User talk:Enric Naval/Archive 2

ZuluPad

 * Regarding your comment "Endorse deletion until draft is provided" on the Deletion Review of ZuluPad, I have provided a new, draft version here with sources cited for your review: User:Omeomi/ZuluPad. Your comments are welcome, of course. --Omeomi (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for taking the time to read and comment on the draft ZuluPad article. I thought I would mention that another user has found and posted a quote from the newspaper article from The Record (Bergen County). He also mentions that The Record has the "second largest circulation of New Jersey's Daily Newspapers". I have updated the draft User:Omeomi/ZuluPad page with quotes and a cited source to reflect this. These are the sources that I feel are notable: The Record, Lifehacker.com, and Gizmo's Tech Support Alert. --Omeomi (talk) 19:14, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Gurch ref
LOL!!!!! thanks! Bstone (talk) 19:12, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
Eric, por favor, tú que sabes hablar bien inglés, explícale al usuario sueco que no para de incordiarme que Canarias, Ceuta y Melilla no pertenecen a España, sino que "son España". Muchos guiris se piensan que son colonias españolas... Ponen las banderas de Canarias, Melilla y Ceuta en artículos de África, como si fuese territorios dependientes, o algo así. Voy yo y lo corrijo, y me llaman "vandalismo nacionalista de Telefónica".... Increíble, pero cierto. Te aseguro que no tengo la menor intención de vandalizar esta Wikipedia. Un cordial saludo, y gracias por la mediación. Granadin (talk) 16:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank You so much
Thanks SOOO much for undoing the vandalizm done to my userpage!! ♥ Tory~ ♥ Amulet ♥ Heart ♥ 18:49, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

About User:Granadin
Thanks so much/muchas Grazias. You're doing a way better job with talking to Granadin as I could (that was my intention when I started editing some of his reverts and tried to talk to him when he was still an IP (nothing bad about IP's but it's just way easier to talk to people that signed up for a user account). Also, I'm curious about some things he reversed (he was right in some...but unfortunatley he didn't bother to give reverences). So about your interference so far: Great/fantastico!

Regards/saludos --Floridianed (talk) 22:29, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

MfD Devon
I tried that earlier today, but they were all declined. The user suggested MfD. I will try with Speedy delete again anyway. Meaty♠Weenies (talk) 21:45, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I've added all of them for speedy deletion now. When the bot comes round to assessing all Devon articles will it created WikiProject Devon categories again or will it learn to put them in just "Devon". Meaty♠Weenies (talk) 22:00, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I've been away!
I've responded to the MfD discussion. Isaac (talk) 02:03, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

P.S. I really like your lol cats.

Signpost updated for May 19th and 26th, 2008.
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 (talk) 07:32, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

ShepBot
Are the last few edits marked correctly? §hep  •   ¡Talk to me!  17:00, 31 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I've stopped the bot until I can figure this out. Thanks.  §hep   •   ¡Talk to me!  17:43, 31 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Waiting for a respinse from a BAG member, response about mb on my talk page. §hep   •   ¡Talk to me!  22:58, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Massive template changes by MadeForMe
Thanks for the catch! I also went to my home WikiProject, WikiProject Television Stations, which is probably a more relevant project, and notified them of the incident you logged. dhett (talk • contribs) 19:05, 31 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I rollbacked MadeForMe's Ohio edits and have a tool for you. If you decide to undo the edits (which I urge).  You could do a mass rollabck from his contributions and use a personalized revert message so you don't have to do 100s of undos. See the user script: User:Mr.Z-man/rollbackSummary.  Hope that helps!  §hep   •   ¡Talk to me!  23:05, 31 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Glad to hear it! §hep   •   ¡Talk to me!  00:15, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Er...
...could you explain your rationale for adding a "see also" to Furry fandom in the Encyclopedia Dramatica article? I don't see the link at all. Tony Fox (arf!) 00:35, 1 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Heh, much appreciated. I didn't think it'd be a good idea for me to remove it, all things considered. =) Tony Fox (arf!) 02:53, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Your message on my talk page
Well you can go ahead and ban me if you like. But you cannot prevent me from holding the view that you guys are terribly biased. For example consider the following statement:

