User talk:Netrat

Concerning your comment on my talk page: the items from the trivia section were converted to footnotes (see WP:FOOTNOTE) to convey the information better and avoid a list of random bulleted information. See also WP:TRIVIA regarding trivia sections. Just64helpin (talk) 23:38, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.: Part of the trivia section was also converted into the "past influences" section. Just64helpin (talk) 00:00, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The references to Davis, Joplin, etc are not directly made in the film. The inclusion of this material may be original research and needs sources. Unsourced material may be removed at any time. If sources that draw connections between the animated characters and actual persons are found, the material may be restored and placed in the "past influences" section, or as footnotes. Just64helpin (talk) 02:34, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning your message, I edited simple because ANN has an incorrect information listing about her year of birth. Neither does Geneon, blog, fansite, nor JP Wiki list or mention her year of birth. Please keep it that way until an official listing from any of those sites emerges. Anime News Network does not constitute as "accurate" information listing. Also, her name is suppose to be capitalized.

Thank you for your time.--24.12.22.32 (talk) 07:46, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neither Geneon or I'VE Sound have released any information pertaining to her year of birth, nor KOTOKO for the matter has revealed her year of birth. Russian Wiki copied it from the English Wiki version, same as to what ANN did."Supposively", the guess of her year of birth came from one of her BBS fansites, that was wishing her a happy birthday. Russian Wiki is NOT the primary source "on Wiki" for information concerning KOTOKO, it is the JP Wiki. I took the time and translated half of the JP Wiki stuff and implanted it onto the English Wiki article for KOTOKO back in 2006.

Albeit, ANN is a reliable source for "anime". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.12.22.32 (talk) 21:55, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Netrat msk,

I saw it was you who added the russian equivalent of the cult video games article.
Since I don't know any Russian, I though I might enquire whether you know for certain if you linked to the right article, since a big part of the list of games I see on the Russian page would not be considered cult-games (though some do as well).

cheers GameLegend (talk) 11:27, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GameLegend, I have linked the right page. The literal translation of the name of the page is "Cult computer games". Yes, we do have a major problem with this page in Russian Wiki, as some people don't seem to understand what cult game is, stating that any hit game is a cult game and any hit film is a cult film. We are working on re-writing Russian article. Netrat_msk (talk) 11:32, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okido. Thank you.

I was just curious, hence the question ;-)

cheers GameLegend (talk) 10:33, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No offense, but it seems that you don't know much about Ukrainian rap. VovaZiL'vova had a hip-hop TV show on the television channel M1, which greatly popularized home-grown rap in Ukraine. Vkhid U Zminnomu Vzutti was also well-known, in particular its member Potap, and WolFF is Lviv's number one club rapper. There are many more Ukrainophone groups that are way more serious than TNMK, which is sort of a joke, and they should be mentioned. If you want proof, go to YouTube and type in some of those names - you'll see a good amount of professional clips. Cossack (talk) 08:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for information. I guess that being a host of a TV show does make you a popular person, it however does not make you a popular rapper.

As for WolFF, does "club rapper" mean he uses crank style or does it mean he only raps at parties? If he's a party MC without any published albums (mixtapes don't count), I don't think he's notable enough, as there are dozens of such MC who are only known to a very small selection of clubgoers.

I have never seen any of albums by these artists posted to rapsubs.com.ua, so how come they are popular and they had never been pirated by this wonderful web site? ;-)

As for YouTube, there are professional videos by a lot of people, Ugo for example, but you are not including them into the article, so I'm not sure this is a proper argument.

There is a list of criteria for musicians: Wikipedia:Music#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles? Do these artists qualify?

My point is there are be a lot of older bands that are still not covered in the article, so including much younder bands looks like an advertisment. Netrat_msk (talk) 09:05, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree with you on scrapping WolFF. Vova is beyond question, however, and VUZV's Potap is very well-known - although perhaps not so much in Europe or America since they weren't around to sing on the Maidan in 2004. With regard to YouTube videos - maybe western amateurs can make professional-looking videos, but in Eastern Europe it's hard to find that kind of technical expertise without decent money. Even renouned artists often have a hard time producing quality videos. As for the site you linked, there was barely any Ukrainophone rap mentioned on it aside from TNMK. Believe me, I don't enjoy arguing about this, but one thing I enjoy less than arguing about which musician is more popular is seeing TNMK with idiotic songs like Do Me The Hip-Hop and Dybany Mene as the the only representatives of an entire genre of music in Ukraine. Cossack (talk) 09:18, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"In Eastern Europe it's hard to find that kind of technical expertise without decent money" - having spent my whole life in Russia, I sure know this :-) But having a pofessional video does not make an artist an established one. For example, there are miriads of wanna be pop starlets in ex-USSR, who have no recognizion but have professional videos paid off by their wealthy husbands or parents. Did you ever heard of Valov's 13-y.o. protege Zhorik? Althoug, I agree that this hardly applies to these rappers. If you are sure they are good examples of what's going on the scene and you are not assotiated with them, I guess it's safe to have them in the article. But anyway, mentioning younger bands and no mentioning older, more established bands is not OK, do you agree?

