User talk:Alex Bakharev/Archive13

Could you join us????
Hello Alex. I know we got you already, but could you join discussion on sourcing Stomakhin article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Boris_Stomakhin#quote_.22Death_to_Russia.22 ? Thank you.Vlad fedorov 04:20, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Politics of Khuzestan
Seeing that Ahwaz has been BLOCKED for 1 MONTH, you should immediately unlock the article as we should NOT have to wait that damn long to make edits and remove his WP:OR and non WP:RS sources. I am getting sick of this anti-iranian double standards - see Anti-Iranianism and the campaign to deny racism and bigotry against Iranians! And no offense, but you should not have protected the article since you are involved in the dispute. What is amazing to me is that you and Khoikhoi (who also claims to be in the dispute) do not acknowledge this and instead take this unilateral actions. What, you want to give a room for this type of propaganda?? Would you do the same for pro-Chechnya and pro-Dagestan propagandists??? Khorshid 05:21, 1 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I have unblocked the article no need to shout. Yes, I am trying to give fair go to every sane person including supporters of Chechen independence. Alex Bakharev 05:52, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Udaltsova photo.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Udaltsova photo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 23:04, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Protection of Stomakhin article
It is extremly unfair. They have protected version of Biophys. And it is discrimination of me. Biophys deleted and reverted all texts done not only by me, but by administrators Mikkalai, Alex Bakharev. So it is just simply protection of Biophys version. Could you come back and restore previous version done by you or to draft a new version? Help, please. You that I am not defaming Stomakhin. It is Biophys with his anti-Russian bias who violates anything.Vlad fedorov 04:26, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Uff da :)
Hola, Alex! :) your slick NewArt bot, to sort the results, did you mean to go about it all by yourself, or - which way is it going to be of better help to you? - Vera - Introvert  •  ~  04:52, 3 February 2007 (UTC)


 * oh, and while at it... I happened to stray into the article about Leon Solomon Moisseiff, one of the real engineers of the The Bridge (and who's been unfairly undercredited until very recently). The man is from Riga, born 1872, so does this qualify as Russia-related? The article is not new, and I'm not sure if I can I still post it to our "new articles" page, but it'd be great to get some attention and help from the engineers like yourself :) to check on the terminology, expand and otherwise edit the story. What say you? -  Introvert  •  ~  05:27, 3 February 2007 (UTC)


 * As a matter of fact I hope somebody would help me with this. If the bot would eventually work for 20+ "new article" feeds I certainly would like somebody on each portal/project to help me with this. Even only for the Russian pages it seems to be quite a chore. I think this Moisseiff guy deserves attention of Russian folks. I have announced him on Portal:Russia/Hidden Gems. Alex Bakharev 06:04, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Alex, thanks for your help with promotion :) - the story of the other real engineer of The Bridge, Charles Ellis, seems even more amazing than that of Moisseiff: he (together with Moisseiff) carried out the most complex and most important calculations for the suspension construction of the marvel, yet his name wasn't up on the bridge until after more than a decade. They two saved the world from the (ugliest ever) original bridge design (by Strauss). But I'm afraid there's no way an article on Ellis (an American) could qualify as Russia-related.
 * As to the bot list sorting, certainly I'll be glad to help, can't promise a whole lot but will be trying as much as I can - we just need to coordinate so not to step on each other toes with you or with whomever else will be helping on this. Let's check again tomorrow or in a day? Kind regards, and thank you again  -  Introvert  •  ~  09:03, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Oca logo.PNG)
Thanks for uploading Image:Oca logo.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 15:13, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Russian 20th Century Avant-Garde Artists
Can you compile a list of some of the important 20th century avant-garde Russian artists (like Futurists etc) who are missing articles on wikipedia and send me the list? Thanks. Horvat Den 15:33, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

A proposal
Would you take an early peek at this and offer comments? User:Durova/Community enforced mediation Durova Charge! 02:47, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Groznyy suggestion
Alex, I've got to say that your compromise suggestion sounds quite reasonable, and I wouldn't be against such a change. Thanks, Samian. 16:05, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Bot for Lithuania?
Hey Alex, I have noticed that you run your bot on WP:BSNB. Could it run also for WP:LITH only? You have the code already, so it shouldn't be hard. What you say? Renata 23:27, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

C-M-S ineq's
Thanks! BTW - why did you only add Chebyshev's picture, and not Markov's or Stieltjes'? Sasha
 * Well, you can add all the three guys, I do not mind. I was affraid 3 pics will make the article overcrowded and Chebyshev was the first who formulated it. Alex Bakharev 01:03, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

My RfA
Hey Alex,

I just would like to thank you for your support in my recent request for adminship, which passed with a final tally of 54/13/11. I appreciate the trust expressed by members of the community, and will do my best to uphold it.

Naturally, I am still becoming accustomed to using the new tools, so if you have suggestions or feedback, or need anything please let me know. - Gilliam 20:51, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Kondrashov article
Hi, I am not sure why you deleted the article i started called Alexey Kondrashov. If it is for lack of references, I agree there is work to be done. If it it because you judge this person to be unimportant, then I disagree. He is a key evolutionary biologist of the 20th century, and has written many important papers in science. Anyhow, do you still have a copy of it, as I don't. could you please post it here or on my discussion page so I can work on it. Thanks, --Seb951 23:25, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Vagif Mustafazade
Greetings. I wonder what you think of this article. It's copied directly from one of the external links (copyvio?) and written in the first person. Biruitorul 03:35, 6 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I have removed the copyvio from the article. It was written in a wrong tone anyway Alex Bakharev 03:43, 6 February 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, thank you. Biruitorul 05:32, 6 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi. I am a new Wiki user, therefore am having some difficulties. Regarding Vagif Mustafazade copyvio, yes, the article was copied from azer.com, but I know the editor personally and can get written permission for Wiki. Please let me know how to handle this. Also, I am planning to copy articles from that site about other musicians, writers and artists. Again, I have permission from the editor for all of them. So please let me know how to avoid copyvio message in the future and what changes I should make to the articles I am planning to create. Thanks. Zondi 07:14, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

History of Christianity in Ukraine
Have a look at the POV loaded additions the anon is inputing, likely a sock of User:Alex Kov, can you please investigate, and also semi-protect the article.--Kuban Cossack 23:32, 6 February 2007 (UTC) Dear Sir, please forgive my ignorance of Wikipedia procedures, but I would be grateful if you would please return to this article, as it appears that there is indeed a concensus for the changes opposed by Kuban Cossack. Qe2 08:47, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Done Alex Bakharev 23:50, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations
You've done a lot for Wikipedia. Let me salute you *salutes*... --Jazzwick 23:59, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Gee, thanks! Alex Bakharev 00:37, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Boris Stomakhin again
Alex could you have a look at discussion of Stomakhin article. It is evident that Biophys http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Boris_Stomakhin#A_compromise just uses the fact that his version was protected to his advantage. The article now does not correspond to any actual situation. Extremist Stomakhin is painted like a victim of Putin regime as it was originally. You could see that not only ellol, Grafikn agrees with me, but you also was sharing at least some portion of the text. Could you do something to the article? Biophys evidently doesn't want to change anything, he advances his conspiracy theories as it always was. I am really disappointed by the Wikipedia, where one troll could write everything he wants and no one could do anything with it.Vlad fedorov 04:36, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Nikolai Schilder
Privet Alex,

we discussed the correct title for this article last October, and concluded that it should be Nikolay Shilder. Unfortunately, user Petri Krohn disagreed and moved the page to Nikolay Schilder first, then to Nikolai Schilder. Now I still think our first idea is correct, but I can't move it, and I'm not certain it would be an uncontroversial move. So I'll leave it up to your discretion to deal with this (or not) as you see fit.

пока, Er rab ee 15:09, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Done. Alex Bakharev 20:22, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Your DYK nomination for Alexey Bogolyubov was successful
Thanks for your contributions!  Nish kid 64  15:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair use image
Hi, I'm afraid I can't see how Image:Benois Annensky.jpg is "fair use" in the article on the person portrayed, Innokenty Annensky. {art} fair use claims are only for critical commentary regarding the painter and his artistic work. Can you take care of it? Cheers, Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:07, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick help
Alex, thanks for your amazingly quick help with [], I am very greatful for such acknowledgement. Please, can you de-link the term "Bashlyk" from the "Phrygian cap", so that we can rename "Bashlik" to more conventional and Google-friendly "Bashlyk"? Barefact 02:32, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Done Alex Bakharev 03:05, 12 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much, I am elated with your help and response. Barefact 07:14, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Help needed
Dear Alex, Hi. Your advice/Help needed; there is a RfC. I am mediator. Here is the message of nominator. What is the correct procedure to drawback of a RfC by nominator.? Stay in peace. Regards. Mustafa Akalp Must TC 15:41, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

mikka
This user is blanking pages. I suspect from my interactions with him he has a political agenda. Since he is an editor, I am not sure how to handle the situation. I am not active in Wikipedia precisely because my contributions have been vandalized under the pretext of editing. Regards.