"Your addition was inaccurate & hardly neutral in tone. Furthermore, my reversion referred to this misrepresentation, as well as the long-standing practice on this page of avoiding the use of primary studies to make specific claims, preferring reviews and meta-analyses...two separate issues. — Scientizzle 20:02, 30 May 2008 (UTC) "

Then what about the reference to an article in Newsweek. Which review or meta-analysis does it refer too? Hallenrm (talk) 07:26, 1 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Pardon me, Enric, for interrupting...Hallenrm, if you want to take issue with any of my edits or comments, you should feel welcome to take it up with me directly. &mdash; Scientizzle 16:44, 1 June 2008 (UTC)


 * No worries. Actually, my talk page always feels quite lonely because I'm almost always maintaining the discussions on other people's talk pages --Enric Naval (talk) 16:59, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Email
Hello, Enric. You've got mail. -- RyRy5 ( talk ) 05:14, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I have to be offline soon, so I might not get your email. Best, RyRy5  ( talk ) 05:16, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

reverts to article
I saw that you reverted edits made to the article New Rochelle, New York due to sock activity. Some of the reverts dont seem necessary but I cannot figure out how to go into the article to fix them myself. Maybe by listing them for you, you might be able to fix them? Thanks!

19th century history: - Simeon Leland, Adrian Iselin and Rose Hill Gardens are all linked ( by  ) but shouldnt be. - Endion is the estate of Frederick Remington which was deleted for some reason

Education: - Iona Grammar and The Ursuline School are all linked ( by  ) but shouldnt be.

New Rochelle in film, music, television and fiction: - Under the Terrytoons line, Gandy Goose, Dinky Duck are linked ( by  ) but shouldnt be.

the following references are unsourceable (false) and should be removed: Notable people: - Mariano Rivera should be on a different line than Ray Rice - Johnny Angel, Craig Carton, Vinnie Costa, Art James, Arnols Stang shouldnt be on the notables list because they lack sourcing.
 * 1) Musicals Give My Regards To Broadway and Guys and Dolls both reference New Rochelle
 * 2) The Oscar-nominated Burt Reynolds film Starting Over includes a school carnival scene filmed at what is now known as the Hudson Montessori School on Quaker Ridge Road.[citation needed]
 * 3) Scenes in the movie Michael Clayton, released in 2007 and starring George Clooney, were filmed in New Rochelle.[citation needed]
 * 4) The character James 'Spike' Thompson (Dexter Fletcher) in the ITV series Press Gang comes from New Rochelle, but lives in Norbridge, England.[citation needed]

the following notables had references that were deleted: - William Randolph Hearst, newspaper 'baron' owned country estate on Stratton Road - Laurence Fishburne, actor, playwright, director, and producer - Rob Morrow, actor - CL Smooth, rapper - Gina Torres, actress Thanks again! --ANGLE-TELLA (talk) 10:52, 2 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, I repaired the damage as well as I could, thanks for warning me of the problems with the article:


 * for 19th century history:
 * for the red links, see my comments on the terrytoon's red links. If you don't like the red links, then please make a short stub with enough info to help other editors improve the article, instead of simply removing the wikilink just because it's a red link.
 * I don't think that it's necessary to add the name of the state on the article, it's enough to point out that he does have a state and that it's big (three acres)


 * for education
 * same as the red links on terrytoon characters (since you seem to live there, you could take a photo of them and start a small school stub using the School-stub template at the bottom of the page, or one of the more specialized templates listed here


 * New Rochelle in film, music, television and fiction:
 * It appears that Gandy goose was a real toon that existed and so did Dinky Duck youtube video. I'll make a short stub for them so that they are not red links. Please notice that it's usual to leave notable enough names as red links so that people will want to create articles on them. You do *not* have to remove links just because they are red, red links are often left intentional by editors in case someone can write an article on the linked term. It's different if the articles on them have been deleted as not notable or other circunstances. I think that toon characters that were featured on several animated shorts when the age of animation was starting, made by an animation study that got notable later, are probably notable enough to merit their own article.
 * for the give my regards musical, I found what looks like a reliable source
 * for the rest of musicals, I am not going to search for sources, but I'll leave them alone for now since I have no reason to believe that they are false, seeing that at least of the musicals on the list actually referenced rochelle.