TNMK may sound like clowns sometimes, but songs like Voda prove that they are not ones. After all, when hip-hop originated in 70's, it was fun party music with a twist of humour, only embracing more serious themes of Public Ennemy and GangStarr much later. I believe Kharkov should be proud to have TNMK, and mindless club rap such as crunk is much more shamefull than light pop-rap tunes of TNMK and Boombox. Netrat_msk (talk) 10:07, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ну в принципе я согласен, что юмор в отечественной музыке - это плюс. Но если бы ТНМК только шутили - музыка у них не то что бы даже нормальная. Вот, например, слегка хип-хопистый Тартак или там Борщ (панк-рок) тоже с юмором поют, а вот музыка у них живая, хорошая. Учитывая качество творчества, которое видно на современной украинской музыкальной арене, две-три хорошие песни ТНМК (по-моему) не извиняют. Вообще о вкусах не спорят, но найдите в инете записи Вовы со Львова или ВУЗВ (могу линки дать) - сразу поймете, что это настоящий хип-хоп, с которым ТНМК ни в какое сравнение не идет. А ВульФФа я дейстивельно зря включил, пойду-ка удалю. Кроме как во Львове о нем мало кто знает.

P.S. Кстати, насчет клипов - в России у всяких там музыкантов-новичков на такое гораздо больше возможностей, чем у их коллег в Украине. Об этом как-то в интервью заявил Олег Скрипка. Cossack (talk) 03:36, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Тартак слушаю с огромным удовольствием, особенно "Систему Нервов". Но не сказал бы, что они "живее" ТНМК. Как по составу (в ТНМК даже больше инструменталистов, чем в Тартаке, есть даже духовики), так и по настроению. Вот альбом Jazz Live у ТНМК слышали? Это же что-то невероятное. Куда уж живее? За линки на Вову со Львова и ВУЗВ буду благодарен (ВУЗВ у меня был, но всего один сборник и в плохом качестве). Насчёт клипов - не знаю-не знаю, у российских 2H Company и Gunmakaz до сих пор клипов нет. Попсовые варианты вроде KREC считать не будем? Вообще мне казалось, что на Украине ситуация с музыкой получше, чем в России, заваленной попсовым продуктом. А Сприпка, видимо, намекал на московское "Наше Радио", дающее площадку молодой поросли поп-рока. Netrat_msk (talk) 09:54, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Вову со Львова и ВУЗВ можно скачать тут. А еще тут есть целый альбом Вовы. На здоровье! :-) Cossack (talk) 17:14, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, my suggestion is to mention the specific Academy Award win, as well as other wins or nominations, after the first sentence of the lead section. Saying "Academy Award-winning" is too vague and attaches too much instant credibility to the film when the specific accolades can be identified after the basic film information. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:31, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MOSFILM#Lead section suggests skipping the vague wording of "Academy Award-winning" and instead specifying the wins and nominations later on. I haven't evaluated the impact of such wording with biographical articles, as most awards are pretty high-level. However, Academy Awards can cover different categories and fail to truly establish the kind of credibility a film has. Just because there was a good song in the film does not necessarily mean the whole film is to be touted. I've also taken the liberty to specifically mention the Academy Award wins. I think the other awards mentioned in the article body should have some mention, too, though. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 18:09, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't do [this]. Post your reply beneath existing remarks, not all up inside of them. I have reverted your edits as it made the conversation very difficult to follow as you could no longer tell where my comments ended and yours began. This would be considered refactoring the conversation as it makes it appear there was a back-and-forth that was not really there. Thanks Beeblbrox (talk) 17:31, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not leave condescending messages on my talk page. I made a comment about the title of the article, hip hop music, before the vote over the title was ever made. So there is really no reason to be telling me in your didactic tone to "pay attention" to some vote that occurred after I made the comment. Regardless of the vote (the result of which I respect), the phrase "hip hop music" is a misnomer. The correct term is rap music. Fortunately and unfortunately, Wikipedia is all about consensus. But regardless of the consensus among the opinions in the Wiki community, the title of this article is incorrect, and it will continue to misinform. ask123 (talk) 01:18, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not willing to go into details about her private life (she's a friend of mine), but the information you insist on restoring is inaccurate. Please leave it as is: it clearly states she's transgendered in the first paragraph, but her status is hardly notable beyond a simple comment as to that fact. em zilch (talk) 17:11, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the sentences, "redacted as a BLP violation. This one was inadvertent, I realise, as it was posted in an admonishment; the key to remember is that this should be removed wherever it's seen. I appreciate everyone's understanding in the matter. Regards, Daniel (talk) 13:52, 12 October 2008 (UTC)". em zilch (talk) 21:58, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Basic_human_dignity Wikipedia is not a tabloid. Embarassing personal information about somebody's medical past is a private matter.--Sonjaaa (talk) 21:47, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why have you removed singles section from Discography, italic style of russian words and links to other artists? --Ypcyc (talk) 08:53, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• I have replaced singles with videos. Actually, there are videos for all these songs, but AFAIK none were releases as singles. In fact, single records are extremely rare in Russia and other CIS countries. As for italics, I just didn't bother, feel free to re-introduces them. As for links to other artists, I don't recall removing them. Do you meed Azad? If so, I'll add back. Netrat (talk) 10:31, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Ok, if so, then please provide video for "Рэп vs. СПИД Feat. ВВЖ", it a single. You think that if you don't know anything his about singles then you can just delete information that other people have added? Yes, singles are extremely rare in Russia, but they were issued and I studied his forum: http://forum.kingring.ru/showthread.php?t=2424 You can check single covers there.
  PS Hope you will restore singles section yourself this time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ypcyc (talk • contribs) 09:24, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. A proposal on the re-creation of WP:RUSSIA is currently underway at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Russia/Proposal. One of the main points is that we should have workgroups covering different topics. We are trying to ascertain the interest of editors in various workgroups under WP:RUSSIA, such as history, politics, biographical, etc; as your userpage indicates you are Russian or live in Russia, perhaps you can take a read of the proposal, comment on it wherever you have thoughts, and perhaps provide details of any Russian topics you may be interested and are willing to collaborate with other editors on? Your input is valued. Cheers. --Russavia ^{Dialogue Stalk me} 20:35, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Regarding the walrus-related line that is commented out in the Lolcat article, concerns were already raised about it on the talk page, so please don't restore it without first discussing on the talk page. Thanks. —Politizer^{( talk • contribs )} 13:43, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know there had been an AfD on lolrus; if you had pointed that out when the discussion was going on, that would have been helpful. Anyway, the fact that lolrus redirects to lolcat doesn't exempt anyone from WP standards; you still have to have a source before adding information to the article. If you have a good source that explicitly states that lolrus emerged from lolcat, or that they are related phenomena, or even just mentions the two in the same breath, then add the information back in, but make sure you cite it and that it's not speculation or original research. The lolcat bible is not a valid source for this information; merely showing that one meme has mentioned the other doesn't satisfy the standards.

