User talk:Dahn/Archive 42

Ahoy!
I may be on a break from Wikipedia, but that doesn't mean I can't be active on Commons. Look here; I trust you will find much to smile about. - 86.105.210.219 (talk) 17:14, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * My pleasure. (By the way, taking pictures is not allowed in Bellu, a policy I find even sillier than the odious Romanian law prohibiting the photographing of embassies, something that may be unique in Europe and North America.) I see the Red Quadrilateral and the Socialist Party of Labour have made their appearance here. (And who is Vlad "Tepes"?) Be that as it may, I must sign off now, so let me ask you to undo some of this madness again: fiddling with the Religious Affairs Ministry information is still uncalled for, Hungarian names are absurd here, and the tags should be addressed one way or another. - 86.105.210.219 (talk) 15:26, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Sign off? :) Dahn (talk) 15:44, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Indeed, though I will be back on board in several days' time. Meanwhile, one of our friends has embarked upon a new experiment: 2004 - 2008 legislature of the Romanian Parliament, 2008 - present legislature of the Romanian Parliament. And, as for List of schools in Romania - heh. - 86.105.210.219 (talk) 20:40, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, Jesus Christ up in Heaven... One survived prod (a matter of principle, apparently - "it's crap, but its title fits in with other crap"). The other two - I man say obsession. Not only are they redundant to the elections (they don't even mention the vital thing one would expect to find under that title - the names of the people elected, which btw could and should eventually be covered by subcategories), not only aree they naive in assuming that one could follow the lead for all Romanian legislatures ("can't someone else do it?"), but they are unlikable to unless we start filling the place with millions of links to roughly the same place. But this is an excuse to add yet more sickening templates that take up half the article space. And do I look forward to explaining all of this in a block AfD to the flock of potential "keep" votes? Dahn (talk) 22:54, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Several days time you say? I'm already counting the hours. Dahn (talk) 22:55, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * And I didn't want to bother you with this now - I was gonna wait for your return to tell you - but this was also gonna reach your talk page. I don't want it to sound like "your mission, should you chose to accept it", but I'm thinking it'll be something fun and constructive, with no real deadline. (And this message will not self destruct in five mi Dahn (talk) 23:00, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Benson controversy
Your insults fall below any ordinary standard of civility, and far below the standard I've come to expect in Wikipedia. To suggest that I haven't read the very matter being discussed is a slap in the face and invites retribution, which you'll note I refrained from. To score cheap points on someone who has let you have the last word is unkind. To say that I've missed the same point over and over shows exasperation on your part, an exasperation I myself had every right to display at your not understanding my points. I've found that when I get angry, it often turns out to have been because I myself was wrong. Check yourself. --Milkbreath (talk) 10:52, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * What? Let's be very clear: I don't think there's something wrong with you for missing my point, I just think that you missed it; I also genuinely think you've not read a part in my posts, or otherwise part in your posts would not make much sense. My message can't possibly be read to say that you are stupid, it reads exactly like I meant it to read: that you are wrong. It's both pretentious and unreasonable to assume that being polite = not saying one is wrong. And, yes, I have continued to post after your "last word", but this was not to "score points" (?!). It was because the purpose of my posts there, and the finality of all posts there, is the hook itself - in my view, too many hooks with problems get by, and I would want that to cease. Evidencing those problems and how people fail to consider them problems is what my posts are all about. Also, expecting a "last word" not to be commented upon is illusory.
 * And, no, I'm not and was not angry. Granted, in this case and many others in the past, I've found it quite frustrating that there are people who think the only arguments against their views can only be voiced in anger. That is the equivalent of covering one's years and starting to hum.
 * In short: I don't believe I have produced any insult aimed at you, nor did I mean to. You may feel insulted by some phrasing (again, with no intention on my part), and you have definitely read a tone of my voice in them where there was none. For what it's worth, you have my apologies for that. Dahn (talk) 11:22, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

The Soap Myth
Thank your for your suggestion. i have reworded the hook accordingly.Historicist (talk) 20:34, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLI (July 2009)
The July 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:13, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Why no Bulgarian folklore
Well, like you, though on a much smaller scale, I prefer to write complete articles and do some research before or at least as I write. We can easily go with something like Albanian folklore's incomplete list of related topics, but what's the point. There are some basic texts in Category:Bulgarian folklore which can provide for some decent background... what I need is a couple of well-written academic monographs, some time and will. But sadly, that's the case with everything :) Best, Todor→Bozhinov 11:52, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Jennifer Zeng' s status
Please see Talk:Jennifer Zeng. John Carter (talk) 16:02, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Request
Hi, I noticed that you understand Romanian. If you get the time, can you take a look at Featured list candidates/List of wind farm projects in Romania/archive2 and check the list over to make sure that it is using reliable sources? Thanks in advance, Dabomb87 (talk) 21:57, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot. If you have the inclination to review the article more carefully, please do so. Regards, Dabomb87 (talk) 22:22, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Little misunderstanding
Hi Dahn. Following our little encounter last night (or whatever time it was where you are) an editor I greatly respect said that he thought very highly of you. So I wish to say that I had no intention of engaging in any personal attacks and was astonished you thought I was trying to "unnerve" you. I wish to apologise for any upset caused and hope we can have a more agreeable interaction next time we meet. Regards Sarah777 (talk) 10:33, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

DYK
I'm not quite clear on who exactly updates these things, as it is all rather confusing - so if you are not the correct person, I apologise, perhaps you could tell me who is, or notify them?

I have voiced concerns over DYK tag censorship, in Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know - at the end of that thread.

Thanks,  Chzz  ►  22:06, 13 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks, sorry to have bothered you.  Chzz  ►  05:56, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

IPA-ro
Done. Ready to help again whenever you need me. — Adi  Japan  08:24, 18 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I want to thank you personally for writing the article on Lívia Rusz. In my childhood I just loved her drawings, especially those in Cipi, the giant dwarf, but also the Mac and Cocofifi ones, which I happened to see again recently somewhere on the internet. You're doing a great job! — Adi  Japan  02:46, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

wp:GA & WP:RO
I saw that you have greatly expanded several articles lately including Harap Alb, Ion Creangă, and Vladimir Tismăneanu; you may want to consider submitting them to wp:GAN. Otherwise, if you don't care, may I submit them? Nergaal (talk) 04:31, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * From my experience at GANs, on average, (unless they are popular TV shows or celebrities), articles there tend to wait for a month or so, or if there is nobody really into the subject, even much more (for examepl Literary sources for the origin of Romanians was listed for 3 months or so). If you go ahead and list 5 articles at once, I found that is not really likely that any of the reviewers will overlap significantly. As for the Tismaneanu article, I have found that once an article becomes a GA/FA, much more editors keep an eye on it, and vandalism edits are much more quickly undone. Even if it is not really complete, that might come up during the GAN and would give the nominators the chance to add the information. Also, drop me a note when you will submit Creanga, since I want to give a hand if I can. Nergaal (talk) 15:53, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't really care, but a list of major works will still be necessary; see Mary Wollstonecraft. Nergaal (talk) 17:14, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