 * for notable people:
 * fixed mariano rivera entry
 * tagged then ones that lack sourcing
 * the source for William Randolph is a blog (unreliable source), tagged as citation needed as it seems that he only had a house to go there on certain days, so it's not a remarkable fact or we need a more reliable source than a blog
 * the sources for lawrence fishburner and gina torres are wikis, used imbd instead
 * the source for rob morrow is a personal page, used a tv.com biography instead
 * the source for CL Smooth is a personal website, using imdb instead


 * I made the changes. However, I think that you actually might be an alternative account of the user that was managing those socks, so I reviewed each change very carefully before adding it to avoid meatpuppetry issues (aka doing proxy changes for blocked editors). I have warned an admin to have a look into the situation --Enric Naval (talk) 14:30, 2 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I appreciate your input. I saw the article several days ago and they looked much different when I viewed it again today. That is why i was wondering about the changes. --ANGLE-TELLA (talk) 14:43, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Regarding your comment on my talk page, I have no direct knowledge of New Roc City, but I agree with your verdict that the recent edits were by Jvolkblum, using several different IPs. --Orlady (talk) 03:45, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Templates
No, I am learning new stuff all the time, just like your cat. LOL Bearian (talk) 21:02, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Mother's Day article edit
Enric - the inclusion of the Republicans' vote against memorializing Mother's Day needs a better citation. I read through the Washington Post article and it has a clear Democrat voice. Maybe a better citation is needed, but having read through the Post article and given the Post writer's bias, I would equate that citation as to a Republican citing Rush Limbaugh in an article. I don't find the inclusion of that vote very encyclopedic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.212.73.250 (talk) 21:09, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

water memory
It was now listing homeopathy as a scientific field (because they changed the meaning of the parameters again), but there's no actual science related to water memory, it's strictly homeopathic. 22:42, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Eh, that's dignifying the subject far, far too much. Maybe if it said "Scientific fields it violates" Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday (talk) 23:39, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank-you
Just a quick message to say thanks for your assistance regarding the deletion of User:Relyimah/Infobox User. I will keep this in mind for the next time. --Ben Sawyer(t-c-e) 05:21, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Hong Kong
Hi, thanks for sending me a message, but, the thing is, the Chinese characters provided at the infobox at the Hong Kong article are: 香港特別行政區, which means "Hong Kong Special Administrative Region". The English name previously stated there is: "Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) of the People's Republic of China", which does not complement the Chinese characters provided in the infobox. Now, "Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) of the People's Republic of China", when you write it in Traditional Chinese, will be: 中華人民共和國香港特別行政區. What I am trying to say there is, either make the Chinese name complete, and retain the name "Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) of the People's Republic of China" as the English equivalent in the infobox, or just leave my edit the way it is (BTW, what I did was, I made the English name to "Hong Kong Special Administrative Region", to complement the Chinese characters provided therein. That would be all. I hope you understood me. Makeru (talk) 09:36, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Template:Cite_study
Kudos and much thanks! –Cg-realms (talk • contribs) 00:49, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

Barnstar

 * Thank you very much!! :) --Enric Naval (talk) 10:48, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem! even when you've voted against my proposed deletion your point has been clear and well thought out, and i thought you deserved something for that excellence :). Ironholds 19:41, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Reasons why radio station articles should be called as their Brand Names
There are many reasons why radio station articles should be called as their Brand Names:


 * 1) People who read articles in Wikipedia will know how it is called.
 * 2) This was how these articles started.
 * 3) The Radio Station's Brand Name are known rather than Their Callsigns.

Xtreme Blaster (talk) 07:45, 21 June 2008 (UTC) ...aaaa-and blocked as a sock! Thanks for the heads up. LessHeard vanU (talk) 18:39, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