Once you've found a source, it may be appropriate to have a sentence or two just stating "the lolcat meme has spawned similar memes, such as the lolrus, and X, and X, and X...." so that people who got there from redirects won't be confused. —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 00:13, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This may not be your intention, but you appear to be badgering User:Daniel.[1] Please stop now, or else further measure will be taken to preserve the harmonious environment of Wikipedia. Jehochman ^Talk 13:10, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, please observe biography of living persons restrictions. You may not add poorly sourced, controversial material about any living person to Wikipedia, as you did here. Jehochman ^Talk 13:12, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would you review his talk page history, you'd find very unfriendly comments he made towards me, while I had not volated any rules usually assotiated with trolling (Wikipedia:No personal attacks and Wikipedia:Civility). If I made a violation of WP:BLP at his talk page, this was unintentional. Regarding my edit, this statement is not poorly sourced or controversial. The source is a reliable magazine with circulation of 65 000 per week. The said article has been among references in WP article before I started editing it; plus a partial translation of that publication is used on the the language's official home page itself. I would like to get a formal appology for falsely accusing me in adding poorly sourced material.Netrat (talk) 13:24, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can provide you with further info via e-mail or wikimail, as I won't be surprised if User:Daniel would stalk me using all his administrative privilegies. Netrat (talk) 13:31, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making frivolous complaints, assuming bad faith, and engaging in disruptive behaviors. Circulation does not matter. A minor computer magazine, inaccessible to most English speakers, cannot be used to make a controversial assertion about a living person in the English Wikipedia. Jehochman ^Talk 13:38, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just thought I'd let you know which sources don't cut it: the five press releases/trivial mentions you cited in the DRV. The article itself has no secondary sources, just mediatraffic.de . Also, I can't find anything that gives any significant mention of the chart, just trivial references to chart positions. Even Mediabase surely turns up a couple sources regarding when the chart was founded, how it's tabulated, etc., and I'm finding nothing of this sort for the UWC. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 15:27, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As already said, I. m not suggesting using five press releases/trivial mentions as sources for articles. They are not sources, but media mentions that show that the only argument to delete the article was false Netrat (talk) 15:56, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did article has any issues other than notability? I guess I was written using primary sources only? Netrat (talk) 15:57, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, how do I get notified when an article I've edited is AfD'ed? The way you are notified? Where do I post request?= sometimes a bot will tell you but that if you started a article also if you use a speical program it will tell them also you can use the help me tag in the welcome comment some posted and ask you question there if you need more help i hope thats helps youOo7565 (talk) 05:33, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on United World Chart, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to a user page from the main/article space.