72.181.191.166

P.S. any ideas on how to stop him?
 * Mikka is one of the best contributors to Wikipedia. Still everybody can make mistakes if you provide diffs for the pages you have disagreement with then I can make a look Alex Bakharev 11:01, 15 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Anon blocked. This is sock of indefinitely blocked who cannot abandon the idea of glorifying his father without proper references. `'mikka 16:26, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Your bot
Hi Would you be able to modify your bot to not include articles which have been created but subsequently deleted? I haven't looked at logs to confirm that it is reporting articles which don't exist when it was run, but I'm pretty sure that it does. A list of new articles, which includes red-links, seems silly.Garrie 04:57, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Cool, I didn't get that it actually "read" the article I thought it may have simply looked at creation logs and some kind of web of links.Garrie 05:24, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Vlad
Hi! You probably know WP policies better, so I am going to ask your advice. The problem is that User:Vlad_fedorov does nothing else but follows every edit by User:Biophys and me, mostly to revert it (see Special:Contributions/Vlad_fedorov). He also cites unreliable sources such as writings by Yelena Kalashinkova who is most probably an alias of some other person (Talk:Yevgenia_Albats) and adds nonsense to Wikipedia (e.g. at least he claimed that Sergei Stepashin had never worked for FSB and that Vladimir Potanin was married to a daughter of Yeltsin ). This is not very harmful in general, but unfortunately still destructive. Could anything be done with this? Colchicum 14:29, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Alex, he goes on "working" on Galina Starovoitova, Yevgenia Albats and Sergei Ivanov. Could you please interfere? Colchicum 20:17, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Also Vladimir Putin legislation and program Colchicum 20:20, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * А что здесь всегда в Википедии "ненадежный источник" дежурная отмазка? Как это мило называть все что тебе не нравится "ненадежный источник", и не надо ничего доказывать. Ведь есть на свете только три надежных источника - Архивы Митрохина, Архивы Анны Политковской и блоги Альбац, все остальное - просто мусор. Я вообще-то полностью описал скандал с Альбац, а ты с Биофисом на пару только и делали что стирали из статьи все о скандале и о том, что папа Альбац - шпион ГРУ, по Старовойтовой вы возвели домыслы одной газеты на решением суда и всеми остальными источниками. Кстати сказать, следствие определило что между выстрелом в Старавойтову и выстрелом в ее помощника прошло 9 минут, и в эти девять минут по показаниям соседей они слышали разговоры на лестнице. В интернете куча информации об этом. А почему вы в статье это не отразили? Невыгодно! Потому что надо набрехать что именно Путин убил, а не помощник из-за денег. У вас что один фирменный прием - берете один источник и всю статью бреете под него? Например в статье по государственный терроризм про СССР только один источник - Ион Пасепа, у Бориса Стомахина - CPJ. Если доказать, что наоборот ваши источники ненадежны, то от Ваших статей ничего поди и не останется. Правильно Биофису на talk page Путина американец сказал, ты бы еще его в убийстве Цезаря и Кеннеди обвинил. Так это американец сказал, не русский. Кроме того это пустое доносительство уже надоедает. И все потому что за ложное обвинение тут в Википедии по-видимому не наказывают, особенно руссофобов. 1) It is not me, but you who 'looks after me', Mediation Boris Stomakhin Case page for example. 2)Disruptive? You claimed that Elena Kalashnikova chief political observer to Dni.ru and contributor to Русский журнал is an alias? You just can't live because there are people with another POV correcting your POV to NPOV. You delete all information which may compromise your POV in Albats and Starovoitova articles. 3)You are lying that I have intentionally made two mistakes. I had written them one time and wasn't reverting to them, unlike you who delete valid and sourced statements. By the way these guys -- Biophys and Colchicum are 'threatening me' with plans to publish articles on Litvinenko science fiction. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Yevgenia_Albats#Further_work Vlad fedorov 20:27, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Mr. Vlad fedorov, only one question (although any conversation between us is hardly appropriate here): How did you get here if you didn't pursued us? Colchicum 20:41, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Да точно таким же путем, которым ты попал на страницу медиации по Борису Стомахину, тем же путем которым ты сегодня правил мои поправки Альбац, Законодательной деятельности Путина и статьи о Старовойтовой. Может логи посмотрим твои и мои на предмет того кто начал это первым? Сам опубликуешь или мне самому это сделать? Vlad fedorov 20:44, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * By looking at my watchlist? Wow. Colchicum 20:50, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Nope. Just by looking at your contribs dates.Vlad fedorov 20:53, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Alex, excuse me for commenting on this here.


 * Vlad, I have never referred to Mitrokhin's or Politkovskaya's archives and never used Albats' blog as a source. The fact that Albats' father served for the military intelligence during WWII can certainly be mentioned if substantiated well, but it is not worth placing in the first place. That was an article about Albats rather than her father. Besides, it is hardly exceptional for anybody to serve for such an organization during war time, which raises some issues about notability.


 * Минуточку, в статье пишется о том, что Альбац была назначена в парламентсткую коммиссию по расследованию КГБ, почему жу мы не можем отразить в ее биографии, тот факт что ее родители - работники спецслужб? Мне все равно каким будет это предложение в абзаце, первым, вторым, третьим. Проблема в том, что вы с Биофисом не перемещаете это предложение, а просто стираете его, потому что оно делает надежность расследований Альбац неимоверно ненадежным.Vlad fedorov 04:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * As to Starovoitova, I only tried to restore the mention of Borschev as a MP which seems relevant and substantiated well. I haven't followed the page history, so I don't know what Biophys wrote there. I myself have never accused Putin of this murder. As to Linkov, he has never been found guilty by a court and I have never heard about such a hypothesis considered seriously, so I don't understand what you are talking about.


 * Да что ты говоришь, там все выставлено так, как будто осужденные по этому делу, не убийцы (это слово старательно стирает Биофис) а невинно осужденные.Vlad fedorov 04:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I have nothing to do with any information on Jon Pacepa and CPJ, you seem to mix me up with Biophys or maybe even somebody else. As to the American you have mentioned, Wikipedians' citizenship seems irrelevant here and often elsewhere.


 * As to Kalashinkova, I have nothing more to add to what I have said at Talk:Yevgenia Albats. Yes, I suspect she is an alias. This often happens among Russian journalists, just if you don't know.


 * Ну и что что это псевдоним, хотя у тебя нет даже основания говорить что это псевдоним? Это что делает ее статьи ненадежными?Vlad fedorov 04:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * If other people correct my alleged POV in Wikipedia, this doesn't mean that they express NPOV. As a text without any POV just cannot exist, NPOV guidelines reasonably require citing different POVs if they are notable enough and well founded. Again, I have made only a minor change to the Starovoitova article, and I can hardly understand how you managed to detect my POV there. But whatever.


 * Вот как раз таки ты на пару с Биофисом и занимаешься стиранием противоположных точек зрения которые отражаю в соотвествующих статьях. Или у тебя на это особенная точка зрения?Vlad fedorov 04:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * As to your allegations that I was lying, let's recall AGF. Here is your summary for a piece of the false information you have added: It is lie. Stepeshin never was FSB official he worked in internal affairs - police bodies Quite rude, isn't it?


 * Нет уважаемый, вы соврали когда стали утверждать что я сделал это намеренно на странице дела по медиации Бориса Стомахина. Причем выбрали для этого специально не то место. Вот здесь http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AMediation_Cabal%2FCases%2F2007-02-10_Boris_Stomakhin&diff=107625975&oldid=107485968 Vlad fedorov 04:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I have never announced any plans to create articles on Litvinenko's writings (although some of them seem notable enough and quite plausible). Your allegations that his writings are fiction have to be substantiated with reliable sources, or otherwise it is not appropriate to put them into Wikipedia.


 * Ага, ну да. Если я напишу книгу, то все что в ней написано, всегда уже будет святой правдой. Железная логика.Vlad fedorov 04:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * For some reasons you have added to Sergei Ivanov a note that the cancellation of the investigation against a son of him was nothing but an allegation by a newspaper. So should one conclude from this that you claim that he is still charged with these accusations?


 * Я просто уточнил источник. Согласно официальным российским документам дело закрыто. Слово закрыто - это NPOV, слово замяли - POV. Я понимаю что это очень сложно понять тебе, но тем не менее. Информацию о том, что сынок сбил тетку, никто не стирал.Vlad fedorov 04:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * The pictures I have uploaded to Wikipedia are all permitted, see Wikimedia Commons, so I cannot consider your efforts to delete them anything but personal attack.