"to developers"
On the Rocketboom article, I reverted the change you made. It appears that the NYT talked about a different event than the engadget source, the video ipod would only have had assistance of developers, while the engadget one would have had the assistance of the people that you listed. --Enric Naval (talk) 18:15, 21 June 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem, Just trying for consensus before an edit war erupts. Andrew doesn't want Rocketboom disparaged, but he uses hyperbolic phrases whenever he tries to correct things. If I know you'll make the change, I can hold off. You have a better grasp of the source material. MMetro (talk) 18:56, 21 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, let's see if we managed to avoid another edit war on the article. I made a few changes more, to try to get all the details correct --Enric Naval (talk) 20:24, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you...
... and I'm honored (I'm also glad that Wizardman gave me the night off!). Many thanks for the honor and the support. B.Wind (talk) 00:46, 22 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Not at all, thanks to you for all the hard work :) --Enric Naval (talk) 00:48, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your message, I planned to decline for those reasons but only just got around to it. ┌ Joshii ┐└ chat ┘ 02:15, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Personal Legal History
This is a term used in the Di Stefano article as it is neutral in terms of whether he was successful or not in his appeal against his conviction for fraud. See the talk page for how this has been arrived at. DavidFarmbrough (talk) 11:09, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks Enric - I did see your link to Preclusion, but I didn't realise that was a follow-up to your query about the use of the heading. The Di Stefano article is very difficult to edit, because people get very cross about it, and even well-reasoned edits can be reverted very quickly. DavidFarmbrough (talk) 11:41, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Cheers!
Tah for the help. Much appreciated! =) CYBORGchimpish (talk) 15:38, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

RV
I'm right in the middle at RV. But please see the last 2 or 3 days of discussion at FRINGE talk page, for more on that section- which is highly disputed, and isn't a justification for anything. —— Martinphi    ☎ Ψ Φ —— 03:01, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Heh, see you researched it (—— Martinphi    ☎ Ψ Φ —— 04:46, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Among other problems, the section never had consensus, and it has reversed meaning several times in the last few days. —— Martinphi    ☎ Ψ Φ —— 05:02, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * It was edit warred into FRINGE. No, it's not something which you should put out as a basis for edits.  The consensus comes first, not last.  There was no "standing version."  There was a anti-consensus version which stayed for a long time.  —— Martinphi     ☎ Ψ Φ —— 05:31, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Hope I'm doing this properly
Thank you for removing the libel which wiki user:Kady Miller posted on the Richie Ramone page. The lawsuit posted and referenced on the Ramone page is real as you can see by the reference. The link goes directly to the lawsuit documents. Please, do not be bullied by her and allow her to delete the lawsuit information or link to the documents. The lawsuit sets precedent in regard to copyright infringement and artists' rights in the digital age. Furthermore, I believe that it is a conflict of interest and violation of wiki terms of service that she is allowed to post on her husband's wiki page about a lawsuit in which she is directly involved. Thank you. User:SomeonePutSomethingInMyDrink —Preceding comment was added at 17:12, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Richie Ramone
I just wanted to stop by and tell you that I think you've been doing a good job trying to keep a lid on this article. It's enough of a challenge to deal with one SPA...having two competing SPAs is really a difficult situation. Throw in BLP, COI and the rest of the alphabet soup and...well, you can see as well as me what that means. It's my intention to try to restore some serious order into the article; if you're in the position of being able to help source some of the existing content, it would be great to demonstrate some proper editing practices. You've read the messages I've left on the talk pages of the two users, I believe, so you probably see where I am hoping to go with this. I probably won't be online much tomorrow or the day after due to RL commitments, but feel free to leave me a message if there's something I can help you with. Risker (talk) 05:38, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Sclua has reported me
Incredible.... May you like to participate? Link. Cheers. --MauritiusXXVII  (Aut Doce, Aut Disce, Aut Discede!) 18:09, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

FYI
I have blocked User:Kady Miller for her personal attack and accusations about User:MediaLawyer, for 24 hours. In the interim, I am requesting some assistance from a member of OTRS as there has been some information that has come to light that leads me to believe that this situation is more complex than it appears. Just wanted to give you the heads-up. Risker (talk) 05:56, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Meh, let's if this situation can be sorted in a calm way without the article becoming a battleground, and without degenerating into another B*r*a*n*d*t, D*o*n M*u*r*p*h*y or GDS long-winding problem. I don't envy the guys at OTRS if they have to deal with this sort of situation often. --Enric Naval (talk) 21:00, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Enric, right now I would urge you to stay completely clear of this article and these two editors; as I indicated, the situation is more complex than it appears, and I would not want you to get sideswiped. Risker (talk) 21:04, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll do that. Thanks for the advice. --Enric Naval (talk) 21:06, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 23 and 26, 2008.
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 (talk) 08:21, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Edupunk
An article that you have been involved in editing, Edupunk, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Edupunk. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? ShoesssS Talk 10:25, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia_Signpost/2008-06-26/Technology_report
It's a long story, but Ais523 has a special template in his userspace for bugs, that he uses every week, and it didn't work this time. The extra number is the CVS revision that the bug was fixed in. He's already fixed it, and you can see what it's supposed to look like now. Thanks for pointing that out. Ral315 (talk) 19:39, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

