User talk:Volker89

Welcome!

Hello, Volker89, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Here are a few more good links for to help you get started:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  -- Longhair 01:13, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell: Double Agent

Where has this been reported as a launch game for Wii? I have not even see any confirmatio of a Wii version at all. TJ Spyke 00:57, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

The proof is in the links: [1] [2] Volker89 9:04 PM, 8 September 2006 EST.

OK, thank you. It's just that we've had problems in the past with people putting in games and not having any proof. TJ Spyke 01:15, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Flag of Japan

Hello, I noticed your changes to several Olympic pages, with respect to the flag of Japan. First, you should know that the "correct" way to make those changes is not to edit the Olympic articles that use FlagIOCxxx templates directly, but instead make changes to the underlying flag template. In this case, look at the source of {{country flag IOC alias JPN}}, which I have edited to reproduce your desired effect. These templates dynamically select a flag image for use in the appropriate articles. That way, you do not have to edit hundreds of articles when a new flag image is used; a single edit takes care of them all. Therefore, I also reverted your changes to the 2000-2006 Olympic pages. The {{FlagIOC}} templates are used for good reason; please do not replace them with hard-coded images and links.

Now, the other issue is the use of that flag variant for pre-1999 Olympic pages. Do you think it is really necessary? The change from 10:7 to 3:2 aspect ratio (which is very close, at 10.5:7) is obviously too subtle to notice on a 22 pixel icon. Also, the big advantage of the previous version is that the bordered flag was used for all pages. The icon flag for Japan looks terrible without the border, and so using the "variant" flag makes all the older Olympic pages use border-less images. It is not possible to use a border template with the FlagIOC template; I tried that already. Would you object terribly if I reverted country_flag_IOC_alias_JPN back to using the bordered flag for all years? Thanks for your comments, Andrwsc 19:33, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

In response to your well detailed comments on November 20, no I do not object to this move. I was just trying to edit each page for historical accuracy. I was not really familiar with the workings of the flag IOC templetes. So, if it is too much of a hassle to use a "variant" flag, then I do understand using the bordered flag. I'm sorry for any trouble and for not responding sooner. Volker89 23:00, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Japan flag template

Hello, I noticed youre changes to the name of alias in Template:Country data Japan from {{flagcountry|Japan|ww2}} to {{flagcountry|Japan|naval}}. You probably didn't realize but your edit messed up in several dozens of articles which are using {{flagcountry|Japan|ww2}} alias. I understand that you wanted to make name of alias more correct historically but name of alias have to be easy to remember and enter. Please don't make such edits next time without contact with author of alias. Regards, Piotr Mikołajski 19:32, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Cases of controversial relations with the Axis of World War II

Hi. You may have seen that Torb37 has cluttered up the article with his usual sub-literate verbiage. Is it even worth retaining, or do we just spike it? Biruitorul 22:41, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Maybe, we should just cut it back a little. Volker89 22:43, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Template:Country data Serbia

You've added two new flags to this template but it seems that one of these flags (Image:Flag of SR Serbia 2004-2006.svg) were deleted. Please fix this template as soon as possible. Regards, Piotr Mikołajski 08:00, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm on it. Volker89 15:33, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Flag of the Soviet Union

Before you replace Image:Flag of the Soviet Union.svg with 1923 version of the flag next time, please, clarify 1923 version's usage period citing reliable sources. Because in the Great Soviet Encyclopedia, published in the 1970s, 1923 version already was not used (image from there is available here). I suppose, that 1923 version was replaced before the WWII or shortly afterwards. Cmapm 21:27, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

How do I clarify that? Volker89 00:40, 21:27, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikimedia Pennsylvania

Hello there!