 * Скажи-ка мне, а откуда ты взял что это фотография из удостоверения КГБ? А теперь объясни почему в удостоверении КГБ вклеиваются фотографии людей по пояс? Почему на них нет печати?Vlad fedorov 04:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * As to Biophys' edit of State sponsored terrorism, If you had paid more attention to it, you would discover that he meant two different links – a reference to blog and a non-working reference.


 * Да? А если посмотреть cur http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=State-sponsored_terrorism&diff=102543018&oldid=102542124, то он стирает одну ссылку. Неувязочка, господин соврамши.Vlad fedorov 04:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * As to the reference deleted by Biophys, it is not from American Historical Review, it is from The Wilson Quarterly, a non-peer-reviewed publication of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars think tank, and the article itself contains almost no references, hence failing to satisfy criteria of a reliable scholarly article.


 * Может мы когда нибудь начнем читать внимательно? Или мне все равно надо тыкнуть что первое предложение относится к American Historical Review. И только потом идет ссылка на Woodrow Wilson International Center? Каким образом это меняет дело? Ты хочешь теперь сказать что в пропаганду издают в центре Вудро Вильсона?


 * Hope this helps. And please don't try to answer here. This place is not appropriate for this, and I shall not react. Colchicum 23:53, 16 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Ну конечно. Здесь только место для поливания грязью своего оппонента и для лже-доносов. Грязь убирать - никому не сметь!!! Как это ностальгично не выглядит, но вы все-таки настоящий наследник советской системы.Vlad fedorov 04:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Guys, we have WP:STALK policy. It is certainly a blockable offence to follow somebody's contributions just to annoy and harass an editor. It is certainly a right thing to do to follow and revert contributions of a vandal. Following contributions of somebody you whose POV you do not agree with is somehow a grey area, it is difficult to prove and may continue for some time. On the other hand blocks for stalking then it is become obvious are usually longer. Better avoid even appearance of such intentions: there are hundreds of admins and there standards on the matter might be different. I will look into the articles in a couple of hours.

At any case there are literally thousands of Russia-related articles in desperate need of editing or even redlinks yet, there is no need to crowd Alex Bakharev 21:06, 16 February 2007 (UTC)


 * А у них просто проблема есть, как бы их источники сделать авторитетными. Вот они и создают сначала странички где утверждают, что источник А - самый авторитетный в мире, как например с архивом Митрохина (автор - Биофис). А потом на их основании они начианют сорить в статьи о правах человека, терроризме. Один американец вставил цитату из американского университетского журнала(!!!) о ненадежности Архива Митрохина. Теперь вопрос - что же сделал Биофис когда увидел такое чудо на своем святом источнике? Ну конечно стер, и написал цитирую "(propaganda segment inserted by anonymous user removed - see discussion)" http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mitrokhin_Archive&diff=107296555&oldid=107010834. Стоит ли говорить что дискуссии на talk page никакой не было и в помине? Вот сижу и я думаю, когда это в американских университетских журналах стали пропаганду печатать? Ни много, ни мало журнал называется American Historical Review и издается Калифорнийским университетом Лос Анджелеса, а историк написавший ее - J. Arch Getty. Ну конечно же это ненадежный источник.


 * А что мне делать когда Биофис стирает надежные ссылки, которые подрывают его точку зрения? Например так он стер в статье State sponsored terrorism http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=State-sponsored_terrorism&diff=102543018&oldid=102542124 Revision as of 23:23, 22 January 2007 (edit) (undo) Biophys (Talk | contribs) /* United States - reference to blog removed, non-working reference corrected) Теперь читаем очень внимательно, то что написал Биофис. Сначала он пишет что это блог, а потом пишет что ссылка не работает. Теперь вопрос. Если ссылка не работает, тогда каким образом он определил что это блог? Или может я просто глупый? Кстати ссылка идет не на блог и кроме того ссылка хорошо работает. Можно прямо сейчас проверить.Vlad fedorov 21:33, 16 February 2007 (UTC)


 * А недавно вообще мне стал угрожать, что напишет статьи про книги Литвиненко. Я чуть не лопнул от смеха... Могу спорить что следующие contribs в статьи про права человека в России пойдут на основе книг того самого Литвиненко, который избивал подозреваемых на своих допросах...Vlad fedorov 21:42, 16 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi, Alex. Obviously, Vlad is stalking me, and it is obvious why. Obviously, I am very frustrated. I would like to ask Vlad at least not to stalk Colchicum. Unlike me, he seems to be a professional historian, and he is doing a really good work here. I tried to help him a little with technical things. One side note. Please take a look at talk page of Mitrokhin Archive. I was right deleting this text as follows from discussion of two other users (now it is deleted by others). That was "bad faith" citation out of context that distorted ideas of its author. Also take a look at Vlad's log. It is at least a thousand of edits. Almost all the time he attacks my articles and edits. I can deal with this problem only by making it bigger Talk:Yevgenia_Albats, as time allows. Biophys 23:43, 16 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Никогда он не стирался другими, уважаемый. Для этого достаточно посмотреть в историю статьи.А что касаеься Альбац, тоо здесь думаю и так все ясно. А что касается твоего расстройства - оно не помешало тебе стереть все мои edits в полночь. Конечно же ты выследил это телепатическим способом не глядя в мои логи.Vlad fedorov 04:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks, but I am not a professional historian. My field is quite close to this compared to, say, physics, but still different. Colchicum 23:56, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Alexander Imeretinsky
Thanks for expanding the article. I plan to create articles on every Namestnik of the Kingdom of Poland (and gov-gens) - Polish wiki has stubs for almost all of them. Could you see if there is anything to improve in Alexander Lüders and Georgi Skalon?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 20:33, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Dmitry Shapiro
Thanks for showing interest in my work, prodding the Dmitry Shapiro article. I am deleting your prod as the subject quite clearly passes WP:N. Please do a google search,. You are a Sysop and should know better about the basics of checking up on these guidelines. frummer 19:49, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Georgia (country)
Dear Alex, Spasiba! There were lots[] of vandalism in the past, so I think it is always a good idea to protect the country pages. Cheers!SosoMK 04:40, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

for the sake of our friendship
I also removed the unsourced statement by the anon saying that most Russians emigrated from Georgia since it declared its independence. This is not true, because there are as many Russians living friendly with Georgians in the spirit of brotherhood as before, but most of them are naturalized Georgians citizens rather than holding the Russian passports, so the statistics don't usually portray the reality. SosoMK 04:56, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Archive Box Deletion
Hiya. You deleted an archive box of mine, calling it nonsense. I had been using that archive to store some text boxes preparatory to using them for an article. Might I ask why?Arcayne 14:11, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Kazakh-Armenian clashes
As an admin can you stop vandalizing?! Artaxiad 04:53, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Three revert rule
Can you please explain the procedure for editing an article? It seems that most other authors can edit the article as they please. All I need to know is that given the original state of the article what is the exact, official procedure for editing it.--Tedblack 10:45, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

In the article Great Fire of Smyrna there were editors before me who violated the WP:3RR. Within less than two hours they deleted my edits for at least three times. According to the WP:3RR they should have been blocked. Why were they not blocked? --Tedblack 11:29, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Alex please help me.
Alex, please see the new campaign Biophys and Colchicum initiated against me http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Vlad_fedorov.

I am really tired now of these false accusations. I have never pursued Colchicum and don't understand why he hates me so much. All that I have done is just introduction of other POV in the respective articles.

For example, you haven't noticed that I actually covered the scandal with Albats prior to your edits, but users Ilgiz, Biophys and Colchicum deleted my coverage, claiming that my sources violate BLP policy.

I don't know actually if Wikipedia is a witch trial place? Why so much hate for users who have other point of view. Vlad fedorov 12:05, 20 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Alex, just look. Biophys actually spies on me he recently reverted my editions in 6 articles adding false accusation on their respective talk pages. He is stalking me and accusing me of stalking.Vlad fedorov 17:13, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Public Transportation Safeguard
Hello Alex,

You have recently deleted a page I started called "Public Transportation Safeguard". As I am relatively new to Wikipedia this is one of the very first articles I tried to start. But the next day it got deleted. I am stuck here on what to do.