yo man
How goes it? Ironho<b style="color:#696969">ld</b><b style="color:#000">s</b> 17:44, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Final decision in Homeopathy arbitration case
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict (defined as articles which relate to homeopathy, broadly interpreted) if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. The sanctions imposed may include blocks of up to one year in length; bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict; bans on any editing related to the topic or its closely related topics; restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors; or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project. User has been banned from Wikipedia for a period of one year. On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 23:54, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: let's open a WP:RFC/U
I back you on this! I already added my username. I'll wait for you to start it just to prevent reapeating the same arguments than you. ok? Cheers. --MauritiusXXVII  (Aut Doce, Aut Disce, Aut Discede!) 19:04, 25 June 2008 (UTC)


 * There is little more to add... I've signed supporting for it and made some very little additions. If I foinf something new, I will keep adding it. Thanks for your time. --MauritiusXXVII  (Aut Doce, Aut Disce, Aut Discede!) 07:27, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

DOS
I saw your change to the ROM-DOS link. This used to have an article, and it got AfD recently (I just found out about it by seeing that redlink). That's why I removed the redlink. Cheers, JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 02:36, 3 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh, ok, then just do as you want --Enric Naval (talk) 03:42, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 30, 2008.
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 (talk) 04:20, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello and Good Day
Hello sir/maam I am a new user here in wikipedia so i cannot edit protected articles like Angel locsin, i am only just concern of the article because it has no image. I am calmly requesting you to Put this image Angel_in_Dubai.jpg, the image was already proven licensed under creative commons and it was already inspected by Flickreviewer,please put it inside Angel Locsin's article with the caption of Angel Locsin at the Lobo Tour in Dubai. Please give me your kindness. Thankyou so much. God Bless You! Watcher Wiki (talk) 10:30, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Richie Ramone
Hello sir, reasons I undid Richie Ramone page---please excuse the impatience, no disrespect intended but this would be comical if not so sad. This band has many informed fans. The Richie Ramone page is more wrong, and unpleasant than ever. You even got the number of albums wrong. Book cited as source is old and updated information in "End of the Century" refutes it. Richie Ramone played at Joey Ramone's Birthday Bash on stage with Tommy Ramone and Joey Ramone's Brother Mickey Leigh, so how is it possible no one talks about (or TO) him? Also noted that no one bothered to correct Subterranean Jungle page that says Richie Ramone playing drums in "Psycho Theraphy" video. He played a cooking pan with a spoon. The track is Mark's drumming. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matty Ramone (talk • contribs) 23:22, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your Talk. I undid wrong page and left the reasons on Talk for Richie Ramone. I think editors are right that the bio should be accurate. I'm a new user and respect the guidlines so I undid it but left it alone as per the rules there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matty Ramone (talk • contribs) 23:48, 7 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Not at all --Enric Naval (talk) 23:53, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Janjua rajput
Hi Eric, I am having a problem with a user who is pushing unreferenced and uncited vandalism on the above article, user Harpreet Janjua. I have requested him to stop, offered to work with him, but he simply keeps POV pushing instead of providing sources. Can this be looked into as Im sure this is a 3RR violation....

Thanks for this Eric, much appreciated--~Raja~ (talk) 11:09, 8 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for this Eric, very much appreciated. He appears to have stopped, we'll wait and see any progress. Thanks again for your swift response Eric! :-) ~Raja~ (talk) 08:24, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

RFC on the conduct of a user
He intentat entendre de què va això (que crec que has escrit tú, per que no està signat, dispensa si vaig errat), però no n'he tret l'entrellat. Si em vols fer cinc cèntims.--Paco &#9993; 06:10, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Recent MfD close
You should also sign the closure, for transparency. ^_^ I amended the result on MfD since the overall outcome was that it was speedied under U1. &mdash; Maggot Syn 18:39, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, lol, I hadn't thought of signing. I though that visitors to the page would just recognize my characteristic overall charm :D --Enric Naval (talk) 18:52, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

125.60.252.50 and his edits
Thanks for reverting the edits of this anon user to the DWRK article. I may also note that all of his edits are hoaxes, especially regarding all the Philippine radio and television related-articles. I also think that this ip address is a sockpuppet of User:Frencher since they keep on adding the same hoax information on the same articles. -Danngarcia (talk) 08:11, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