I'm writing to inform you that we are now forming the first local Wikimedia Chapter in the United States: Wikimedia Pennsylvania. Our goals are to perform outreach and fundraising activities on behalf of the various Wikimedia projects. If you're interested in being a part of the chapter, or just want to know more, you can:

• Contact us on IRC at #wikimedia-pa
• Join our mailing list
• Visit our blog at http://wmfpa.blogspot.com

Thanks and I hope you join up! Cbrown1023 talk 04:48, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Re Alterations to List of Aircraft of the RNZAF

Changes have unfortauntely left the name "Nazi Germany" next to British Klemm and Messerschmitt - political party in power at the time is irrelevant (well maybe not so for the Messerschmitt, but we don't say "F-15, Republican American, F-16 Democrat America"). What was wrong with using the flag without the National Socialists being mentioned? Winstonwolfe 03:05, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:Kurdistan Workers Party flag (current).gif

Hi, I have removed the image from the two articles over copyright concerns. The image is unfortunately under fair use. If you can establish a consensus that the image is PD, then it can be used in articles in a problem free manner. -- Cat ^chi? 07:29, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Montenegrin Flag

You reverted it several times. Why? --PaxEquilibrium 10:00, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

On what page? Volker89 16:23, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

On several (Kingdom, Principality, WWII). --PaxEquilibrium 21:47, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Those are what, I believe, are the correct flags.Volker89 19:39, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, sorry - I mixed your edits with another. --PaxEquilibrium 15:11, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Hungary - Carpatho-Ukraine

Volker89,

I'm afraid you are wrong with the Ukrainian flag here for (at least) two reasons:

• Carpatho-Ukraine was not a state so it cannot be mentioned as predecessor state,
• Carpatho-Ukraine had nothing to do with Ukraine that time thus the flag is not appropraite at all,

so could you please stop fighting about it, even if Hobartimus is far not the kindest user of Wikipedia.

Thanks,

--peyerk 08:11, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Then the Ukrainian flag should be removed from the Carpatho-Ukraine page if thats the case. Oh, and what about the Baranya-Baja Republic? Volker89 14:07, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

This "republic" existed for 11 (or 12) days as seen in the article. That formation had nothing common with anything regarded a state but a few men declaring themselves a political leadership.

Mentioning it in an encyclopedia as an interesting page in the book of history is ok but regarding it a real state... no.

--peyerk 18:21, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

December 2007

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary, which wasn't included with your recent edit to World War I. Thank you. -MBK₀₀₄ 23:16, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

British Raj Flag Change, December 2007

Hello. You also didn't supply an edit summary for edit of the Dominion of Pakistan article. It seems your main change was to change the flag that is used for the British Rule in India in 1947. Could you please provide a rationale for this over on the talk page for the Dominion of Pakistan? Thank you. Ajobin (talk) 22:27, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I left a note on the Dominion of Pakistan's talk page. Hope that clears things up. Volker89 (talk) 22:57, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Argentina Flag

Hi, I noticed your recent edits to the List of Sovereign states in X articles, and I was just curious what the source is on that plain Argentina flag? I was under the impression that the flag with the sun had been Argentina's flag since the 19th century, and I can't find any reference to the flag changing in 1983 on FOTW or in the Flag of Argentina article. Thanks. Orange Tuesday (talk) 17:10, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

The source I was using is on the List of Argentine flags page. It says the flag without the sun was used from 1812 to 1983. After that, the flag with the sun was used. --Volker89 (talk) 17:16, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Huh. That's interesting. I'm not sure that List of Argentine flags is right, then. Flag of Argentina claims that the national flag dates from 1812, [3] says it was last modified in 1818, and [4] has there being a sun on the flag since 1816. None of those pages say anything about 1983. Orange Tuesday (talk)

One of us or someone else should change the List of Argentine flags then, or at least bring this topic up on its discussion page. Volker89 (talk) 17:59, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I changed it. I'm pretty sure that it's right now. Orange Tuesday (talk) 18:36, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, by the way, thanks for doing so much clean-up on the List of sovereign states pages. They've been looking a lot better lately. Orange Tuesday (talk) 18:38, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

No prob. Volker89 (talk) 19:51, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 21:09, 30 August 2008 (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, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes 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. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

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) 01:16, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:43, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

November 2021

This edit appears to be nonsense. Jc3s5h (talk) 22:53, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

My apologies. Must have happened when my phone was in my pocket. Like "butt-dialing". Volker89 (talk) 23:44, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:09, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

June 2023

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! TylerBurden (talk) 15:39, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I will keep that in mind. Volker89 (talk) 16:36, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:09, 19 November 2024 (UTC)