De Nada
Naturalmente. De Nada. El articulo es muy bueno. Lo siento que la imagen no fue muy claro. Como estas? Es bastante caliente en Gales en este momento. Quiero nadar en el océano frío ahora! Sí? Saludos! Dr. Blofeld      White cat 21:06, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Sí. Aunque no tengo un diccionario en este salon. Mi español es bueno pero quiero aprender hablar español con fluidez. Necesito practicar el idioma! (I think its unusually a masculine "el" for idioma normally it would be "la") Buenos Noches! Now if I could only speak all the languages of the world, including Romanian I could create some good articles in Romanian! Dr. Blofeld      White cat 21:24, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Sí me siento muy afortunado. Vivo sólo dos kilómetros del mar! (Bristol Channel). Not much surf of late though... Hey you have lagos (lakes) in Romania don't you? Probably in the mountains though... Dr. Blofeld       White cat 21:30, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes indeed, French, Spanish, Italian, Catalan and Portuguese share similar verbs, makes things a lot easier. Even iof you are very basic you can often decipher... Dr. Blofeld       White cat 21:33, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I see LOL, rather polluted eh? Fish with glowing heads, (frickin sharks with laser beams attached to their heads) that kind of thing LOL. Now wouldn't it be nice if every commune in Romania could be fleshed out at least like Sfânta Elena... Uneveness it sources and editors me thinks.... Dr. Blofeld       White cat 22:04, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Much better to have decent articles on communes first than sub stubs on the villages... Dr. Blofeld       White cat 09:49, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

You might be interested in the message on my user page.... Anyway what are we going to do about communes one lined unreferenced articles like Armeniş. Is there a site which at least list population/area data for Romanian communes? Dr. Blofeld       White cat 15:34, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

If you could point me to a source I can go through them and add basic data and an infobox. I think I'll add an infobox with a map anyway as I'm doing the same with Latvia, Belarus and Russia at present. If you can find me a site with population and area data I could add it as I go along.. Dr. Blofeld       White cat 15:50, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I understand. See Armeniş.Can you fill the reference out for me with what the actual publisher and census is from etc and I'll copy. If we could at least get these one line unreferenced stubs with an infobox/coordinates map and referenced population this would be a progression... Dr. Blofeld       White cat 16:22, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

What an embarrassing mistake 3,100 million people.. Dr. Blofeld       White cat 17:14, 21 August 2009 (UTC) Are you unhappy with the infoboxes? Well ideally I'd like them all to be full with text but it is an improvement yo have a map and reference I think...  Dr. Blofeld       White cat 21:59, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh, you've sorted that now, no extra probs, I'll quickly add the full ref to the others I've done now and use that from now on..

Children's literature project
I notice that you have recently contributed to several articles which are part of WikiProject Children's Literature. If children's literature is an interest of yours, or you would like to meet other like-minded editors, perhaps you would like to join the project as a member. You can do this simply by adding your name to the Participants list on our project page. However, if you do not wish to, you are still free to contribute to articles in any way you like, and request services such as article assessment on our project page.

Thank you for your excellent work so far. strdst_grl  (call me Stardust) 10:50, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Sfânta Elena
Hello Dahn. I think it's better to continue our conversation here (or at my talk) rather than use Blofeld's talkpage. First of all, I would like to thank you for your friendly approach. As for your concerns about the article, I'm able to provide each sentence with reliable citation, I'm just trying to avoid overcitation. If you can point out the passages, I'll gladly add missing citations. I've used the GenealogyRO as an accessory source - the page is in English, while my other sources were in Czech language. However, the informations are basically the same as in my Czech "equivalent" of GenealogyRO - www.svata-helena.eu. This website mentions as a source books about Czechs in Banat and chronicles of Sfânta Elena. Furthermore I cite (check it carefully, please) a book by Jaroslav Svoboda (2009), the informations there are very similar. The article contains several independent and reliable sources. I have no reason not to believe GenealogyRO, but I'm not expert on Romanian websites and if you can explain me, why the page is wrong, unreliable or spammy, I can remove it. Thanks for your remark about Napoleonic Wars, it's my shameful mistake and I'll fix it immediatelly. In my opinion, the whole problem is with merging/segregating of that article. I apologize, I know nothing about the concensus of Romanian editors on communes. I found five other wikis (including Romanian) where Sfânta Elena is mentioned separately, so I didn't expect such a negative reaction. Czech Romanians and their settlements in Banat represent an unique and important phenomenon also for Czech culture and I think the article should stay separately. However, I'm open to discussing it and I'll respect the community consensus. Have a good day, Dahn. --Vejvančický (talk) 11:37, 20 August 2009 (UTC)


 * No problem, the article looks good now and the name is not so important. Thanks for expanding and copyedit. I use the citation style for easier orientation in the article. If you click the note Svoboda (2009), p. 91 in this version of the article, you'll be automatically moved to the link with cited book. That's the only purpose. --Vejvančický (talk) 15:40, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

oh come on!
Why is this ref not reliable. I think you have some issue with things outside Bucharest. Don't try to deny because i don't believe you. :) Mario  1987  14:18, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Îţi dai seama că nici mie nu imi plac miticii deşi nu ştiu dc vă numim noi aşa. Inseamna ca suntem chit. Mario  1987  14:40, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Hai ca iti ofer o de asta 

Mario1987 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Back
Thank you for the welcome! All is well with me; more photographs are forthcoming too. Meanwhile, let's look at some of what's appeared in the past month:


 * 1) Bigotti, New Generation (student organisation), European Council on International Relations, INTERREG IVC, Association of Central and Eastern European Election Officials, Carrefour Colentina - the spammers are busy
 * 2) Mircea Ivanescu, Constantin Virgil Banescu, Paul Păun - right
 * 3) List of FC Vaslui statistics and records - start with the caption on the first photo
 * 4) Delia Matache, Pierre Vassiliu, Play & Win (band), Bere Gratis, Casa Productions - can't do without the obscure musicians
 * 5) Mihai Radu - hm
 * 6) Strada sforii - yes, if improved
 * 7) Pantelimon at Şoseaua Iancului, Pantelimon at B-dul Chişinău Bloc, Iuliu Maniu at Virtuţii Bloc - can I write about my own house?
 * 8) Template:Legislatures of the Parliament of Romania - the experiment continues.