If you can fix the redirect to point to a regular Wikipedia article rather than a user page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you are fixing the redirect. If you think the redirect should be retained as is for some reason, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your reasoning on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. ViperSnake151 14:55, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For the moment, it is a draft in my personal user space, and I wanted to ensure nothing I didn't intend gets into the draft before it's completed. If you want me to implement something, I will do it myself, but I wanted to avoid people sneaking in something that I wouldn't notice until later. I hope you understand. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:04, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I felt that not including genres artists create to describe themselves is sufficiently covered by the earlier points (particularly "Is the genre real?"). At most a one sentence explaination can be added, so I wll probably do that. Keep in mind some people feel the proposal is too detailed, so I was trying to avoid "spelling it out" too much. As for the genre examples, folk metal and skate punk aren't as well known and as written about as the others I listed; I wanted to stick with ones people would be familiar with. By the way, I haven't read any sources that classify nu metal as a form of alternative rock. I've extensively studied both the heavy metal and alternative rock genres due to my work involvling those subjects; all metal sources consider it metal, while alternative rock sources only talk about how the genre supplanted alt-rock as it declined in popularity in the late 1990s. WesleyDodds (talk) 06:18, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Netrat. At x.org I opened a request to add an acute accent to the russian keyboard layout. Since I have seen that you contributed to [Stress (linguistics)], would you please be so kind to state your opinion of how and where an acute accent would make most sense. TIA, Helge--Hhielscher (talk) 14:33, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the best place would be after the alphabet, at a separate line. Please consider adding other symbols that are common in Russian, but very rare in other languages to the same group or line as stress mark:

• • « , » , § , № , probably even rubl sign and hryvna sign.

Also, be sure to ask the same question to User:Mitrius: he holds a linguistics degree from Moscow State University. Netrat (talk) 16:56, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adding further symbols to the keyboard would require to use the third level (often called Alt Gr). My original idea was to add such a third level for the Russian keyboard, but without assigning a key to 3rd level by default. User:Imz and Sergey V. Udaltsov suggested not to use the third level, but rather put a dead (double) acute on Shift-2 or Shift-3.--Hhielscher (talk) 07:57, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that I misunderstood your original question. I thought you were a developer for Wikimedia and idea was to add a stress mark to cytillic virtial keyboard used in Wikimedia projects - and you were looking where to position this character

If you were talking about real keyboard layout, than I have no ideas. Frst of all, I'm a Windows user, and I know absolutely nothing about *nix GUI traditions, keyboard layouts and localizations, exepct the fact that you use KOI-8R and KOI-8U encodings. And, wait, KOI-8R encoding doesn't have "ё" letter! That's what I know. I do not plan switching to Linux.

Thanks Netrat for your answer.Modern Linux/Unix System use Unicode by default. ё is on the left hand side of 1 here.--Hhielscher (talk) 15:10, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Introducing a global improvement to an existing kayboard layout sounds like an utipical idea to me. With a decent word processor, you can setup an auto-replace or a similiar option that will isert a desired symbol when you hit a pre-defined combination. This way any user can choice the key or combination he or she prefers. Why don't you just do this? Netrat (talk) 13:01, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am looking for a solution that works system wide in all applications.--Hhielscher (talk) 15:10, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What are your plans for this article?—Kww(talk) 22:25, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to build a new one using layout, core and some information from the old one as soon as I have to time to do my research and find enough reliable sources covering the subject. Right now I'm short of time, so I cannot say for sure when I'll finish this work. Are you interested in this subject? Netrat (talk) 01:41, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just would like to see the process ended one way or the other. I'm about to have their website put into the blacklists to ensure that no further links can be set up to their site, and am investigating building a bot which reverts additions of any references to the United World Chart (or about ten other unreputable record charts). If you can manage to actually find someway to demonstrate that it is a notable and reputable site, I'll have to change my plans.—Kww(talk) 01:49, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, is there any kind of deadline? I guess I had to hurry? Netrat (talk) 04:28, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't enforce a deadline. The bot isn't anything I can get built in a few days. Mainly what I need to know is if you've actually found sources beyond what you mentioned in the DRV. If you have, and I find them convincing, I'll leave the UWC out of my plans. If not, I'll continue ahead, and check back with you before anything is actually turned on.—Kww(talk) 04:38, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I still don't think it stands a chance. Also, other editors seem to be editing it as if it were an actual article. 0.o Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 22:28, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Netrat/United World Chart, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Netrat/United World Chart and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Netrat/United World Chart during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. —Kww(talk) 23:54, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I notice you still haven't made any changes to the page since its nomination even though you said you would. Have you been busy, or did you forget or something? I still don't see much purpose in keeping it around, but eh. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 18:00, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yep, sorry. I said I'll try to work on that article, so I actually was not promising. You are right, I've been busy with work and ru-wiki activities. However, recently I've got an idea how to improve this article. I'm thinking about using de-wiki article that survived nomination as a blueprint or at least a guideline. Netrat (talk) 18:12, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Interesting thing there is the documentation of the UWC's claim of using official albums charts from countries that don't have an official album chart, such as Brazil.—Kww(talk) 18:42, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • O RLY? If so, then that should be a big red flag. I should also note that United World Chart has been salted. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 19:52, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not edit this page until you understand what dodgeball is and what it is not. If you do have information relating to the history of the sport of dodgeball, add it with citations. Otherwise, please leave the page alone as your edits were irrelevant and poorly written.Basket548 (talk) 14:40, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, I looked at the history and realized that you are correct, it was vandalized prior to your edits. Did not mean to be hostile, just had a bunch of vandals lately and was a bit irked. Still, maybe (and please take this as constructive criticism) you should check out the history of a page before you wikify it? Otherwise you end up hiding vandalism under a pile of your own edits. (unless you're using a bot, in which case, maybe the bot's settings should be changed)Basket548 (talk) 16:10, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