What's wrong with the Templar source?
just wondering since it seems to be getting removed alot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by StormBreakLoose (talk • contribs) 20:34, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Aeris vgcats.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Aeris vgcats.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 04:24, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Leo vgcats.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Leo vgcats.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 04:35, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 7, 2008.
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 (talk) 09:28, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Please opin
It's so hard to AFG, dude. Are you still editing FLG article? I posted an ANI a while ago, but the issue presists. I have placed an informal RfC in the relevant Talk page, do you mind giving me your opinion? Thanks. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Falun_Gong#RfC_on_Repeated_Removal_of_Adminstrator_Reviewed_Edits Bobby fletcher (talk) 05:08, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Rocketboom
Can you take a look at Rocketboom again please? I don't know what to do about the personal attacks. I can't get Andrew Baron to focus on facts or process. He keeps editing his own article. Not sure what to do. Cleanr (talk) 19:37, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: two videogames on Sonic the Hedgehog
I removed the articles that did not have "Sonic the Hedgehog" in its title, since Sonic the Hedgehog is a disambiguation page. --Silver Edge (talk) 08:22, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Sonic the Hedgehog (series) is already linked though. It's the first link there. --Silver Edge (talk) 08:29, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Template: New Rochelle
A number of recent edits by another user seem to be anything but helpful. I have tried to contribute and explain the reasons for not changing certain details but the user refused to acknowledge my discussion. The user is making even more edits to the template based on opinion rather than the facts. I came across a discussion in which you had mentioned taking some degree of responsibility for this template. Are you able to assist? thank you--Collier Strong 08 (talk) 22:21, 19 July 2008 (UTC)


 * sorry, but I think that User:Orlady is handling the matter correctly. The responsability was mostly about adding the template to articles, and assuming responsability for its existance (to avoid it being deleted as a creation of a baned editor). I would love to peruse every change to the template, but I'm not knowledgeable enough to do that. I'll just keep an eye on it and help others who know more. --Enric Naval (talk) 23:21, 19 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Note that Collier Strong 08 has been blocked for being a sockpuppet of the banned user Jvolkblum. I share your view that some of Jvolkblum's contributions have been worthwhile, but I am concerned that selective acceptance and restoration of this banned user's contributions only encourages this person to continue his or her attacks on Wikipedia. --Orlady (talk) 19:50, 20 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, this guy has raised an army of socks without any encoragement when his edits were all being reverted, so I'm not sure if my actions are having any effect. However, if you see that my actions are really having an effect on increasing his activities, then just drop me a note and I'll switch to just reverting him on sight. --Enric Naval (talk) 20:38, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * He has been pretty brazen lately. See Suspected sock puppets/Jvolkblum (14th) (yesterday's sockpuppetry case) and Suspected sock puppets/Jvolkblum (15th) (today's sockpuppetry case), note the number of IPs he is using (which aren't being blocked), and check out all the new articles that new sockpuppet Bessiemoo has created. He is also an active nuisance at Commons -- see this report there. If you give him an inch, he'll take a mile. --Orlady (talk) 00:27, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Bessiemoo has been blocked and the articles this sock created have been speedy-deleted, so you won't be able to see a contributions list. Below is the deletion log for the nine articles this user created:

--Orlady (talk) 02:11, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) (Deletion log); 22:05 . . Renata3 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Forest Knolls, New York" (db-banned|Jvolkblum)
 * 2) (Deletion log); 22:04 . . Renata3 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Isle of San Souci, New York" (db-banned|Jvolkblum)
 * 3) (Deletion log); 22:04 . . Renata3 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Rochelle Park, New York" (db-banned|Jvolkblum)
 * 4) (Deletion log); 22:03 . . Renata3 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Scarsdale Downs, New York" (db-banned|Jvolkblum)
 * 5) (Deletion log); 22:03 . . Renata3 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Sun Haven, New York" (db-banned|Jvolkblum)
 * 6) (Deletion log); 22:03 . . Renata3 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Victory Park, New York" (db-banned|Jvolkblum)
 * 7) (Deletion log); 21:47 . . Tanthalas39 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Quaker Ridge, New York" (db-banned|Jvolkblum)
 * 8) (Deletion log); 21:46 . . Tanthalas39 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Pinebrook Heights, New York" (db-banned|Jvolkblum)
 * 9) (Deletion log); 21:46 . . Tanthalas39 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Premium Point Park, New York" (db-banned|Jvolkblum)


 * ugh, what a mess.... and he is using tools to disguise his IP, too. I'm gonna revert him in sight from now on, clearly a few good contributions that have to be separated by hand from all the chaff are not worth all this disruption.