That list is up for deletion, though admittedly it now has a rather different form. I hadn't seen that article you pointed out; maybe rolling back to the prior version is best. And great work on the Creangă articles! - Biruitorul Talk 22:13, 26 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I shall reply soon (I went on another break), but first: yes, I did see your rearguard action against the blind. I knew you were hard-hearted, but this just crosses the line. And as a socialist, you may be interested to learn that your ideology has collapsed, two decades ago no less. - Biruitorul Talk 15:59, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Good one - it ranks right with this gem. But who knows, given the campaign Crin's been running, he just might have dropped in here for a bit. - Biruitorul Talk 18:03, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Dodgy films
You may want to decide to delete this and its director. Surely they are non notable? Himalayan   14:38, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeha, it looks like an obvious self promotion to me, some extremely low budget seedy "movie". I'm a little tied at present, whenever the AFD is started give me a bell. I love the way he tries to make it analytical by saying about the cultural references to Vlad the Impaler. I laughed my head off when I read that, and kind of thought, really? How original... Himalayan  15:17, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Well done, haha the film article looks hilarious with "find sources google scholar" LOL. Himalayan   21:29, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

LOL,well I'm sure the film is mentioned in some of the most stylish books covering Romanian cinema in the national library in Bucharest.... Or maybe not.... I've heard of some very cheesy films in my time but this one wins hands down... There are tons of notable Romanian mainstream films missing, why somebody would start this..., an obvious promotion.. Himalayan  21:37, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Not that you should have known this, Himalayan, but here is what the national library in Bucharest looks like. You won't find any books, stylish or otherwise, inside that shell. When it looks like this (eventually, they say), maybe then (if we're not all reading holograms by that time). - Biruitorul Talk 22:54, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

That is a pity! I thought the national library at least would have been resourceful!!! Himalayan  11:03, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Şăineanu
I've added IPA's to Lazăr Şăineanu. If two French IPA's are two many you could cut one of them. Also, if you think another IPA for the Şeineanu variant would be useful please tell me.

I've also read the whole article, but not because I have an competence in the subject --- I have next to none --- but because you made me curious and I already knew your writing style was very enjoyable. Thanks again for the good read. I made some small corrections, please check if I didn't overdo it. I wanted to also check Iorgu Iordan's quote "a real stain on for our public life of the late [19th] century", which doesn't seem right, but the www.romlit.ro server was down. — Adi  Japan  06:04, 30 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Comparing me with Bogdan is over-flattering... I did nothing but read (and enjoy) the article.
 * Yes, you can suppress the text "Romanian pronunciation" when it's not needed. In fact there are several other tricks you can do with that template. See the full list of options at Template:IPA-ro. — Adi  Japan  16:29, 30 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Ivan Turbincă and Coronini: done.
 * Now I realize that I might be mistaken about how the name Lazare Sainéan is pronounced in French. As you see, the name is written with a simple dot on i, not with two, which suggests the pronunciation Sénéan instead of Saïnéan as I thought at first (based on etymology and without thinking much). Do you have any idea how the name is supposed to be pronounced in French?
 * On a different note, I'm thinking to make it easier for you (and anyone else) to make requests for Romanian IPA's, so I prepared this page: User:AdiJapan/IPA. You can just list there whatever new "installments" you might be preparing, whenever you like, without feeling that you're intruding (which anyway you're not). I have that page on my watchlist and I will go through it whenever I can. Keep me busy! — Adi  Japan  11:11, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Lazăr Şăineanu

 * Wow!! Spectacular article! You're an amazing writer - I love it! -- Y not? 23:36, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Old issue
Hi. I was reviewing my watchlist after being absent for a while, and I noticed this edit (30 days old). First of all I would like to say I am sorry for not informing you that I was referring to that incident in discussion with Anonimu (my mistake to engage in it and bring all that out ). In particular I want to say I did not have to bring that up to prove something to Anonimu; I am sorry I did.

Second, since there are some misunderstandings about that incident, I would like to clarify something. What you said then (that all 3 million Moldovans are idiots), if taken at the as-written value is a racist attack. But if taken within a larger context (i.e. reading what you have been commenting in several different talk pages over several previous days), one can come to the conclusion that you simply boiled-out for the moment, and you would obviously not say that if you were calm. Before that happened, i.e. before I have taken your words at their face value rather at "what would you have said had you been calm", you have done just the same with other editors. You do have this habit of taking things as written rather as (thinking what could be really) meant, and my point was to show you that this can go against you as well: you, too, sometimes say what you don't mean.

Hence one way is to assume good faith, and if someone writes something that looks as attack, ask calmly "do you really want to say that, b/c I read x, y, z in your words". In doing so, of course, we might occasionally miss opportunities to take down vandals for the face value of their words, but we gain that we ensure we don't accuse people for what they don't mean. In other words, to show more latitude. Because many new users are not very educated, and there is no WP requirement for them to be, they don't have to pass an exam to become editors. They treat WP as a forum, and has to be explained to them that this is not a forum. Don't worry about vandals. Once they repeatedly offend, the old offence can be brought in to show there is a pattern, even if they have already apologized for or withdrawn it.

Of course, you can raise the bar to the standard of Biruitorul. But then even you fail that standard once in a while. (No disrespect meant.)

Thirdly, about the content matter. You know very well that (99.99% of) people of the ethnic majority in Moldova consider themselves Moldovans, including those that consider themselves Romanians. The question is that many (including 90% of those under 25 years old) consider Moldovans a subset of Romanians. You know that this, and not something else was what the experts pointed out during the 2004 census: be careful how you report Moldovans and Romanians; do not present census results as evidence of two different ethnic groups when you have members of the same family confused.

Also you know very well that most people are under-educated, and won't be able to explain much more elementary things than what an ethnicity is. You must know by now that many people in Moldova have serious problems because they were not careful how their names were recorded at different points in their lives, for example see this. Of course they must pay the price for their ignorance. But if they are ignorant about their own name (with the effect of them being unable to get passports and ids, which hurts financially very much), how do you expect them to be careful about declaring something in a poll, especially when they are never handed the census paper, but are just told "don't touch this with your dirty hands, or read this, it's complicated, you just answer my questions and I will write for you, because i know how to fill this out and you don't. now, are you Moldovan or not? ok, I have from the police records that you are born on ..., is that correct? ok..." This is what the experts saw during the census, and why they wrote the recommendations to be careful in interpretation. Not to mention the fact, that many people were never asked, because each census official had a norm, a large number of people to cover, and no time to look for people (if at 12.00 on Tuesday everybody is at work, they don't ring the second time at your door).

Last, but not least, you know very well that people answer what they think is expected from them from the person who asked. (You can see a similar answer-what-is-expected situation here, page 190.)