--Versageek 00:42, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Netrat. Based on the templates on your talk page, please consider joining the Article Rescue Squadron. Rescue Squadron members are focused on rescuing articles from deletion, that might otherwise be lost forever. I think you will find our project matches your vision of Wikipedia. You can join >> here <<. Ikip (talk) 14:24, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

	WELCOME	from a Article Rescue Squad member
	Welcome to Article Rescue Squadron Netrat, a dynamic list of articles needing to be rescued, which changes with new updates, can be found here: Articles tagged for deletion and rescue Category Articles tagged for deletion and rescue not found I look forward to working with you in the future. Ikip (talk) 14:24, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome Netrat! If you have any questions, or need any help, please ask me. Thank you. Ikip (talk) 14:24, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you have not noticed, I am not an administrator, and cannot delete pages. An administrator looked it over and decided what should be done. Wayne Marshall the conductor is by far more notable then the VJ.--gordonrox24 (talk) 00:25, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An admin did all of the reverting and deleting. http://www.concertartist.info/biog/MAR001.html shows information about Wayne Marshall as a musician rather then a conductor, so even the name of the article was inappropriate. If you wish, we can reinstate your deejay page, but it will be done correctly.--gordonrox24 (talk) 00:55, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Wayne Marshall (deejay), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

lacks notability, reliable sources

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. RadioFan (talk) 01:15, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Aenima-with-susan.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 22:23, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Aenima-with-susan.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 22:24, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote "removed POV and unsourced claims" in an edit comment, which is odd because that edit (and the edits you made to the same article before that) actually added content that expressed your own opinion (among other things, that piracy was good because people didn't have to pay for books) and had no sources. It would seem then that your actual edit was the exact opposite of what the edit comment claimed. I would hope that this was a mistake. DreamGuy (talk) 14:39, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There actually was more than one thing I changed in that edit. First, I've removed a paragraph that was repeating what have been already said few lines above. Saying the same thing twice is not needed.

Moreover, the paragraph I've remove should have been removed or copyedited anyway, as it was an unsourced strong claim. The paragraph was "The greatest disadvantage of e-books is piracy" - and it did not explain who have decided what disadvantage is the greatest one, and why his or her opinion is the final truth. The prober text would be "Dr. N.Otable of Oxford University claims that the greatest disadvantage of e-books is piracy". Otherwise this is just a personal opinion of some Wikipedia editor, and thus is unfit for encyclopedia. I refered to this as "removed unsourced claims".

Then, I've added more info to other paragraph. The article looked like it was focused on publishers' point of view, which is itself a violation of POV. It most aspects, it approached a book as a market good rather than a work of art. What most publications I've read consider to be the greatest problem with e-book (which is the abscence of usual aestetics) was only briefly mentioned. At the same time it even failed to mention that most of books created by humanity as currently available for free as public domain due to expired copyright.

And then came the greasest POV of this article: automatically having "people is able to get books without payments or permission" item in "disadvantages" section.

While it's obvions that this is a disadvantage from publisher's point of view (so it does not need a siurce), it's certainly not obvions why this is a disadvantage from reader's point of view. Actually quite opposite is obvious here. Since you expect that readers would try to copy a book without paying (or get a permission), you admit that readers are actually interested in doing such thing.

And there's also a Mr. Common Sense telling us that getting something for free is better than paying for that something, especially when you are unlikely to suffer from any legal or moral opression.

In fact, people who treat a book as a book rather than a good are inlikely to ever cear about things like royalities (yep, this is my personal opinion but I'm not inserting this to the article, right?).

You see, what you call "piracy", is what anti-copyright activists and free content activists, including some numerous politicaly parties are calling "opression" or "an outdated mechanism".

I refered to this as "removed POV". An article's subject should never be presented from a single point of view.

To give you an example, we cannot start Saadam Hussein article with Saadam Hussein was a dictator just because most people in your environment (or even most Wikipedia editors) agree with such claim. This is what NPOV is all about.

Sorry for being so wordy, I just wanted to be perfectly clear, since... who on Earth would doubt that people would prefer getting information for free rather than pay when they have a choice?