I am a high school student leader and PTS is a community service activity I started at Overseas Family School, Singapore. It has been planned since last December and introduced a month ago. It has became really popular and one of the best ideas and initiatives in community service. Now is it spreading amongst schools like Singapore American School and United World College of South East Asia. Many of my friends and the community service coordinator at our school encouraged me to start this page. and I did. But after I told them the news and they all went online looking forward to contribute, the page has been deleted. So please can you explain why it has been deleted and how can I possibly start it again. It will help me in building up my limited knowledge and skills in Wikipedia. If you can, would you please leave an answer on my talk page, thanks! --Jingshen 13:12, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Alex, what are you doing?
Alex you have protected http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasnost_Defence_Foundation Biophys version with completely deleted information about sources of financing of that organization which was taken from the website of that organization. It is evident that Biophys deletes any POV he personally dislikes. Any POV he personally dislikes is violating Wikipedia policy according to him. You understand pretty well that his aim is disinformation. He would never agree to introduce any POV or material he personally dislikes. I agree on the respective version of this article made by Mikkalai - see the history page. Why you help Biophys in his intention to delete POV he dislikes? He could present any other POV supported with statements just like me, but he chose to delete my materials instead which is weird.

Biophys again has reintroduced Phallus of Putin in Wikipedia, this time he has made it there http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_political_bloggers.

Please just look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Vlad_fedorov where I have provided almost anything pertinent to this case. It is unfair that Biophys does whatever he wants in Wikipedia, advances only his POV. Is this a Biophysopedia?

I urge you to take some measures for Biophys. How can it be that all allegations introduced by Biophys against Russia do always comply with Wikipedia policies and materials/opinions of journalists, newspapers and officials introduced by me always violate Wikipedia policies accroding to Biophys? Please see the respective talk page for Boris Stomakhin where Biophys refused to negotiate. Could you also took negotiation of Glasnost Defence Foundation under your control if you have protected this article? Vlad fedorov 03:07, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Gurchenko.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Gurchenko.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 16:59, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Again Putin Phallus
Hello Alex,

Biophys again had restored Putin Phallus where you have deleted it diff http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_political_bloggers despite the fact that you have deleted it.

You see that he is really persistently vandalising Wikipedia. How could you support him by blocking his versions of the article.

Moreover, please see how Biophys is stalking me right now. I had edited Freedom House article and had a nice disscussion there. But Biophys is stalking and intimidating me by messaging to other users the following texts:, , ,. Is it civil and complies to Wikipedia policy? It is clear now that he stalks (pursues) me personally.Vlad fedorov 19:31, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

PTS
Hi Alex and thanks for the response! Appreciate it. --Jingshen 23:00, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Union of Progressive Zionists
I'm a bit surprised that someone would tag an article listed in four categories as not being listed in categories. Hashomer 16:10, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, my bad Alex Bakharev 21:01, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:Eduard Uspensky.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Eduard Uspensky.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add , 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 the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Chowbok  ☠  03:00, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Any suggestions?
Hi Alex, I explained my position here: Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Vlad_fedorov Do you disagree? Vlad continue reverting all my changes. Could you please suggest any way out without arbitration? If you have any good suggestion, I am ready to think about it. Thank you. Sincerely, Biophys 05:39, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I think Vlad and me should follow suggestion of User physiq: stay away from each other's edits. It means: I do not do any edits in articles where Vlad did any edits before me (whatever these edits are); and he does the same with regard to me. Smae thing about colhicum. What that be fair? Do you agree? Biophys 13:13, 23 February 2007 (UTC) So, I posted it here: Requests_for_comment/Vlad_fedorovBiophys 16:19, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Just to let you know. If Vlad does not stop his wikistalking, I probably have no other choice but to try mediation and arbitration. Biophys 05:43, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Go on Biophys. Let's the arbitrators decide who is violating BLP and whose sources are reliable and who is stalking at whom. I had enough of your falsehoods and empty accusations.Vlad fedorov 05:47, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thank you very much for the barnstar! It is much appreciated. Er rab ee 13:21, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar
How nice of you! Thanks very much. It's nice to know that people have seen the articles. --Bookworm857158367 15:15, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks indeed, though I doubt I made a serious contribution. Thanks anyway. Mhym 18:56, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Amirov.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Amirov.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 10:04, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Images
Hi Alex. User:Artaxiad tries to delete images on Azerbaijan, many of which were taken in Soviet times and should be PD. Is there a way to stop it? Please see his recent contribs: Grandmaster 16:27, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I was in informed by Interiot (Admin) that images that are PD still need sources, there fore i tagged it. Artaxiad 19:15, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The other thing that I noticed that Artaxiad only tagged Azeri-related photos. Wikipedia started with much looser copyright policy then it is now. Tightening it is a painful process by itself. Please always do it in a good faith, doubts in the intentions of the tagger make it even more painful. In short do not use copyright issues as a weapon Alex Bakharev 23:39, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I hope you are not buying what Grandmaster said I found one of Baku's images than I checked his logs I found all his images on Government, Travel etc websites, so that is why I am tagging it he has no info on who owns the images it simply says there the owners of the website. Now grandmaster is going to use this against me in Attribution which is pointless because most of what his images are copy vios or non-sourced. Artaxiad 07:26, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The user who uploaded the images explained so many times already that he has a permission to use them. Looks like the hunt on Azerbaijani images continues at commons. If you check this Baku Metro article, you'll see that all the images are tagged for deletion by some TigranMets, who is apparently Artaxiad. Grandmaster 07:45, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * If you have a problem you can ask me nicely to remove them yet you just shove it my face. His images are from other websites permission means nothing it doesnt say anything about where he got them. Artaxiad 07:50, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I reverted all my changes on there, we'll see what the other admin has to say when the email comes back. Artaxiad 07:54, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I would understand that you were concerned with copyright problems if you were so critical with regard to images uploaded by people of ethnic background other than Azerbaijani as well. But it seems to me that the image tagging has been done in a very bad faith. Grandmaster 07:58, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * No the only reason you are saying this is because of Armenian-Azeri conflicts which I really can care less unless people shove it down peoples throats like you are doing now, if it was a Asian or something you wouldn't say anything, if i find a violation I can check there logs and it seemed he had alot so I went and tagged the rest no bad faith but it seems you are assuming bad faith. Artaxiad 08:00, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, guys, because of an edit conflict out of three paragraphs only one (the last one) survived that changed the meaning of the reply. The lost paragraphs were about the importance of the sources of the images. I cannot restore the full reply but please if you have sources always insert them: it is a general courtesy to the source, it often needed for the checking of the copyright status, it is needed for the verification of the image. In the case that there are no doubts that image is PD (note that PD-Russia or PD-Ukraine requires much more than only the origin from the Soviet time!) and no doubts about the explanation of an image, then it is possible to put something generic like Pre-1954 Soviet photograph made by an anonymous photographer, the copyright belonged to the Soviet state and expired according to the law. Please handle all the requests to sources seriously.

I am happy that I have misunderstood Artaxiad and he acted in good faith. Please in future avoid the appearance of mixing the content disputes with the copyright issues, they should be separate. Happy editing Alex Bakharev 08:35, 25 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks Alex, I always assume good faith unless I see that somenone targets the images only because they are Azerbaijan related. I hope the issue has now been resolved. Grandmaster 08:39, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi again Alex. Do you know if there is a way to keep Image:Magomayev.jpg on wiki? It was taken in late 1960s and was ok to use here under the previous Soviet PD license, which apparently has changed now. It is no good to see the article about a prominent singer without any illustration just because of the reasons we discussed above. Thanks in advance. Grandmaster 14:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

AdrianTM
Hi, Alex. I was recetntly adressed this "fuck off" remark by User:AdrianTM, and wonder if this subject for a complaint or grounds for on-the-spot sanctions. Thank you. (What adds to the inflammatory nature of this behavior is that, after User:Khoikhoi had reverted his message, he readded it without the part, and indicated I should be checking out his curse words on the history page.) Dahn 23:27, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Though I would content that nothing I said was on a personal level (I was merley presenting him with what I thought was a paradox in what he said about the article), I respect your opinion. Tell me, please, if you could possibly remove his last comment on that talk page, given that it advertises and refernces the personal attack he claims he had no intention to commit (which is basically the same as insulting me twice). Dahn 00:13, 25 February 2007 (UTC) Never mind, he did it himself. Dahn 00:14, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you Alex, It wasn't my intention to commit an infraction, but I thought it's the only appropriate response to that user who didn't let me breath without accusing me that I blow air. (you can see that's that the case in that page where he deliberately provoked me). -- AdrianTM 00:05, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Picture
Alex, Vlad fedorov goes on deleting the picture of Putin from Vladimir Putin legislation and program and accuses me of copyright violations, although this picture is from Kremlin.ru. Could you stop this? Colchicum 13:46, 25 February 2007 (UTC)