My point is: let's not pretend we can not read critically something. If someone or some sourse does not have enough words to express oneself correctly, let's not ascribe to that a meaning that was never meant. Dc76\talk 15:40, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, whaddayaknow
All three resident experts on Corsican matters are currently indisposed. Maybe we should run you for adminship, eh? ;-) --Illythr (talk) 01:31, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

:))
Cica argh... stupid template from hell..!! Nu mai pot de ras. Mario 1987  08:32, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Trabzonspor (women)
Hi! Check these plz: Santos FC (ladies), Brøndby IF (women), Olympique Lyonnais (ladies) CeeGee (talk) 17:56, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Nominations open for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 12 September! Many thanks,  Roger Davies  talk 04:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Aussie templates
Man, I tried to withdraw my nomination yesterday as it was clear they were going to get their own way. I tried to appease the situation and speak to User:Orderinchaos to discuss how to modify the existing template to avoid further conflict. Then I log in today and find that not only has my closure been overridden but I was reported to ANI for actually trying to end the dispute and work with them in good faith because they thought I was being "flattering". They've really upset me given that I worked hard yesterday to try to reduce the conflict and stick to the issue but their completely misinterpreted my intentions. The worrying thing is that they are adminstrators and should have understood the sitation better and assumed good faith. They stirred up further trouble with what they did and ought to be stripped of their admin tools and their reaction was far from exemplary. Himalayan   09:26, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Crin Antonescu
Greetings! It has come to my attention that you have recently overridden some changes I have made to the Crin Antonescu article. I am sorry for deliberately deleting the "Personal life" section, as I was planning on updating it with more recent information, but have accidentally omitted to do so. I would like to update the article with fresh content and to revamp its structure, as it currently bears a very untidy aspect. Furthermore, I would like to exert some modifications to the language and overall quality of the entire article. I can assure you, there are no censorship intentions on my part. In conclusion, with your consent, maybe we can collaborate to raise the quality of the Crin Antonescu project together. I will be anxiously awaiting your reply. Thanks in advance!--Crin Antonescu (talk) 15:06, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Proof reading
Hi, I recently expanded an article on Ecaterina Nazare. However some of the more anglocentric plays she starred in I think are still in the Romanian titles like Tennessee Williams etc. Could you please see what they are and if it is correct. Thanks. Himalayan   21:53, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Amazing how many red links always appear for Romania. Romania and Poland I've noticed in particular.. Himalayan   12:46, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

What do you mean? Delete the redirect? Himalayan   18:03, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. I would create a dab page of others who share the same first name... Himalayan   18:26, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Assume good faith. Himalayan   22:05, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

LOL, I was half-kidding. well you did make a series of similar edit summaries yesterday! When you said about the Ecaterina page I sort of felt a little like I was being scolded... Thanks for letting me know anyway.. Himalayan   08:58, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

No worries, I make the same sort of replies to editors of Pakistan settlement articles who really just do not get that a local taxi driver called MUHAMMED AL MASAMABAD is really not notable. Grrr...Check out the sort of spam here. Himalayan  12:53, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Worrying thing is that virtually everyone of the Romanian commune articles I've edited so far is incorrect. See this for example. A lot of them even claim 2002 census and they are mostly out by at 100. There should be no reason for that even if the creator of the article didn't cite the source. As it stands I'll have to go through all of the Romanian commune articles and correct all the errors and added infoboxes with references... Himalayan  13:52, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Seems you were right about Romanian wiki and are right to mistrust it. It seems the data in these articles was copied initially from ro. Just comparing a few of the 2002 census stats on ro (apparently) and comparing them to the official statistics site they are incorrect in everyone I've looked at so far. I agree with you about the lack of editors who will be trying to expand the articles but it is the same with most rural muncipalities anywhere, from Romania, to Belarus to to France to Finland to even Cololmbia and Brazil. Most of them are lacking even lacking basic facts or a map. The thing is, we have these articles, so unless somebody decides to delete them all somebody has to try to add the bare minimum to them... The best thing would be to get a bot to add infoboxes and reference the data, but unfortunately too few people around these days willing to use bots on actual content... Himalayan   14:07, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, although for articles about people and events that took place before 1911 it probably is still very accurate. I'd cringe though if I saw the 1911 encyclopedia population figures being used to reference existing cities though..BTW Arad county so far is looking a lot better and accurate than Alba... Himalayan   15:32, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Greek phrase
Hello Dahn! The literal translation of the phrase παρηγοριά του κόσμου would be "consolation of the world". What is the article about? If there's anything else, I'll be glad to help! Cheers, Constantine  ✍  01:30, 12 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Interesting. I'll keep an eye out for the article! As for the phrase, AFAIK it is only used in Greek in a religious context. Personally, I have encountered it only in reference to the Virgin Mary, so that could be the parallel the author is aiming for, since he refers to his wife. As for a less literal interpretation, it doesn't really work. "Consolation" is the exact English equivalent in every sense. Cheers, Constantine  ✍  09:34, 12 September 2009 (UTC)


 * PS. what shall we do with Njirlu? Generally, I am against blocking users, but he doesn't understand or willfully ignores anything about rules or consensus and seems to be hell-bent on adding his original view on the Aromanians. What do you think? Constantine  ✍  14:40, 12 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I just reverted the typical changes to Aromanians, Aromanian language and the template, and he just re-reverted. I am really at the end of my patience with him. Pity indeed, as you say. Constantine  ✍  14:57, 12 September 2009 (UTC)


 * It's all right, I've started a thread in ANI on my own. Constantine  ✍  15:13, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, its on my watchlist, but thanks anyway. Its probably Aromanian, so unfortunately I can't read it. Do you perhaps understand it? It looks like an insult of some sort, but a) as said, I don't know and b) I don't particularly care. Since he obviously feels that I am a sinister enemy fighting "the Truth", it's to be expected ;) I won't report him for letting off steam, but if he continues the same old story after his block expires, I most certainly will. Constantine  ✍  20:00, 13 September 2009 (UTC)


 * It was quite interesting. The 'devil' theme reminded me of Bulgakov's Master and Margarita, although I must confess I did not know about Macchiavelli's earlier work... It also inspired me to ask you whether you could recommend me a couple of works from Romanian literature (and that I'd have a reasonable chance of finding in English, of course). Preferably something not modern, and more solidly/typically "Romanian", if you know what I mean... ;) Constantine  ✍  21:32, 20 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Wow, thanks a lot! And yes, you grasped the "spirit" very well... Thanks again :) Constantine  ✍  09:58, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Re
I don't understand you anymore. Until now i thought that you were an editor that has nothing to do but track my contributions and criticise me. But now i see that you throw all kinds of accusations that aren't true and that have the role of discouraging me in making future contributions. I say to you not to worry because everything you say against me or my contributions means absolutely nothing for me and sadly my oppinion of you just dropped to a level even lower than hell. I saw that you had all kinds of trouble in the Romanian Wikipedia on the same subject of blatantly criticising users and honestly i think you should keep your bad thoughts to yourself and try to help others a lot more. Instead of criticising and accusing you should try to help an article by adding what's missing or something else because ultimatelly you are an editor and nobody is perfect.

Si separat, fara suparare, sa sti ca pe la noi pe aici prin zona Maramuresului este o vorba cum ca voi astia de dupa arcul carpatic sunteti niste tigani. Nu am vrut sa cred asta dar vad ca cel care a spus vorba asta nu a gresit cu nimic. Cheers si atat. Mario 1987  12:48, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes i had some problems over the past but what makes you a better editor than me? And about the "lower than hell" comment i urge you to read again because it's nothing offensing about that. I just tried to say that my oppinion of you just dropped to a level "lower than hell" with the sense of lowest possible. And the message in Romanian wasn't a racist attack it was just a remark present in the region from where i am from. You consider us stupid and slow we consider you gypsies and you know that is right. Mario  1987  13:11, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

ANI
My comment was to Mario, which I hope the indentation indicated. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 20:24, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. :) Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 21:09, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Caracal
You beat me by a few seconds here! Hmm...