And regarding sources... Well, most (>50%) items in the list are unsourced to begin with, mine is no exception. You didn't bother adding ref's since they all are pretty obvious, right? So did I. If you want ref's that bad, even for things that are quite obvious (and not strong) claims, then I can put some effort into it. But than you will have to provide ref's to all statements of the article, especialy each individual item adv/dis, as I would say that they are not obvious either. For example, it is not obvious that piracy is bad for authors, as I can easliy cite enough authors who advocate free content; as well as authors saying they are more interesed in getting more people to read their works rather than getting royalties. Do you really want that? Netrat (talk) 00:15, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Then I've merely mentioned the public domain status of all books that are XIX century or older and the fact that producing paper books is also hazardous for environment. Are you in doubt of these facts? They are easliy verifiable, this is not some kind of sacred knowlege. You can actually verify them anytime, a lot of sources are available from corresponding Wikipedia articles I've linked, they both are one click away. Netrat (talk) 00:28, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that while parts of your edit may be obvious improvements, too much of is as a whole is questionable for the current version to remain. For what it's worth, adding "balance" to an article by way of personal counterpoints is not considered to be "removing POV" by most editors - it generally doesn't improve article quality because now the article has two unsourced opinions in it and not one. For now, you should revert and break the edit down into its component sections before re-adding it. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 08:22, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What exact sections do you refer as questionable? I believe I have answered all concerns few lines above. What I've added were not anyone's personal opinions, but mere indications of obvious facts. You don't challenge them, right? I havn't added words like "the most important", "the least important", "all the people agree" or "some people agrue". And what do you mean by "break the edit down into its component sections"? Netrat (talk) 10:30, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let's see. "On the other hand, producing paper books is also hazardous for environment" is highly subjective; it is perfectly possible to produce a book in a sustainable manner, as was done for most of the history of the book. "This is a disadvantage for publishers, but at the same time an advantage for readers, since they don't have to pay for reading a book." that's mostly silly; criminal activity might be advantageous, but being subject to criminal activity is not really an "advantage". "For example, all fiction from XIX century or older is in public domain." This might be true, but in the absence of an electronic copy the potential reader is still obliged to obtain a copy of any book in that range, and as physical objects they are rarely free. That's most of the edit. Your comment above is mostly rhetoric rather than a rebuttal to the specific points in question. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:06, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1) Papermaking consumes great ammounts of wood and water. One e-book device allows users to read 100's and even 1000's of books. A paper equivalent of such ammont of text would use a lot of wood, electricity, water and chemicals, even if sustainable technology is used. 2) Many people do not believe that making electronic copies of content is a criminal activity. Defining this as "a criminal activity" is very biased in the core, especially when you don't mention what jurisdiction you are talking about. There's a strong opposition to current copyright laws and practice; further links have already been provided. Very, very few people ever went to jail for downloading copyrighted texts from Internet. This is an exceptional rather than common. And anyway, the advantage for readers was getting books for free, not having to deal legal side of this action. It would be silly to say that the ability to get books for free is a disadvantage for readers. 3) What do you mean "absence of an electronic copy"? They are actually present. To "obtain" a book by Mark Twain or William Shakespeare, all you need to do is open Project Gutenberg, Library of Congress, Wikisource or any other web-site that hosts public domain texts, make a couple of clicks and start reading. Netrat (talk) 12:33, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to copy parts of this to the article talk and continue there. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 13:35, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 13:54, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FYI. :) rootology (C)(T) 01:13, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored my addition of Subaru Forester to the list of Compact SUVs in Template:Automobile classification. The Compact SUV article clearly includes crossover SUVs in the category of compact SUVs. Also, precedent has been established by the existing inclusion of BMW X3, Honda CR-V, and Toyota RAV4, all of which are cited by their articles as compact crossover SUVs, where "compact" refers to the compact SUV article. — Wdfarmer (talk) 22:41, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, referencing Compact SUV articles makes little sense since Wikipedia articles are not considered to be reliable sources. Forester, All-Road and XC70 are 3 rather uncommmon cars. I don't think classifing any of them as as a SUV is right. They are "cross-country station wagons", a very distinct category. Maybe crossovers, but definitely not SUVs. They stand apart even from other crossovers like X3, CR-V or RAV4. Second, I try to include vehicles that are archtypical examples. Forester probably started cross-country station wagons trend, but I guess you'd agree this is not an archtypical SUV. Netrat (talk) 14:53, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would argue that rather than adhere to traditional definitions, the classifications should reflect current usage. Several current sources include the Subaru Forester in the SUV category:

• Subaru's site includes it in both their "Crossover" and "SUV" types of car.
• Motor Trend magazine named the Subaru Forester 2.5XT as their "2009 Sport/Utility of the Year". They define a modern SUV as having a number of key characteristics:

1. high ride height and high seating position
2. a two-box body and multifunction interior that allows a combination of seating or load-carrying configurations;
3. the availability of all-wheel drive.

• Consumer Reports calls the Subaru Forester a "small SUV" along with the Toyota RAV4 and the Honda CR-V.

— Wdfarmer (talk) 20:52, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You said that you would work on this back in January. I'm just curious as to why you still haven't been working on it of late. I really think it should be deleted, since you seem to have no interest in working on it, and many IPs are treating it as if it were a legit article. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Many otters • One hammer • HELP)} 15:18, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently you emptied this category out of process. Moves and emptying of categories should be discussed first at WP:CFD you can also comment there on why you made this change. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:49, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this case is quite obvious, so I didn't bother posting atWP:CFD, as it would be a waste of other users' time. There were 3 duplicating categories: Russian rappers, Russian rap and Russian hip-hop musicians. Neither of them had more than 5 articles. Having such categories would make sense if there would be dozens of articles of Russian beatmakers, DJs, rappers and beatboxers. But as long as there are less than 10 articles on any of such, it makes no sense. In fact, when I started working on these, Category:Russian rappers and Category:Russian hip-hop musicians were both categories for Russian rappers. I've make the same thing on Russian Wikipedia, and there were no objections, as the issue is quite obvious. Netrat (talk) 00:25, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Netrat!