 * He also still doesn't seem to understand that he should change his behaviour instead of insisting that everyone else is doing it wrong :(


 * Thanks for the list, Orlady. I had only seen a few of his edits at one or two articles that I happened to have watchlisted, so I couldn't see how much of a problem this user is. --Enric Naval (talk) 03:23, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanx Mate!
Hey Enric,

Thanx for Reverting the Vandalism on my user page it is highly appreciated:)--~*~Lil&#39;GKhanster~*~ (talk) 02:49, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

U No Best
Thank you for your recent intervention and concern. I'm glad you understand the energy that overflowed at the cabal site. Thank you for the steps you took to prevent almost definite retaliation should it have been discovered by the "wrong" editor. Together let's look at something tho. Lets look at what one little sentence can create. Everything that followed my edit at that site was unnecessary and would NOT have happened if the first editor had merely communicated instead of reverted. I am very reasonable. But, his "trigger happy" style set into motion all that followed: wasted time and words that should have been devoted to the task at hand-editing articles. Envolvement by 5-6-7 editors. Let's you and I consider that what happened to me is multiplied enourmously all across Wikipedia since rapid deletion is seen by some as their calling. At this point it is just an observation. But, as we can see, the actions of one effect many. I regret the "bastion" sentence but I don't think I could have predicted the firestorm that followed. Thanks again--Buster7 (talk) 11:42, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Removal of edit on Alexander the Great page
I noticed you removed my notice to Fyrom/Republic of Macedonia citizens. (in history of talk page 02:26, 17 July 2008) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Alexander_the_Great&action=history

I must confess I am new to Wikipedia so I am going to respect the verdict of a higher power. :) However, I just want to make the point that I don't think the notice was irrelevent to the discussion. If you check the current and old archives you will find many posters focused solely on making the claim that Alexander was not Greek.

While I wholeheartedly support Fyrom/Republic of Macedonia's right to free speech. more often than not they are making claims that aren't true or distortions of the facts (e.g. in the current talk page of Alexander someone claims Macedonians didn't compete in the Olympics). The reason why I think it is important to add some sort of disclaimer (maybe a link to another page?) is to put those sorts of comments in context and discourage unauthentic contributions which lowers the caliber of the discussion.

Thanks for taking the time to listen (and the links) I'll try to trend a little lighter until I better understand the rules. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crossthets (talk • contribs) 02:46, 17 July 2008


 * replying on user talk page (as soon as I get some time on RL) --Enric Naval (talk) 10:17, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Please visit my talk page when you get a chance. ThanksCrossthets (talk) 09:21, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Henry Bauer additions
Hi Enric, Thanks for keeping an eye on Henry Bauer. I'm sorry I haven't had a chance to make many of the promised edits until now. I have now rearranged the article (I think I kept everything that was there), and added some new information. I will work on adding the rest of my sources over the next hour or so. Please take a look when you have a chance and let me know if you have suggestions. Thanks, Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 15:27, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

RE:Moving the conversation to TOS article
Okay,thanks for fixing it. XxJoshuaxX (talk) 14:14, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Republic of Macedonia
Hi Enric. Just a note - that information being added to the intro is being given undue weight, and it doesn't seem to be serving any purpose except to make the user that continually inserts it feel good. If it's added again, it should be removed. Cheers,  Balkan Fever  11:21, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, I was about to ask whether it wouldn't be better to just leave the current version with the link to the country list, instead of explaining those small details. I guess I'm too benevolent with that sort of edits :) --Enric Naval (talk) 11:28, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

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


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

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

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Melesse (talk) 10:00, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 14 and 21, 2008.
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 (talk) 06:20, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Message to To Enric_Naval, Nsk92, ThuranX, Cast, L0b0t, Pete,Hurd, Annette46, Artene50 and, T-rex about cooperation to improve the AI-Wiki-page
As you well know, the AI-Wiki-page is once more deleted, this time by Bjweeks on a request from Hoary. I have written to them at their talkpages about cooperation to achieve an AI-Wiki-page that has general Wiki-consent, before publishing it again. Copies of these messages are on my talk page. Take a look at them. As AI is the largest anarchist-network in the world, it of course should have a Wiki-page. I invite you all to contribute to a better AI-Wiki-page for later publishing. This time so good that it will not be deleted by anyone.

