographical articles. --Sander Säde 14:22, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Categories on redirects

Why are you removing these? They're perfectly legitimate. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:30, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, yes and no - Wikipedia:Categorizing redirects says "Redirects aren't articles and most shouldn't be categorized as such". If there is an useful category, then there should be a redirect, but if the redirect is to an article that has no relevant information - such as those that you reverted - then the redirect is unneeded at best and misleading most of the time. In general, redirects should not show up in the article categories. --Sander Säde 09:39, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

I would disagree that any of these categories are not relevant to the redirects in question. Wikipedia:Categorizing redirects allows them if they are useful. How is it not useful to categorise buildings in their architectural styles, for example? Trust me that it is very useful for me! -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:45, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Any chance you could restore just the architectural style category, then? Redirect pages showing up in the WP:Estonia categories is a major pita for automatic watchlist and similar tools - and I would say that at the very least, to justify the category, redirect should at least have a separate section in the redirect target page. --Sander Säde 09:54, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Done. I've kept the cats for the buildings and the ship, all of which I think are fully justified. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:46, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! --Sander Säde 10:48, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Teet Kask page

Hi, Sander! Could you please advise what information should be changed or deleted in the page of Teet Kask. You have edited the page recently. I apologize for not knowing all the rules at Wikipedia. I would appreciate if you answer to me in talk section. IleneOkkim (talk) 16:58, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

That article seems to be largely created by Teet Kask himself, going by the editors names - Brorbjork (bjork is birch in Swedish, Kask in Estonian), K.a.s.k.project, Teet Kask - which would violate WP:COI guideline. The article doesn't use any real sources (see WP:SOURCES - self-published, such as Youtube channel or Facebook page aren't considered acceptable sources) nor does it give any idea how or why this person is notable (WP:NOTABILITY) and should have a Wikipedia article dedicated to him.

Frankly, the whole thing reads like a typical self-created vanity article - and if notability could be established, I would recommending scrapping the whole page and rewriting it from scratch using proper format and sources, not to mention, a neutral point of view.

--Sander Säde 17:17, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the information and tips. IleneOkkim (talk) 18:29, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Category:Aruküla

Hello Sander Säde. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Category:Aruküla, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: C1 does not apply to category redirects. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 01:07, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Timo Toots

Hi, I've replied here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:URH88#Proposed_deletion_of_Timo_Toots

Best, URH88 (talk) 09:45, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Clarification motion

A case (Eastern Europe) in which you were involved has been modified by motion which changed the wording of the discretionary sanctions section to clarify that the scope applies to pages, not just articles. For the arbitration committee --S Philbrick(Talk) 15:32, 27 October 2014 (UTC)