 * According to the Law of Russian Federation on copyrights, publication of copyrights object doesn't conveys rights for publication on anyone who want to publish this object somewhere else. There is no any resignation on kremlin.ru website from its copyrights. Moreover you insert unsourced false information as a description of this image. I also left aside a fact that this particular image is not found on the website Kremlin.ru in Photoalbum section. How could you explain this latter fact?Vlad fedorov 11:15, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * All materials on the Presidential website may be reproduced in any media outlets, on Internet servers or on any other information supports without restriction on the amount of material and time of publication. This authorisation covers equally newspapers, magazines, radio stations, TV channels and Internet sites. The only condition is that any reproduction or broadcasting of the website’s materials contain a reference to the original source. No prior approval from the Presidential Press and Information Office is required to reprint information from the website. If you don't know the source of a picture or wonder where the reference is, follow the picture link. So report whatever you want, and we will see. I am not going to explain anything to you anymore. Colchicum 20:00, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Alex, could you please take some move to stop the edit-warring there or at least explain Wikipedia copyright policies (they are bad, but certainly permit this kind of use) to Vlad? He doesn't seem to listen to me. Colchicum 20:00, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Fyi, I’ve started a deletion discussion at commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Kremlin.ru. If the template on Commons is deleted, I will also nominate Kremlin.ru for deletion. —xyzzyn 21:14, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan
Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Thatcher131 18:23, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Warning given to 64.238.179.60
You left a warning for, who blanked vandal text on the featured article of the day. Blanking a garbage page seems like a fairly reasonable response for a newbie editor. Gimmetrow 01:44, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Blocking of JAnDbot
I strongly disagree with reason for blocking my bot. It's normal, that bot adds all languages. And ru-sib is still live wiki = not closed yet. And if it is because of Abkhaz language, i recommend you to see the ru-sib article. It is not robotical stub. As I sait do User:Khoikhoi, the only way for not adding ru-sib is to remove it from all languages. And en is the only one, who complains.

And if you look to mo: language, it is dead wiki, but still existing. I think, it's better to leave this language as it is, and remove it after ru-sib is officially closed.

Please, unblock bot, because block in one langage can destroy solving of problematic interwiki: in another 249 languages it will be OK, but in en will bew mistakes. JAn Dudík 07:59, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Judging others...
Hi, Alex. I am perfectly aware about the huge difficulties of having to estimate extremely complex situations and having to pronounce decisions about fellow users. Judging others is a very ingrate position and I respect those who, in spite of difficulties, take this responsibility. I think that in order to manage such a complicated task, one should however observe a couple of basic principles: presumption of innocence and hearing both sides. I would like to call upon these principles in my case.

Allow me first showing that not all the edits which you claimed of having undone edits of User:Dahn did it so. Thus, this edit has nothing to do with any edit of Dahn, this edit either has no relation to Dahn’s edits, this edit was a compromise proposal aimed at stopping a war edit of Dahn against other editors, while this edit was an add-on of sourced information, having nothing to do with Dahn.

There remain nevertheless three edits where I got involved into direct contact with Dahn.
 * 1) In the edit sequence related to Ion Creangă, I had first expanded the information in the article’s lead, my edits being reverted by Dahn, I reinserted my edits, which have been again reverted. At this moment I abandoned, not wishing to continue what could have degenerated into an edit war.
 * 2) Through this edit I restored an external link deleted by Dahn as “spamlink” – a dismissive and unjust labelling of what I considered a legitimate link. That’s why I allowed myself to characterize the revert as “vandalism”. Dahn reverted back invoking that the link was “commercial”. I was not prepared to continue on this and I abandoned.
 * 3) My third edit restored a perfect decent and relevant external link, in accordance with the arguments presented on the talk page by user Turgidson and myself.

As you can see, dear Alex, in all three cases my edits were content-related and perfectly sustainable, not just abusive and arbitrary interventions aimed at harassing Dahn. Besides, you can check the general pattern of my edits and you’ll encounter a respectable editor and author of appreciated articles. Please try to put yourself into my position: what am I supposed to do now, as you are accusing me of stalking Dahn ? My only choice is to avoid any article where Dahn is editing out of fear of not being accused again of “stalking”. Since much of the topics where Dahn is editing cover my interest area as well, the logical consequence is to leave Wikipedia. Is this what you are aiming to, when you are warning me “Please stop following Dahn” ?! I am by no means persecuting Dahn. Try to imagine how Wikipedia would look like, if every user whose edits were challenged, complains about being harassed. What about reporting Dahn harassing me with this revert, this revert, this one, again this revert, this revert this revert, this revert and finally this one ? Should we suppose that Dahn’s eight reverts were pertinent and legitimate, while my three reverts were arbitrary and made in bad faith ? Sincerely, I didn’t think before about this possibility, but now, after having counted eight reverts against me within a week, I seriously consider to report Dahn for WP:STALK What do you think, Alex ?

This case between Dahn and me is a good example of a very intricate situation, with mutual recriminations and a never-ending conflict. The story behind all this, dear Alex, is that in the last 10 days I began to be more explicit in my criticism of Dahn’s editing behaviour. Examples of my stances are this warning, this post, as well as these most recent post 1 and post2, where I was admittedly vehement in criticising what I consider an abusive and detrimental behaviour. As you see, Alex, this story has much deeper and larger roots as probably presumed at first sight. As you probably realise by now, I am far from being some trolling kid, running tasteless jokes against established users. I am very seriously concerned about the possibility that Dahn’s WP:OWN behavior grows into a problem for the community. Besides, libelling summaries like: rv vandalism, rv vandalism, rv blatant pov, rv spam, rv POV-pushing, shoo, rv pov, rv POV-pushing, rv to last by me, rv v, rv POV-pushing, rv vandalism don’t make things better: accusing co-editors 4 times of vandalism and 4 times of POV-pushing (not to mention deeply dismissive comments like “shoo” or “rv spam”), all within the last week. Were he a weak editor, this wouldn’t pose such problems. When coming from a user disposing of great potential like him, disruptive behaviour is more damaging. I hope you dispose now of more material to base upon your judgement. Please note that any suggestion from you to resolve this situation will be more than welcome to me. --Vintila Barbu 13:56, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thanks for the barnstar!

It came to me that you might miss my (timely) thanks made on my talkpage, so I'm doubling those here. Yury Tarasievich 14:28, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Tedblack and Great Fire of Smyrna
Hi Alex, I've given a few days time-out, he was really overstepping the lines. Do you think we should now unprotect Great Fire of Smyrna to give the other editors an opportunity to sort things out while he's (hopefully) away, or would you prefer to keep them on talkpage-only too? Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:39, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I have downgraded the protection there to semi Alex Bakharev 11:20, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Rafael Popper
You suck, a lot! Screw your AfD! --Dual Freq 19:49, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Civility
You left yesterday a note to User:Vintila Barbu claiming he is stalking User:Dahn. The relation is somehow the other way around. If you want proof, take a look at Valter Roman. I created the article today and Vintila helped me. Guess who came right after us? User:Dahn. I expect you to leave him a message on the subject. Cheers, Dpotop 20:10, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

BTW: you should also criticise Dahn on grounds of WP:OWN, because this is his greatest problem. Dpotop 20:11, 28 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but you got it wrong. Valter Roman was proposed for creation on the noticeboard several days ago. I happened to pick it, marking my name next. If Dahn was so eager to edit on the subject, he could have easily created the article himself. Instead, he waited for someone else to create it, fill in half the info, and then took over. This I call stalking. BTW, there are 3 proposed articles left uncreated. Why didn't Dahn choose them instead? Dpotop 12:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * So, your accusation of stalking on Vintila is more appropriated on Dahn, which seems to make a fixation on everything related to a certain period of Romanian history. If Vintila edits articles of that period, that does not mean he stalks Dahn. Dpotop 12:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, lets see further development Alex Bakharev 12:22, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * It is truly abhorrent that I stand accused of improving articles. First of all, the article was announced here by the user who initiated the whole drive. I simply noticed the link turn blue, clicked it, and happened to notice that the article was nowhere near wikipedia standards (it was ungrammatical, colloquial, unwikified, vague, and occasionally just plain wrong - such as when implying that Kaliningrad was a city in the Soviet Union during the 1930s), and that I had access to sources Dpotop did not. I did so at a time when the article was not being "used".
 * If you have the time, Alex, please read the dialog on the notice board in regard to the said article. I have chosen to stay away from it, since I had nothing to reply to Dptop's claims, but you will notice that two users argue there that Dpotop stepped over the line with his comments on the matter.
 * You will also note that this was started bu User:Biruitorul as a contest of some sort, and that, as other users have pointed out, Dpotop decided to create the article out of contest (in case he wants back in with credit for it, he can take it for all I care).
 * I don't think there is anything in this situation that refers to either WP:OWN or WP:STALK - as opposed to Vintila Barbu's overt appeals to stalking ( and ) and his subsequent move to follow my recent contributions and revert them on sight.
 * I would also like to point out that some Romanian contributors live with the assumption that I am to either form a team with them or go away, and interpret this as a wikipedia policy. I have not been able to find that policy, only ones referring to interaction with other users - I have not broken that rule, whereas Vintila Barbu has stepped over it limitlessly (not merely by stalking, but by calling me all sorts of things as a means to discredit me and my contributions). Furthermore, as countless editors will attest, I am perfectly able to cooperate with those contributors who advocate neutrality and informative quality, based on reliable sources (all my past conflicts with these two users involve the persistence of their POV-pushing and reliance on things such as rumors, personal experience, and ability to mudsling). Dahn 12:22, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

User:AlexNewArtBot/SwedenLog
Hi. I was informed of this bot through the Swedish Wikipedians' Notice Board (SWNB). It seems really interesting and useful. Maybe at some time it could be made to edit the New Articles page on the SWNB directly. I'm wondering though, if the bot could also pick out the date the article was created and who created it? The date is nice for keeping track, while information about the creator is nice for (a) being able to help prolific editors out and (b) take intervention against hoaxes, bogus and non notable articles.