I just made a disturbing discovery: over a period of three days in July, this guy "improved" articles on every commune and town in Arad County. Thus, we have this, this ("The commune can be proud of its exceptional touristic potential"), this ("The touristic potential of the commune is an exceptional one"), this ("Conop commune can become an area with touristic attraction by trimming up its anthropic and natural potential"). Should be interesting cleaning up this stuff. I suspect much of it can simply be reverted.

Also on a lighter note: Egypt–Mongolia relations (nice manipulation of sources there), Moldova–Switzerland relations (necessarily trivial, given the title, but this sentence stands out: "In December 2008, Moldovan entrepreneurs in Switzerland attended a forum organized by the newly-formed Switzerland-Moldova Chamber of Commerce, with guest speakers Pierre-François Unger, Minister of Economy and Health of the Canton of Geneva and Moldovan Minister of Finance Marian Durleshtyanu" [actual name: Mariana Durleşteanu]), Norway–Romania relations (with a sentence Ceauşescu would be proud of: "The earliest contact between the Romanian and Norwegian people may have been in the 9th century AD when Varangians began trading with the Byzantine Empire along routes that led through Romania"). - Biruitorul Talk 00:06, 13 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not the only one being faulted for his English skills today... - Biruitorul Talk 20:26, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Abramburica is all yours - feel free to finesse, add, cut, what have you. (Also, perhaps a more interesting hook is warranted.) If she's dismissed, we'll say that, but otherwise I'm inclined to mention new events more sparingly, not being of the Wikipedia-as-news-service mentality. (There's probably already too much focus on this year's events.) And thank you for the much-appreciated words of support. - Biruitorul Talk 08:01, 21 September 2009 (UTC)


 * This is funny - see the comment at the bottom. I wonder just what alt text we can come up with for this or this. - Biruitorul Talk 15:45, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Dahn, may I ask you to weigh in on this sterile debate, which has already degenerated into this? I'm ready to throw up my hands; even the simplest things have to stir controversy here... He's also moved University of Iaşi to Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, probably in contravention of WP:NC. - Biruitorul Talk 14:01, 25 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I keep throwing stuff at you! It needs some sectioning, for one. - Biruitorul Talk 03:45, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Forests
Băneasa Forest. Notable? Could it be expanded (even just a little?) Himalayan   10:34, 13 September 2009 (UTC) Much better, thanks. Himalayan   13:03, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Himalayan   10:28, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Lukacs
Wikipedia has a long undo. Which editor mangled the article? Fifelfoo (talk) 15:47, 13 September 2009 (UTC) If your complaint is with User:Andrea Virga's edits, your own edit of 13 June completely obliterated all text that editor added. Fifelfoo (talk) 15:54, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLII (August 2009)
The August 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:31, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Crin Antonescu
Greetings! I have just added some text to the Crin Antonescu article. The main purpose of the editing action was to fill the article with complete objective information. I would like you to confirm that the content respects the Wiki politicies and does not enter in any other conflict with content editing rules. Thank you!--Crin Antonescu (talk) 11:42, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Long answer short (or short answer long)
I am only pointing here a few things, b/c I might not have otherwise the time to reply properly. Please excuse the lack of etiquette.
 * "if person x is presented with an option to specify his/her ethnicity and s/he answers one thing but means another, that person is an idiot"
 * IMHO, a too strong word, but with correct sign. However, you can not put together 3 million idiots and say all Moldovans are idiots. Moreover, if I mean I am x as a subset of y, and I am asked to choose between x and y, without given the choice "x subset of y", then whatever I declare, according to your criteria I would be an idiot. Now, a sufficiently educated person (read top 5% can thing thoroughly about all implications of all answers, and answer intelligently but insincerely y). The rest answer sincerely x meaning x as a subsets of y, and you call them idiots. The problem I see is not what people declare, but what you chose not to know about, or rather to ignore. For example, you know so much about people, history, and 1000 other things related to the Romanian Old Kingdom, that I couldn't believe possible for a humble human being (as opposed to a machine). On the other hand, IMHO you chose to not even bother know quite simple things about Transylvania, Bukovina or Bessarabia. The problem is, that given your encyclopedic knowledge on some things, it's surreal to see you (pretend you) don't know simple things on other things. Such as for example that your interpretation in this issue is 100% identical to communists' one, and ignores what the rest of the world (forget Romania) warns about.
 * "anecdotic evidence" such as how they supposedly posed the question don't make the cut here. I also know that this kind of evidence can only hope to persuade me personally, by appealing to what I would find likely
 * yes, I mean to point it to you only. Have you ever been in Harghita or Covasna in the situation when each one pretends not to understand the other, while both perfectly understand everything? :) The same is during the census. The problem is who fills the paper: you or the census person. This question in Moldova was like putting in an American census a question "George W. Bush / Barrack Obama (erase one) is a piece of s&%t". Census official would have a strong opinion about it. So they do in Moldova. To quote Stalin: "it doesn't matter who run the elections, it matters who counts the votes".
 * Because it's not reality: it's a theory, a biased theory, and I have the responsibility and intellectual honesty not to present a biased claim for a fact. The most that can and should be achieved here is a citation of reliable, non-partisan sources that question the Moldovan census results (not unionist blogorama, not personal deductions about what happened there or elsewhere)
 * It is a claim, but not biased. And not, please, never use my claims as facts. They are only meant to present the situation to you the way I see it. They can point you to be more careful how you understand some details, but they are not meant ever to be substituted to a sourse. However, in 2004 Moldovan Census you have (and always had) a reference that cuts the chaise. (I never cite blogorama, except when it's the author's article). The only point I am making is that caution should be taken on how the results on ethnicity and language questions are interpreted. To the issue: the best IMHO is to say both POVs whenever that is possible. IMHO, accepting communist POV is biased, even if you pretend it is not the communist POV but your own understanding. With all due respect, that would be precisely "intellectual dishonesty" (to know something and say the opposite, or worse, pretend not to notice).
 * but I don't see anybody who supports Romanian patriotism going out of his/her way to subtract the troglodyte mass from the total number of Romanians.
 * Depends what you call patriotism. I am sure you are patriot and you do subtract them. And I hope I could be characterized likewise. The only problem is I don't see ethnicity "troglodyte". So, for example, as much as I dislike Vadim or the like, I cannot cound him in any other ethnicity.
 * But hey: all ethnic identity is a construct, and constructs change as people do.
 * I understand your viewpoint, but there is an equally plausible opposite one: ethnic identity does not change (except when people die).
 * One of the other things you did that irritated me was to tell Anonimu that I learned a lesson from the "Moldovans as idiots" example.
 * That was inappropriate language I used. Again, I am sincerely sorry. I was not in my "waters" when talking to him.
 * And I need to point out that your last post basically admits to have willingly misinterpreted my original statement for an ulterior purpose. As you have done me the honor of noting, I'm a decent person, and I think you'll agree that I have ever wronged any of my fellow editors, you included, on purpose.
 * Back then I reacted to what I perceived as your misinterpretation of one other fellow editor. (I forgot the nick by now.) Perhaps you would consider him/her unworthy to be called editor, and perhaps that would contain a grain of truth. But then in my understanding you exaggerated that editor's words and acted as a bureaucrat rather as an intellectual. (I do agree that vandals can be effectively dealt with only in "bureaucratic" terms, but my impression was that that user did not reach that far. I was under the impression that your main goal in WP is to ban people you perceive as "too patriotic". I have learnt of your contributions later.)
 * Lastly: please, can we stop discussing my mood or my personality?
 * Sure. Sorry about that. My fault.
 * Also: I'm actually not that moody
 * Yes you are. :):) (just joking) :):)
 * Now, may we move on?
 * Absolutely. Dc76\talk 00:13, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, sure, whatever you say. :) I have Deuteranomaly (as do 6% of people). I see as many colors as all other people, and the same intensity, but I can distinguish more hews of blue and fewer hues of reg-green spectrum. This is actually not a color blindness, since people like me are able to operate just as well in all circumstances involving colors (we never see red as black as some fear). There is gene A and gene B, and by stupid natural selection 91% have gene A, 6% have gene B (and 3% actually do see less). But physiologically and practically A or B are as good. If we were the majority, we would have discontinued the use of some colors (like yellow green, some hues or red-orange and orange-brown spectrums), but would add new colors in the blue spectrum (which you people say are identical, while they are NOT!) Dc76\talk 13:39, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