I want to state one question to you: From August 19th until August 23rd the MAKS-Airshow takes place again in Zhukovsky, near Moscow. Do you have the time to go there in order to take a lot of photos? Would be unique contribution for Wikimedia. I hope your response is positive. Greets, High Contrast (talk) 18:03, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm not going to visit MAKS. If fact, I'm not interested in aviation at all. Moreover, my only camera is the one built in my Nokia 5800 - I've never been a photo fan either. :-) However, I'm sure that A LOT (really) users from Russian Wikipedia will be visiting the show. You can ask them. Try people from ru:Category:User en-4 and ru:Category:User en-3. Netrat (talk) 18:56, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see that it is obvious, especially with the afd going through. It should have been discussed at the Talk page. Boleyn3 (talk) 15:24, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article The list of one-artist genres has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

lacks 3rd party references

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. RadioFan (talk) 11:08, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated The list of one-artist genres, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The list of one-artist genres. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. RadioFan (talk) 11:46, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Have you tried Googling "dub metal"? There is no shortage of bands using this term. You might also check out some of the work of Justin Broadrick or Kevin Martin, or maybe even some of the stranger Bill Laswell produced albums. If you just want a link for a band that calls itself "dub metal" on their own webpage, you can probably find those links on your own. Cheers. Hairhorn (talk) 17:41, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your contributions to the article, please keep in mind that the "Crescendolls" link redirects to "Interstella 5555: The 5tory of the 5ecret 5tar 5ystem", which is already linked. Incidentally, within the context of the film, the band is named Crescendolls after they are kidnapped, which raises the question of whether they had a name before that point. The description of the "concept" is actually misleading, since there is nothing to indicate that Daft Punk wanted the album itself to tell a story. Feel free to contact me if you have any concerns. just64helpin (talk) 19:42, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll also point out that "New Musical Express" redirects to NME, which is why I changed the link. just64helpin (talk) 22:02, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you mean by "so many italized words", but if there's something not in keeping with Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Italics, feel free to fix it. just64helpin (talk) 22:12, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter
The Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter Issue 1 (September 2009) Content News and announcements Want ads Feature: Article rescue as a team effort Featured editor: MichaelQSchmidt

I have nominated Category:Rap acts performing with live band (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:05, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Aenima-with-susan.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Angus McLellan (Talk) 15:40, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi this is not just us/uk centric wikipedia "(European segments should not lint to US or UK classifications. Ideally, they need their own articles" and just using German cars as examples is not WP:NPV, this template has already good mix of brands/countries, there is no need to constantly change these examples, as you can see by lookin the edit history of this article/templete it has been real problem with this article.--Typ932 ^T·C 15:07, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1. This is sure not us/uk centric wikipedia - and this is why European segments should NOT link to US or UK classifications. Segments that are used both in UK & continental Europe are not always equal to UK classification. And they sure need their own articles.

2. I'm NOT using German cars only. There are Japanese, French and American brands in my version as well.

3. There's no need to constantly change this template. There's a need to constantly improve it.

4. I've been working on this template for a long time. Half of the cars previously listed where added by me. I know what I'm doing.

5. The previous version had a lot of problems. Just for example, Toyota iQ is considered microcar by some sources and city car by others. Camry is considered mid-size family car, full-size family car or executive car in different markets. Such examples are unacceptable.

6. No classification distinguishes between small, medium and large pick-ups, so this has to be removed.

7. There's a very good reason for listing full line-ups by some makes, such as Peugeot, VW or Honda as I did. This gives a better picture what's different between segments. Netrat (talk) 17:11, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1.First this IS international wikipedia, its not dealing only US/UK things....

2.You removed all Italian cars and left only German cars for certain categories, and there is already quite many from that country, no need to make it more NPOV

3.You can improve it but its not improving at all if you remove good mixture of car brands.

4.Clearly you are not understanding what are you doing.

5.The previous version had no problems with car models. If there is problems with Camry remove it, I think its easy to find some other Japan car for that. The IQ can be put under certain category by just looking its measurements.

6.The pickup section could be improved

7.See 2/3

also you dont seem to clearly understand all terms like "compact executive" and "executive", like "Executive car is a British term that refers to a car's size and is used to describe an automobile larger than a large family car." it has nothing to do with luxury.

rgds --Typ932 ^T·C 18:59, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I'm proposing a WikiProject Kanye West at WikiProject Council/Proposals/Kanye West. Would you mind taking the time to vote there? Put your name in the Support section if you think he deserves one.

Kanyewest1123 (talk) 08:59, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Hip hop music, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:04, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that was just a UI glitch. On the other hand, you should also watch what you restore: so, this time you restored an obvious vandalism (some unrelated Poikemon mention). Take care. Netrat (talk) 19:13, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I see you removed Category:Agricultural occupations (animal) from Gaucho (or vice versa?). Any particular reason? Do you think that gauchos are not agricultural workers, or that they do not work with animals? I'm going to replace it for now; please let me know if you think there are good reasons why I should not. Ty! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:36, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I missed the link, my intention was to remove American cattlemen category. I've fixed it already. Netrat (talk) 23:03, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

K. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 00:30, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter Volume I, Issue III February 2012 Front cover | Feature | News and announcements | Humor | Want ads To contribute to the next newsletter, please visit the Newsletter draft page. ARS Members automatically receive this newsletter. To opt out, please remove your name from the recipients list.