I also don't understand the rules, and would really appreciate an instruction page.

/ Fred-Chess 23:17, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Assyrian people
Hi, I was wondering if I could use your bot for WikiProject Assyria? What is the process of creating a new search with the bot? Thank you. Chaldean 04:11, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much. Now how can I have the results show in the Project's page? Chaldean 06:16, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, why do some of the rules have "\W/" in the end and some dont? What does that mean? Chaldean 06:17, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I am usually pasting the template into the board like this. Then the content is of the search result is shown on the board. Also because the bot search result starts with the new section there will be the edit button to edit the bot results. I would recommend to do it after we at least onece run the bot with more than 50% of correct finding. It is no use to frighten board users with hundreds false positive.

The rules are Perl Compatible Regular Expressions. \W there means any non-word chracter (any character outside a-zA-Z range). I use it as a word boundary. Thus, /\Wassyria/ would much Assyria, Assyrian, Assyrians, etc. If I limit it from both ends /\Wassyria\W/ it will match only Assyria but not Assyrian nor Assyrians. If we have a short word that looks like a possible fragment of a longer English word or name I would prefer to limit it from the both ends, to prevent false positives. Alex Bakharev 06:47, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanation and yes please increase the threshold. I dont mind having more results. Chaldean 04:36, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, it doesn't seem to be working in the WikiProject page? (I don't see any results being shown.) How old of pages are shown in the result? Like after how long is the page created then it is moved from the search? Chaldean 05:14, 3 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Ok so why didn't it pick up Assyrians in Australia? Chaldean 05:32, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Because it was already announced on the board WikiProject Assyria (in the section Diaspora). The bot does not re-announced articles that are already in the search result (latest version) or in the corresponded board (in any section). Alex Bakharev 06:54, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh ok, thanks for that. Chaldean 15:06, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Bot
Hi, Alex! Not sure if you have seen this inquiry yet. Could you comment, please? Thanks!&mdash;Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:09, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Request
I tried looking for materials on General / historian G. I. Krivosheev but couldn't even decipher his initials. If you know any sources, or could create a stub, it would be appreciated (he is an author of a relativly popular work on Soviet WWII casualties).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 17:08, 2 March 2007 (UTC)


 * General-colonel Grigory Fedot Krivosheev, PhD, member of Presidium of the WWII Association (генерал-полковник Григорий Федотович Кривошеев, член Президиума Ассоциации историков Второй мировой войны). Search for "генерал Кривошеев" (880 responses), "Krivosheev general" (16,400 responses). Barefact 19:42, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Request for help
Alex, would you please de-link redirects of Old Turkic alphabet, Turkic alphabet, and such from the Orkhon script. Orkhon script is just one of, though studied and known much better than others, of the number of variants of the Turkic alphabets spaced territorially and in time. The redirects do not allow addressing the different variations of the Turkic alphabets that fall outside of the Orkhon script boundaries. Barefact 19:57, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Why has our page been deleted?
Hi, can you tell me why you have deleted my wikipedia page - "FoyleOaks" The reason you gave was 'A7' which means its spam or something?

User:AlexNewArtBot
Hi!

I was informed about this bot by Aldux, and I think that it would be very useful for the Wikiproject Greece, which has a New articles section. What should we do so that the project is supported by the bot?

Thanks in advance, and congratulations for this very useful bot!--Yannismarou 17:54, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks!--Yannismarou 20:45, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Believe a blocked user is using another username to work on
User:芸術破壊行為 is making the same type of edits that User:Blarga2, who you blocked, made to John Madden (football). It appears the new account was created just before the anonymous IP you also blocked. Thanks, Ronbo76 06:02, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
 * He is already indefblocked by User:Nlu Alex Bakharev 06:38, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:1958_Sakharov_Kurchatov.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:1958_Sakharov_Kurchatov.jpg, has been listed at. Please look there 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. Yonatan (contribs/talk) 22:30, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Ukrainians
No, that's fine, and thanks for letting me know. If you feel the edits were quasi-vandalism, semi-protection is better. Cheers, SlimVirgin (talk) 06:49, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Alex, thank you for dealing with that anon. SlimVirgin (talk) 08:01, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism by User:67.180.67.179
It seems the User:67.180.67.179 is still at it. Please take a look at the following edits:   . In your opinion, would you consider these to be malicious and hateful vandalism? I certainly would. Please take whatever action is appropriate in such situations.

I left the same message at User talk:SlimVirgin. Balcer 19:21, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I think your response was the correct one at this point. Hopefully the problems will stop, but I will let you know if the pattern of controversial edits continues. Balcer 03:32, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Melbourne meeting
I live in Melbourne. According to Jimbo's userpage, he will be in Australia in late April - if there is any meetup in Melbourne, I would like to be involved if possible. Metamagician3000 01:57, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for you reply on my talk page. I made a comment on the relevant page. Can probably do that Friday night if anything happens. Metamagician3000 06:18, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

DYK
Hi Alex,

I've noticed your bot adds new articles to a lot of new article announcement pages. I was wondering if you could modify it just a bit to help me with a task. I've been using the bot's lists occasionally to find entries for the DYK section of the main page. It is, however, pretty frustrating to pick through all those stubs to find articles that meet DYK criteria. It would be cool if you could have your bot create a list just for finding new articles for DYK. It would have to select articles based on the DYK criteria. If you'd be willing to do this, I can write you exactly how I think that could work. Greetings,-- Carabinieri 17:30, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * That it a challenge! Make bot to find good articles. I could compile the list of new articles longer than 2K, having more than one paragraphs, at least one link and at least one category. Still it will be quite a long list. Not sure if it will be useful. Still I will try Alex Bakharev 20:41, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Some more criteria that could be useful would be whether an article has a references section or something similar (DYK articles have to be referenced). It would also be great, if templates, especially infoboxes, weren't counted as far article size goes and if articles with cleanup or similar tags were disregarded. Thanks for your help, -- Carabinieri 22:16, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot for your help, Alex. It seems some of the other people who work on DYK like the list as well.-- Carabinieri 13:24, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Bot re-adding
Hi Alex, just noticed that the bot readded some articles I trimmed off it. This edit added back some articles like 1924 International Lawn Tennis Challenge which I had removed on the edit directly before that. It's going great otherwise - SimonLyall 18:37, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes. I know it. The bot searches over the consecutive days are overlap. The bot would not add an article already in its search result or in the main board but would happily re-add deleted articles. I have probably made the bot to find the last edit by it and check against this last edit Alex Bakharev 20:50, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your translation
Thanks for your translation. But, do you have any information about that image or just translated the Russian text? I ask that because I believe that source information is still incomplete.

If I understood correctly (do hesitate on correcting me!), the given source is a newspaper issue from 2001 that happen to include that image. As the copyright tag used on that image says it's public domain because "...it was published before January 1st, 1954, and the creator (if known) died before that date...", I believe would we need more information on that image to feel comfortable about it claimed copyright status.

Do you know about any reliable source that could give us information on this image's creator (specially, the date of his death?)

Or maybe, some reliable source explaining this image was published by the Soviet government (what would make it almost undoubtelly PD)?

Sorry for storming you with this task. It's like I'm punishing you for being nice :).