The explanation is actually very simple: there are 3 color pigments in the human eye: long-wavelength (red), medium-wavelength (green), and short wavelength (blue). The 91% and the 6% have the maximum of the sensitivity of the red and blue pigments at exactly the same wavelengths (564, resp 420 nm). This + the fact the the green pigment is fully functional = the same color sensitivity. But our green pigment is instead of 534 nm somewhere at 540 nm. This means fewer hues in the red spectrum and more in the blue spectrum; the total number of various hues being the same. You can also see http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilizator:Dc76/proiect1 which I still did not manage to finish editing. Dc76\talk 13:51, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Please, don't apologize. It was obvious you meant no offence (first there is nothing to be offended about, second you did not know about, third whatever occasional disagremeents of opinion we might have - who doesn't -, I know your integrity). About me earlier post, if something I wrote looks like ill-thought to you, just say so, b/c I might re-think those parts. And don't worry, it can wait whatever necessary.
 * the thing is that it's one of three greens used on the map (why three? întreabă-mă să te-ntreb), and distinguishing somehow was probably needed for the regular reader.
 * :) I noticed that but they were greens not blues, so I could suggest nothing name-wise. :)
 * The problem I'm still facing is that there is an even darker green in there, so I don't really know if I've got it sorted.
 * :) In fact, both you and me see the same colors, but color memory is better for you in the green-red area. You can memorize, say 550 nm, 552 nm, and 554 nm, but I can only 550 and 554. To distinguish them I must put the colors one near the other (then I see difference, albeit small), while you can look at one wall and then go to the opposite wall and say which is which. Add to that that most colors in real world are not pure, but mixed... :)
 * So you actually see more blue than I do?
 * I think so. But it has little practical use, because the ability to compare hues on the sky is practically irrelevant comparing to ability to choose your clothes of appropriate color. For example when I was a kid I was telling my mother: "I want to wear that dark blue." "What dark blue? You have no such." We discover that it was some other dark color (something between green and brown) with one dark blue thread every 5cm apart, she memorized that color, but I couldn't, since I had no name for it, hence I memorized the color of the thread. If you didn't hear/read about this, it goes genetically from the mother (carrier without feature) to the son (feature) to the daughter (carrier without feature again): my mother's father had it, but my parents and my sister are just normal. My children won't have it, but if I will have a daughter and she will have a son, he will. (Of course, assuming there are no other significant interferences from other branches.)
 * And then, if I were to pour some yellow over it, it's all one hue?
 * I never know that. I just heard of guys who couldn't tell blue apart from another blue that everyone else could see, and, I think, they had trouble distinguishing some blues from grays. (And don't worry, I'm not reaching for my torch and pitchfork. Not just yet.)
 * You can read color blindness and related articles (if you have time). Basically, one can have the maxima for each of three pigments at slightly different wavelength, or even each of those absent. When all three are absent, the person only sees black and white. The non-dangerous one is when the middle pigment is slightly different, like I have, because that only changes the names of the colors, but the amount of color we see is the same. If instead of the middle, it's the long wavelength that is slightly displaced, you can have people that see black instead of certain RED traffic lights (very dangerous). Fortunately, I am not in that situation. Anyway that only occurs if the traffic light are not regularly washed.
 * So, there are many possibilities, but they occur with different frequency: I forgot which one occurs only in 1 in 1,000,000 people. Mine occurs in 5-6-8% males and 0.5-1% females. (3-4-5% on average; I understand that the statistical data differ from source to source.) There are a lot of funny tests to see this.
 * Also, did you know that in case of life-threatening emergency, such as airplane going to crash, one sees only black and white (the brain shuts down the other receptors). Hence it is important to have emergency notices in black and white, and possibly 2-3 shades of grey. Blue would appear black, red would appear white.
 * An example of a color I believe I can memorize better (you can also see it) is what I call "white blue" or "sky blue", like the sky in no-cloud conditions: something between white and light blue. You can easily note the difference if you put all three colors in front of you. But I can just glance and turn away and without comparison to white or to light blue can tell it is neither white nor light blue. You can do the same with yellow green: you immediately note that color, but I had to force myself to memorize it (after some exercise it is actually possible, but must be permanently exercised). Some colors between red and orange are particularly troublesome for me: there are a few images/maps in WP when they write "orange" but I could swear I see "red". Also I need comparison to distinguish dark brown from cordovan. But I can immediately distinguish pink without any blue from pink with some blue from pink with more blue (violet). And obviously not to be confused with indigo (e.g. the hue on US president seals). I believe there are 4 basic types of blue: white/sky blue, light blue, dark blue and indigo. :) Dc76\talk 18:46, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * An example of a color I believe I can memorize better (you can also see it) is what I call "white blue" or "sky blue", like the sky in no-cloud conditions: something between white and light blue. You can easily note the difference if you put all three colors in front of you. But I can just glance and turn away and without comparison to white or to light blue can tell it is neither white nor light blue. You can do the same with yellow green: you immediately note that color, but I had to force myself to memorize it (after some exercise it is actually possible, but must be permanently exercised). Some colors between red and orange are particularly troublesome for me: there are a few images/maps in WP when they write "orange" but I could swear I see "red". Also I need comparison to distinguish dark brown from cordovan. But I can immediately distinguish pink without any blue from pink with some blue from pink with more blue (violet). And obviously not to be confused with indigo (e.g. the hue on US president seals). I believe there are 4 basic types of blue: white/sky blue, light blue, dark blue and indigo. :) Dc76\talk 18:46, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Wow
High compliments for your work on Rakovsky. Carrite (talk) 20:48, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Military history coordinator elections: voting has started!
Voting in the Military history WikiProject coordinator election has now started. The aim is to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on 26 September! For the coordinators,  Roger Davies  talk 22:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Notification
Hi Dahn. I'm posting to let you know that your name has been mentioned on a list of potential candidates for adminship on the talk page for RfA's here. If you are interested in running, or if you would like to make any comments, feel free to join the discussion. decltype (talk) 20:14, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Hola
Bună ziua Dahn. Ce mai faci? Himalayan   20:43, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Glad to see. If I had the time and resources I could probably learn abit more basic Romanian, I couls probably learn any language which actually uses "normal" letters, anything in Cyrillic or in Asian lettering schemes I am clueless! Himalayan   10:21, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I was wondering if you flesh out Ecaterina Andronescu a little. It is due for a DYK. Himalayan   20:34, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