Hi. When you recently edited Don't Stop the Party, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ben Mor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 18:22, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

My name is Victor and I'm a storyteller with the Wikimedia Foundation, the non-profit organization that supports Wikipedia. I'm chronicling the inspiring stories of the Wikipedia community around the world, including those from readers, editors, and donors. Stories are absolutely essential for any non-profit to persuade people to support the cause, and we know the vast network of people who make and use Wikipedia have so much to share.

I'm scouring user pages looking for inspiring, motivating and interesting stories of how Wikipedia has affected the lives of people. I'm asking questions like "How has Wikipedia changed your life?", "What's the most interesting story you have about Wikipedia?" and "Has Wikipedia ever surprised you?"

It's interesting that you're into hip hop.

Last year, we used the annual fundraiser as a way to show the world who it is who actually writes Wikipedia. We featured editors from Brazil, Ukraine, Argentina, Saudi Arabia, Kenya, India, United States and England. This campaign was a huge success, resulting in the most financially successful fundraising campaign ever. It was also a campaign that stayed true to the spirit of Wikipedia, educating the public that this free top-5 website is created by volunteers like you and I.

This year we want to highlight more Russian-language Wikipedia editors, so I am in the process of planning a trip to Russia to interview editors.

If you or someone you know (or have heard about) has been positively affected by Wikipedia, or have something interesting to say about Wikipedia I'd very much like to hear about it!

Please let me know if you're inclined to take part in the Wikipedia Stories Project, or if you know someone else with whom I should speak.

Of course, if you have any questions or concerns, please ask! I will answer as soon as I can. I apologize for any poor translation of this letter, I am using Google-translate. I hope it makes you laugh :)

Thank you for your time,

Victor Grigas

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Victorgrigas

vgrigas@wikimedia.org

__________________________________

Привет!

Меня зовут Виктор, и я рассказчик с Wikimedia Foundation, некоммерческая организация, которая поддерживает Википедию. Я хроник вдохновляющих историй сообщества Википедии по всему миру, в том числе и читателей, редакторов и доноров. Истории совершенно необходимы для любой некоммерческой органицации, чтобы убедить людей поддержывать наш проект, и мы знаем, что у людей, которые строют и используют Википедии есть много, что рассказать!

Я ищу вдохновляющие страницы пользователей, и интересных историй о том, как Википедия влияют на жизнь людей. Я задавал вопросы вроде "Как Википедия изменила Вашу жизнь?", "Какая самая интересная история у Вас есть о Википедии?" и "Википедия ли когда-нибудь Вас удивило?"

В прошлом году мы использовали ежегодный сбор средств как способ показать миру, кто на самом деле пишет Википедия. Мы показывали редакторов из Бразилии, Украины, Аргентины, Саудовской Аравии, Кении, Индии, США и Англии. Этот метод имел огромный успех, в результате чего у нас была наиболее финансово успешная кампании по сбору средств в историе организации. Кроме того, мы остались верны духу Википедии, просвещение общественности, что это бесплатно ТОП-5 Сайт создан добровольцами, как Ви и я.

В этом году мы хотим выделить еще редакторов Википедии на русском языке, так что я нахожусь в процессе планирования поездки в Россию и интервью с редакторами.

Если Википедия положительно повлеяла на Вас или на кого-то из Ваших знакомых, или у Вас есть что-то интересное сказать о Википедии, я бы очень хотел услышать об этом!

Пожалуйста, дайте мне знать, если Ви бы хотели участвовать в проекте Истории Википедии, или если вы знаете кого-то еще, с кем я должен поговорить.

Конечно, если у Вас есть какие-либо вопросы или сомнения, пожалуйста, обращайтесь! Я отвечу, как только смогу. Извините за плохой перевод этого письма, я использую Google-перевод. Я надеюсь, что заставляет вас смеяться :)

Спасибо за Ваше время,

Victor Grigas

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Victorgrigas

vgrigas@wikimedia.org

Victor Grigas (talk) 20:45, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Schlachtfest, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Feast (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:37, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you do not stop vandalizing the article, you will be reported. I assumed good faith on the first edit, but you persist in labeling the article with your single minded opinion. There is no basis for the comparison since there is no credible source for the phrase "Silicone Valley". This is your only warning. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 05:53, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review Wikipedia:Vandalism to educate yourself about what is vandalism and what is not. And it looks like I have to report YOU, since it was you who violated 3 reverts rule. Netrat (talk) 13:02, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Jazz festivals in Egypt requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for four days or more and it is not presently under discussion at Categories for discussion, or at disambiguation categories.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Epeefleche (talk) 00:55, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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) 13:48, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Havoc/disambiguation2. Since you had some involvement with the Havoc/disambiguation2 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Certes (talk) 16:00, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]