Thanks again for your step. I hope you could be useful in this matter again. Best regards, --Abu badali (talk) 00:23, 8 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Abu, I just translated the Russian text. Yes it is a Ukrainian newspaper of 2001. Kirponos died in 1941. Since a copyright of a photograph is usually started from the date the photo was first made and the copyright of Soviet photos was almost always given to the Staet, thus I think the copyright status is pretty safe, but you can investigate further, if you wish. Alex Bakharev 00:58, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Help! - Turkic alphabets
Alex, will you please help with the "Turkic alphabets" article. User Dbachmann effectively immediately killed it as a stand-alone article, pretending to merge it with Orkhon alphabet, without resorting to use to Talk page, or allowing the other users to comment. The action is visibly done in a bad faith. User Dbachmann belittled the author, removerd references contained in the original article, wiped out most of the contents, and then added in the merged left-overs. Please reverse this covert and unannounced speedy deletion. I even can't give a link to the wiped out article, because he re-linked Turkic alphabets title to Orkhon alphabet, like it never existed. Can you suggest what else can I do to restore the article? Barefact 21:27, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Putin Article
I have noticed that you have reverted all my changes. Can you please explain your reasons in the discussion section of the article. I will remove your addition concerning SPAG as per discussion. I am prepared to discuss the other changes. 59.101.157.29 07:33, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

User:217.156.39.245
Hi. He's back. Dahn 13:01, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

User:R9tgokunks's edits on User:LUCPOL
If you could spare a moment, I have a question and a request for possible action. User:R9tgokunks and User:LUCPOL are engaged in frequent content disputes, and don't seem to get along. As far as I can tell, neither of them is a model Wikipedian, to say the least. Today, however, User:R9tgokunks made a number of significant edits in User:LUCPOL's userspace, seemingly without his permission. (see history of contributions, which occured around 22:00 EDT on March 9). The result of this series of rather messy edits is that a potentially controversial template User:LUCPOL/Userboxes/User schlonzk was created in LUCPOL's userspace. (Previously LUCPOL had a box with this text on his page, but only for himself, and not as a userbox which could be transcluded elsewhere). Note that User:LUCPOL's command of English is not great, so I don't think he would be able to act adequately in this matter, which is why I am mentioning this to you myself.

Anyway, what is Wikipedia's general policy on this kind of action? What steps should be taken, if any, in this matter? My general opinion (and it is only that) is that User:R9tgokunks is actively seeking a fight and continually escalates the disruptiveness of his edits. A number of people have complained about his edits on his talk page. I have reverted him a few times myself, so I may be biased here. Please make your own judgements. Balcer 03:36, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I restored the userpage of LUCPOL who is no angel to be sure but is entitled to have his page as he sees it without unwarranted interferences. Something needs done with this and all these footprints. No need for new inflammatory userboxes.


 * And while at the subject, Balcer, please consider having a word with your friend whose talk page calls for partitioning of Russia. This whole partitioning issue is too well-known to you and him to make jokes about it. Cheers, --Irpen 03:52, 10 March 2007 (UTC)


 * You mean "userbox|#BDBDAD|white|30px|Freedom", I assume? It seems pretty harmless to me, and does not explicitly call for anything.  Anyway, I have little contact with Halibutt and zero influence over him. Also, I am not in particular bothered by the existence of the "Silesian independence" userbox, just the way it was created.  There are a few people who want to have independent or at least highly autonomous Silesia, and they are entitled to hold that view.  Balcer 04:11, 10 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I mean
 * and
 * and


 * People are entitled to their views. It's just having those boxes are inflammatory. See WP:NOT. True enough there are no policy to ban those boxes but I would enthusiastically support such proposal. This is my first choice of a candidate to trash as well as all the others. --Irpen 04:27, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I have dropped a note to LUCPOL. Lets see his reaction. Alternatively you can put the Userbox to WP:MFD. There is a WP:CSD special criterium for speedy deletion, named T1 Templates that are divisive and inflammatory. But I am not sure it is the clear case of such a template (we have a lot of User supports independence of XX type templates, so I would rather seen it on MfD, or deleted by a User request. Alex Bakharev 05:03, 10 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks. A note to User:R9tgokunks about editing the userspace of others might also be useful. Balcer 07:48, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Done Alex Bakharev 08:01, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I did not permit to create this userbox. If more persons this userbox to use is OK. His editions on my side became reverted. Second matter: I would want very to finish conflict by R9tgokunks, he continues him - example:. Why? I try to stand down him in many matters - example: - he still the same. Please help. LUCPOL 11:24, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: your post : I ask this to write on discussion R9tgokunks, he removes my messages. LUCPOL 13:54, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Does not deserve on name "sock puppet" no IP (83.28.235.97, 83.12.15.10 , 83.18.242.234 , 83.19.93.74 etc)
 * 2) Chechuser in Requests for checkuser/Case/LUCPOL confirmed, that these IP's does not use as "sock puppet".
 * 3) Checkuser matter was closed -.
 * 4) Writing down stencil "sock puppet" in IP's user page is vandalism by User:R9tgokunks.


 * LUCPOL...That IS YOUR USERBOX, YOU CREATED IT, IT GOES UNDER YOUR NAME! I can assure you, even thought everyone says I am FORCEFULLY trying to harass LUCPOL, it doesnt have ONE BIT ,ONE CRUMB of truth to it AT ALL. Why has everyone accused me of harassing LUCPOL after creating a template he thought up? Friendly gestures are met with so much PARANOIA these days, and im VERY disappointed and a little depressed about that. Second, LUCPOL keeps adding unsigned Warnings to my page telling me i am "vandalizing" Upper Silesian Coal Basin and Upper Silesian Metropolitan Union, when in fact he is the one doing it because he wants to advertise Silesia, By the way those two pages were almost EXACTLY the same as the Katowice article until i attempted cleaning them up...OH WAIT Upper Silesian Metropolitan Union STILL IS, BECAUSE LUCPOL KEEPS REVERTING IT! -- Hrödberäht (gespräch) 17:31, 10 March 2007 (UTC)


 * For what did you create this stencil? Is my? Yes? So leave him. Second, your citation "wants to advertise Silesia" - where? Where is advertisement in article Upper Silesian Coal Basin, Upper Silesian Metropolitan Union? You think really, that all users make a mistake - you are right always? Without comment. LUCPOL 13:11, 11 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Alex Bakharev, are you going to respond, or just ignore what i said?? -- Hrödberäht (gespräch) 20:46, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I would just really like to know why you think I created an "inflammatory" Userbox for the purpose of "to harass User:LUCPOL"? -- Hrödberäht (gespräch) 21:22, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Portal:Karnataka/New Pages
Hello Alex,

For your attn: User_talk:AlexNewArtBot

Thanks, - KNM Talk 01:45, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Alexander Zelenko on DYK for 11 March 2007
Thank you for the nomination! &mdash; ERcheck (talk) 14:50, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair use images in galleries
Hello Alex. Would you please refer me to the policy page that prohibits displaying fair use images in galleries? It makes sense under FUC#8 (no merely decorative use) but I need to point someone stubborn to the exact page. Thank you. - NYC JD (objection, asked and answered!) 23:03, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Can I please ask you to weigh in here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Spike_TV&action=history - NYC JD (objection, asked and answered!) 02:23, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I have re-addressed the question to User_talk:Renata3 Alex Bakharev 02:50, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * That's quite a tough one because there is no strict guideline where you could point and say: here it is! (BTW, I am not keeping up with latest developments on fair use policies) My take at this: If someone wrote an article Logos of Spike TV or a decent section about them then it would be ok to show all those logos (of course, the article might be subject to WP:OR and notability guidelines). As of right now, it is a violation of the policy because there are too many of them (FUC#3), they do not identify the subject of the article (the first logo used in the infobox does, FUC#8), they do not illustrate text (in fact the section has no text, FUC#8). Also practical look: such galleries do not belong to articles in any case, even if the images are free (Wikipedia is not an image gallery). That's my take on this. Renata 03:16, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you kindly - NYC JD (objection, asked and answered!) 11:21, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Bot error
See this. Basically it's replaced old content with new instead of just adding it. Some kind of buffer overflow? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 00:26, 12 March 2007 (UTC)


 * It looks like there was an intermittent network problem: bot failed to read the previous version of the search result but did not fail to write the results. I run the bot from home there I have a crappy cable modem, that sometimes reboots itself for no apparent reason. If the problem will repeat itself I would add some test on reading the previous version of the search result. Alex Bakharev 02:13, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