And he is not even good at it
Considering the Dan Herman keep voters, pretty close to obvious if you ask me. Hobartimus (talk) 19:33, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Triune Kingdom of Croatia, Slavonia, and Dalmatia
If you have the time to go through my contribution at the deletion page you would be able to find that the name Triune Kingdom existed much longer than the article on the kingdom says. Dalmatia was part of the Kingdom of Croatia, Dalmatia and Slavonia from 1358 to 1409 (naturally the Kingdom was in personal union under the Crown of St. Stephen of Hungary). It was again governed by Josip Jelacic from 1848 to 1850 from Zagreb, since Jelačić had under his control all of Croatian lands except in Istria. The Triune Kingdom proclaimed independence from Austria-Hungary in 1918 for all Croatian lands including Međimurje and Rijeka, including Dalmatia. -- Imbris (talk) 20:27, 22 September 2009 (UTC)


 * The question is not whether the Triune Kingdom existed, but when it existed. The documents in the Croatian State Archives show that it did exist and under the name that included "Croatia", "Slavonia", and "Dalmatia" though not always in the same order. The article should not be deleted but improved. The fact that after 1868 it was an another name for the Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia interferes not with the fact that such a kingdom existed during Croatian History (at least from 1358 to 1409).
 * (2) When I mentioned the three periods, I have meant to say that those are three periods when the Croatian lands were joined under single administration, but the kingdom of the three names existed even if not all of its territories were subject of a centralised govt.
 * (3) In times of Austria-Hungary, not all of the Croatian lands sent deputies to the Imperial Parliament in Vienna, and in the same time had (at different times) its own crown land parliaments but.
 * (4) Would you say that there is not such entity as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland just because its member states have now or had in the past their own provincial parliaments, govts., etc.
 * Imbris (talk) 16:35, 23 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Don't do it Dahn, I warned you... :) -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 18:34, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Titu Maiorescu
Hi, I have added back parts of the material reverted by you on this page which is likely to be accurate. User:Luiza1202 seems to be a new user unfamiliar with our policies, so I left some notes on her talk page explaining what she did wrong. If you have something against the material added by her please challenge it, not just completely remove it like vandalism, especially when the material might useful (we are not encouraging potential good new users in this way). --Eurocopter (talk) 11:56, 24 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Just think that mostly all of us did the same at our beginnings on wiki and after hours of enthusiastic work someone simply comes and revert it saying that it's all junk. I'm conscious that this is not the way to go for writing a quality article but we must be patient with such issues and attempt to fix and encourage. --Eurocopter (talk) 12:15, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