3RR block
I think you should revisit that block you gave to Arcayne. Look at the diffs, they are not reverts, he was cleaning up the article and removing unsources original research. Since when has the removal of original research become a violation of the 3RR? If you go to the diffs, and then back track to the previous edits you'll see that they were there already, and several editors have agreed that those contributions were unsourced original research that should be purged from the article. There was no true violation of the 3RR going on here. Just one editor that didn't like the clean up job. It would be like saying this edit is not a constructive edit to clean up the article, but really a revert of someone else's edit and should be delt with the same.  BIGNOLE    (Question?)  (What I do)  04:14, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I thank you for re-evaluating the situation.  BIGNOLE    (Question?)  (What I do)  05:21, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I would like to add my voice to Big's and thank you for reconsidering the block. While I don't think I did anything wrong (spirit of the rule), my numerous edits on an article that inspired some anger made me a target. I will endeavor to be more careful. Thank you again.Arcayne 12:17, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. The 300 {film) article is currently the most viewed article on wiki, and at the same time it is a subject of an edit war, so the tempers are high. Sorry about it Alex Bakharev 12:22, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * How do you know that the article is the most viewed? I would love to know how to find that sort of information.Arcayne 14:38, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * In fact I was told so by an admin. According to 300 (film) is the fourth most visited wikipage after the start page (duh!), Battle of Thermopylae and Wiki. 72K visits per day constitutes ~1 visit each second Alex Bakharev 01:22, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Also posted at the AN/3RR: I bring htis to your attention for the very reasons you note above about the popularity of the article, and the edit warring going on: This editor is using the 3RR as an intimidation tactic. Despite having made only a couple edits to the page in three days, he came at me with it. He's using it to push a pro-iranian/persian agenda. he is upset by any removal of content which disparages the movies portrayal of the Persian amries of Xerxes. Further, it's my understanding that 3RR applies to a SINGLE content dispute, NOT to an article as a whole. If it applied to articles as a whole, any three edits which correct information, reword for neutrality, and so on could be counted to the 3RR. It specifically applies to arguments about whether sentence X or Paragraph Y should be in, complete with deletions anreinsertions over and over. TO argue a set of content in one section, resolve it and move on isn't covered by 3RR. Mardavich needs to be made aware of the problems with his interpretation of 3RR, and the fact that he tells editors that any edit they make puts them in danger of violating 3RR can and has been seen as intimidation. I tried to explain it to him, but he weaselled around it using AGF, which is tough to do when confronted with 'you're gonna break 3RR and i'm gonna get you when you do', especially since it's accord to his overly restrictive interpretation of 3RR. Thank you.  ThuranX 20:12, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Alex, please see if this a personal attack
Here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Biophys#Other_important_edits, Biophys wrote that Politkovskaya article "(***) Articles currently vandalized by a wikistalker. Please help!". Vlad fedorov 04:50, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

DYK Good search results
I really like this idea. I did find some area for refinement. Please visit DYK Good search results. I marked those articles which had less than 1,500 characters. Please look over those articles that I marked and see whether you can revise the bot to exclude such articles in the future. -- Jreferee 05:33, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

By the way...
Have you seen this http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AFederal_Security_Service_of_the_Russian_Federation&diff=110631062&oldid=110380425 Vlad fedorov 05:39, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * One of the trolls I have blocked or upset. Posting from a "freenet", Germany that are used as an open proxy. Nothing unusual, I got plenty of such "friends" Alex Bakharev 05:59, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Arcayne
Right after you unblocked this user, despite the fact that he had clearly violated WP:3RR (Partial reverts count as reverts), he continued reverting/undoing/removing other users' edits on 300 (film) disregarding WP:3RR, and later came on my user page and made an accusation and personal attack against me which violates both WP:AGF and WP:Civil. , all of which further demonstrates this user's total disregard for Wiki policies. --Mardavich 23:36, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, I told him:


 * "You made no friends with your underhanded tactics, sir. You have lost my Assumption of Good Faith on any of your edits.Arcayne 20:12, 12 March 2007 (UTC)"

Considering his tactics, I considered my response rather restrained. I will, however, make things easier for all concerned, and not contact Mardavich again.Arcayne 23:42, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * As you can see, he's been stalking me too. --Mardavich 23:49, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * How exactly am I stalking you?? If you mean, how did I know that you went to Alex all sneaky-like? I have set to 'watch' Alex's talk page, as I have an unanswered question about something unrelated.Arcayne 23:55, 12 March 2007 (UTC)


 * User:Arcayne is making further personal attacks labeling me all sorts of things like "devious", "POV-pusher", etc, and seeking meat-puppets for his edit-wars on other "freindly" users' talk pages.  Alex, I am really getting tired of these personal attacks and accusations. I request that you personally look into this issue, because by unblocking this person when he had clearly violated a Wikipedia policy, you seem to have given him the wrong idea that violating various Wikipedia policies prohibiting edit-waring, meat-puppetry, and personal-attacks are tolerated in Wikipedia. --Mardavich 00:02, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Admin Alex, I'm sorry you have to be apart of all this. I hope that it's clear that User Mardavich is trolling. He seems more concerned with trying to get Arcayne blocked, for any reason he can concoct, than he is with actually editing Wikipedia, and if you check his talk you'll see there is no personal attack on there.  BIGNOLE    (Question?)  (What I do)  00:13, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry about all his accusations, Alex. To clarify, after he went after me, it seemed prudent to warn the other editors he harrassed that they might be next (he must be watching my contribs to see who i contact). I won't respond and clutter up your page anymore by responding to this fine gentleman's posts any more. I believe you know my and others'  position on the fellow. Again, sorry to be cluttering up your page with this nonsense.Arcayne 00:14, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Guys, can you concentrate on the article edits rather than on the fruitless personal accusations and contra-accusations? User:Mardavich had valid reasons to believe that there was a 3RR violation by Arcayne. In fact I been reasonably neutral in the matter and more experienced in Wiki policies fell into the same line of reasoning. Please stop accusing Mordavich in the bad faith nomination. "Attacks" by User:Arcayne are very mild, we usually not block for that, still they are clearly irate users, so please resort to more polite communication. I would urge all involved parties to concentrate on the discussion about the article rather than each others. Alex Bakharev 01:09, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I accept at least partial responsibility for messaging him after the nonsense yesterday. I won't make that mistake again.Arcayne 01:31, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Alex, I'm sorry to bother you, but your buddy is out trolling again. He's reported me for 3RR (without warning btw) and none of these are violation. These are his diffs: Here I removed pictures that had nothing to do with the film, here I removed a duplication of another section, this was just some Anon inserting a sentence above some tags in the plot section, and last is just some extraneous details that are not much use on to the article. This is getting kind of annoying. Maradavich is just going through the history and picking out anyone that removes anything, regardless of what the reason, and I point to this as misconduct because he hasn't done this to anyone else except those that he sees as "opposing" him. Notice in the history he didn't come after me until I defended Arcayne.  BIGNOLE    (Question?)  (What I do)  12:02, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I guess I should voice my opinion as well. He came at me at 2:20 on 11 Mar, after TWO edits, at 1:29 i removed a section sourced to a person's personal film review blog, and then at 1:47 same day, I removed a see also , and took it to talk. For those two solid edits, he hit me with a 3RR 'friendly warning'. It was cleraly intimidation, same as he's doing to other editors opposing his views. As BigNole and I, along with Erikster and a few others were adding to that and similar films (comics interpretations) it was clear from our edit histories that we pay attention to the page and have an interested preceding any 'bias editing, but he's instead choosing to see us as the 'opposition'. His behavior and conduct is to me definitely incivil, YMMV. He needs a significant cautioning. Thank you. ThuranX 22:23, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

300 Edits
We have been thinking that creating a temp page for the controversy stuff might allow that discussion to take place for those interested in that, while the main article (Production, Plot,Themes etc.) gets some much needed attention. After its nice and tight, we reintegrate a hopefully more stable controversies section. We were thinking that an admin should sign off on this idea, as the article is - as you said before - highly visible. As well, because of the argumentative edits, we want to make sure that no one feels slighted. In addition to the temp page, and the moving of the controversies section to it, we would make sure that all new contributors knew exactly where to go to if they wanted to address the controversies surrounding the film. To be clear, this suggested move isn't intended to lessen the contributions of those wanting to point out controversies, and/or their effect. This allows those editors in workin that particular section a specific area to hash them all out, while at the same time, those editors interested in putting the rest of the article together can do so without relative distraction. After both are relatively stable, they can then be integrated. Your thoughts?Arcayne 01:52, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I like it, but I am involved very litle in the article. Lets ask those who involved Alex Bakharev 01:55, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, the fact that you are not involved in it is precisely why you are a good choice for this. While you are aware of the vehemence of the edits going on, you are distanced from it, which allows you to look at the setting-up dispassionately, and catch potential trouble spots before they occur. You can be as involved or uninvolved as you wish, but your initial input on how to how to avoid trouble would be really both helpful and appreciated.Arcayne 02:04, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * oops, I am a dummy. I had to reread what you wrote. Most of the non-OR editors are in. We just need an admin to make sure folk know we aren't trying to OWN the article.Arcayne 02:30, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 12th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:07, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Armenia-Azerbaijan mess
I've gone ahead and moved vartanm's statement to the talk page since he wasn't named as a party. I think we need to pay a little more attention on this issue now. - Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 06:47, 13 March 2007 (UTC)