What's with this biting of newcomers? Some tags and a note on the talk page would have sufficed. Why delete all that text, that probably was the result of a prolonged effort from a newcomer? It may have had translation errors, but you are aware that WP is a collaborative project and editors should fix each others mistakes, not simply remove large portions of text (especially when there's no BLP concern or other seriously controversial claims). As for the lack of references, remember that your weren't the most prolific sourcer in your early days (not even after more than 6 months on WP), yet nobody removed your contributions - e.g. you text in the above article still stands... still unsourced... after 3 years(!). So, please, give newcomers some space. I suppose you don't plan to edit WP for the rest of your life. The Romania-interested community on en.WP is already dwindling, and a new generation of Romanian WP editors can't be educated by laconic summaries to edits denying all their work. Please be more considerate next time.Anonimu (talk) 22:03, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * What I remember about my "early days" is that there really wasn't a sourcing requirement on wikipedia. That's the only part of your post I feel requires an answer. The rest I've tried to explain in my summary(-ies), and it's pretty clear-cut. Dahn (talk) 22:16, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Better said you weren't aware of that requirement, just like that editor doesn't seem to be at the time. Because WP:V was a policy, the day you first edit using this account and during the period when you made that significant expansion to the article mentioned above. As for your summaries: 120-160 characters are certainly not the best way to explain how things works to a newcomer, that may not even be aware that those fields serve for anything. Don't let your antipathy towards the ro.WP eliminate prospective Romania-interested editors from en.WP. There's a huge difference between those people who wilfully ignore WP policies and guidelines and the ones who are simply not aware of them.Anonimu (talk) 22:35, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Anonimu, that skeletal policy did not account for a citation system (the examples it provides are idiotic), and only clearly discussed cases about info that is likely to be challenged (whatever that means). Since I have since become the (presumably) most prolific citer of sources in this "Romanian community", I think it's quite unreasonable to assume anything other than blunders quite common in the day throughout wikipedia. The Moldavia article as I expanded it is verified by sources, but I didn't cite it at the time - feel free not to take my word for it, but in any case I don't plan on doing the same work twice for your convenience; if it's required of me, I will visit the article with citations when I'm good and ready. And since the result is fairly literate, with or without citations, you analogy is flawed.
 * What's more, I did not object to (just to) lack of sources in this particular case, and the core of my argument is that a poor work is for nothing - the article will have to be redone, so in that sense spending less work on it is prolly for the best. (Particularly in cases where one ignores the basic requirement of not using an article as a sandbox.)
 * As for my "antipathy" toward rowiki - the only thing that comes into play here is that translating a destitute article that mysteriously made it to FA there over here is not an option; the option would be for them to revise their FA criteria (which they have). That said, I have great, great respect and admiration for many who work on that project - and, while, I (and they) can prove that there is something flawed with the project, I don't have an "antipathy" toward it. I have a standard, and you do too, for all the sophistry.
 * To answer that argument about the thinning core of Romanian editors: if you're comparing a total today with a total which included the likes of Bonaparte, Icar and the likes, the numbers are indeed dwindling. Thank God for that.
 * Now, will there be anything else? Dahn (talk) 22:51, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I have no idea why did you consider my comment above an attack against your general editing. It was just a reminder that everyone makes mistakes as a newbie, and the above example was just to show that your en.WP persona wasn't born form the foam of the sea either. Deleting someone's work, even flawed, can easily be perceived as hostile, moreover if it is done without a solid explanation from the part of the deleter (something that edit summaries can't and weren't designed to be). The article may have been poor, but was surely more informative than the stub you put in place. And the community is here to help wikify the contributions of inexperienced editors (Jimbo even said that, overall, anonymous editors contributed most of the WP content), nobody required you to do it. If you prefer Bonaparte socks and wannabes, who just make a dozen spurious edits that you can quickly (and justly) revert and then report for a hopeful block, that doesn't mean that all new editors interested in Romanian topics are like that. That's all I've wanted from you with the above comment: just be more tactful when dealing with new users that aren't noticeably looking for trouble.Anonimu (talk) 23:56, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Dude. I do not "consider your comment above an attack against my general editing" - I just don't think that it's worth pointing out to me supposed issues that are no longer relevant. As far the foam of the sea goes, yes it was. Comparatively so. I have tried to adapt myself to an over-the-average standard of quality, and that standard kept changing (for the better, but that's ultimately irrelevant). At all those points on the road, my editing complied with the top, say, 30%, even when it did not comply with the top 5% (for the sake of argument, it prolly still doesn't). "The article may have been poor, but was surely more informative than the stub you put in place." - the article was going to have to be redone either way, right? The factual difference between doing that in one step or in several is ultimately insignificant. "nobody required you to do it" - the issue is not that, obviously, since copyediting/wikifying is just one tiny sample of the problem such editing poses.
 * "If you prefer Bonaparte socks and wannabes, who just make a dozen spurious edits that you can quickly (and justly) revert and then report for a hopeful block, that doesn't mean that all new editors interested in Romanian topics are like that." - I never said I do prefer socks or consider all newbies socks (you may want to review that phrase); this is not an issue of comparison in intent, it's one of comparison in results. "just be more tactful when dealing with new users that aren't noticeably looking for trouble." - fine. But how about those editors make everyone's job easier by at least reading the text and links that pop up at the top of each editing window?
 * Anyway, thanks for the feedback. And I don't actually need "chilling". I assure you I'm calm, and I am pretty intrigued that you seem to be reading this as irate - presumably, you're used to reading replies in this key (in fact, right now I'm more preoccupied that Mackey only has ten days left in the force and also has to get custody of his bastard kid Lee). I will however note that you're posting on my page for ultimately no apparent reason, while urging me not to get upset - am I to read in this an attempt at baiting me? Because, if that's what you're doing: a) please stop, it's tiresome; b) it's really not working on the proposed "annoying me" part. Dahn (talk) 00:47, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm going to leave the first part of your comment to the classic "He that hath ears to hear, let him hear." cause this is clearly going nowhere. I thought my intentions were expressed quite clearly, but you want to assume bad faith, go ahead. I really have no idea into what I could have baited you - but of course you've just said you're one of the top wikipedians, so I suppose I should bow before you or something. Anyway, hope all the above wasn't in vain.Anonimu (talk) 16:58, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Anonimu, you're wasting my time. Now, you either have a real issue with catching the meaning of some written phrases, or want to see how much you can keep at flogging a dead horse. As long as it's instantly apparent that I got you the first time, even if I cannot and will not agree with your claims, carrying on with the same stuff while telling me to watch my temper (that is, assuming that I would lose my temper over your posts) is the equivalent of flamebaiting. Now, after you come in here and challenging me with a claim that I haven't been up to standards edit-wise God knows when, and then taking my reply that this is not true as me saying that you should be "bowing down to me" is one of two: 1) trolling; 2) obtuseness. I have plenty of proof to certify it's not option 2 (which is a shame, because it means you've never considered bowing down to me), so I must assume you're here, on my page, on a mission to make yourself obnoxious. Dahn (talk) 17:23, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Opinion
Hi Dahn! With regard to your view to discussion on Articles for deletion/Triune Kingdom of Croatia, Slavonia, and Dalmatia, I was wondering about your opinion on another matter. The Croatian Parliament declared independence after the referendum held on May 19th, 1991, where 94% of the voters voted for independent state. On 25 June 1991, Croatia declared independence and became a sovereign state, yet we have tens of articles about so-called entities such as SAO Krajina, SAO Western Slavonia, SAO of Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Srijem, SAO Kninska Krajina, Kninska Krajina or Republic of Serbian Krajina. Should we merge these articles with the article History of Croatia? --Kebeta (talk) 12:52, 24 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree that Triune Kingdom was an alternative name for Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia. But, Triune Kingdom was also an entity and political reality at that time. Moreover, it was semi-legal not illegal entity, since Austro-Hungarian Empire encouraged it in some periods. It just wasn't so hostile as Croatia - SAO-s conflict. --Kebeta (talk) 13:17, 24 September 2009 (UTC)


 * If I am pushing a content fork (I think I am not), what about an article Republic of Serbian Krajina, which covers all relevant text from tens of articles about SAO-s. Why do we need so much articles on the same issue. Not to mention that the subject is explained in so many other articles about dissolving Yugoslavia. Don't you agree, or you think I am wrong (again). I am sorry, I just can not understand double standards for same thing. --Kebeta (talk) 15:18, 24 September 2009 (UTC)


 * O.K. Thanks for replay. --Kebeta (talk) 16:20, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Terra_Awas
Looks alarmingly familiar to a certain Italian plumber... Himalayan   19:56, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

LOL. Well we do need him to return to stamp on nasty mushrooms and descend pipes of courses. Then him and Luigi can cook me a nice pasta dish when they get home. Na I think Mario is basically a good guy and is pasisonate about expanding knowledge on wikipedia which is something, he just needs to seriously consider not bringing regional racial differences into the agenda and to use reliable sources when building an encyclopedia. When he returns as the Italian plumber from Nintendo's 1987 game I hope he will help me sort out the Romanian communes. Joking aside we do need content contributors who work on non-Anglo centric articles. I sorted out the ALgerian nav plates and categories earlier, tried to convince some editors that articles about loony women who store rabbits in the freezer are non notable and that we do not need seperate infoboxes specifically for articles on Liberian counties and SOlomon Islands as they are redundant but seemingly wasted my time. I am now, however, more set to resume adding infoboxes and references to Romania, slowly... Himalayan   20:27, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I know about all that. I did read the posts about him on talk pages/ANI. The sock puppetry for trying to promote pictures was rather naughty of him. He did apologise though. I do wonder though what his intentions really are, I don't know if he would intentionally add incorretc information to wikipedia I just think he perhaps made a lot of errors (which I've personally wintessed on the communes as a small example) and doesn't use the best sources. At leats you and Birtroul are here to overlook but you shouldn't have to, he should be responsible. He does have the ability to add a lot of articles in a short period of time which makes checking each one tougher and hard work. If he could be a little more cautious I think is the main thing and try to focus more on accuracy.. Maybe this will prompt him to be more careful from now on.. Himalayan   21:47, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Any chance you could expand it then? The remaining info I found was in Romanian... Himalayan   19:40, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Any reason why you don't take your articles to GA? You must have at least 20 articles that could be promoted to Good Article relatively easily. Himalayan   19:38, 26 September 2009 (UTC)