(Anna Quist (talk) 22:27, 28 July 2008 (UTC))


 * Replied on your talk page. --Enric Naval (talk) 07:34, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I think you're right: attempts at dialogue are pointless. -- Hoary (talk) 10:13, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

"I will ask you to stop these lies and smearstories about AI, or else you will be trialed by the International Anarchist Tribunal, and get an expelling Brown Card from the IAT" – Anna Quist

Strong words there, Enric; better call your lawyer. Wouldn't want to be expelled from the "largest anarchist organization in the world"!

Re: thanks for intervention on the spore talk page
Glad I could help, I am anticipating the game release and so I keep a watch on the article. Debates in the talk page tend to get out of control. Sometimes editors get so caught up in their own idea that they miss the fact that "real" argument points aren't getting made. --Nanobri (talk) 07:07, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Your query
Very possibly. Also User:TerrenceGuion. --Orlady (talk) 22:52, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Anna Quist has threatened legal action against you.
On her talk page she has written "I will ask you to stop these lies and smearstories about AI, or else you will be trialed by the International Anarchist Tribunal, and get an expelling Brown Card from the IAT on Internet for ochlarchical, authoritarian behaviour."
 * I figured this was something you ought to know. Zazaban (talk) 02:24, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * To me, that doesn't sound like a legal threat. It does sound unintentionally hilarious, though. -- Hoary (talk) 02:48, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It's a very silly legal threat, but it is still a threat. Zazaban (talk) 03:21, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * She says: I will ask you to stop these lies and [smears] about [my group], or else you will be [tried by my group's pseudo-legal system], and get an expelling Brown Card from [my group] for ochlarchical, authoritarian behaviour, see [my group's website]. This has nothing to do with the law. -- Hoary (talk) 05:17, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I know, but this guy should be aware if he's being threatened by somebody, even if they are the organizational equivalent of Mornington Crescent. Zazaban (talk) 08:39, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for warning me, guys. Yeah, this looks like a bit of a ridiculous threat. Still, she's warning me that she is going to smear me on her website (saying that I have a "ochlarchical, authoritarian behaviour" on the AIF-IFA matter) because of stuff I do on-wiki, so that should count as a personal attack under WP:NPA no personal attacks. Certainly that's not a legal threat, unless we believe that the tribunal actually exists. Actually, I suspect that it exists, but that she is the only judge and jury on it :D --Enric Naval (talk) 16:15, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I left her a message complaining about her comments. Thanks again for warning me. --Enric Naval (talk) 15:18, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Re:Chat invitation
Hey there. I didn't get your message on my talk page. Do you mind elaborating? I never sent you any invitation. :P Thanks, RyRy   Public  ( talk ) 17:00, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Falun Gong
Wondering if you want to chime in on the same issue you and others brought up - on the relevance of the CCPs cult label, etc. Maybe time for WP:DR on this issue. -Zahd (talk) 23:49, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I replied at the talk page. --Enric Naval (talk) 14:07, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

di Stefano
I've brought the matter up on the talk page and asked Squeakbox not to keep edit warring. Your input would of course be appreciated. JoshuaZ (talk) 04:22, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the heads-up. --Enric Naval (talk) 18:39, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your detailed explanation Four points, Eric; they make good sense. Hag2 (talk) 18:28, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Not at all. --Enric Naval (talk) 18:39, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Your last comment in G's talk sort of loops us back to my remark about "One of my dilemmas....". *smile* And I think it is this particular element of GDS's personality which seems to be missing from the main article (and one of which I would like to see more). But I am probably wrong: GDS is probably fuming at the whole bit &mdash; that is, Paul Williams, Jim Cusack, Serbia Telecom, Wikiwhatever, and Delia Smith.  Beats me.  But thanks anyway for all that reading material on my talk.  I enjoy your commentary, as well as your insight.  Hag2 (talk) 21:40, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:May contain nuts
I apologise for going against your grain. Sorry. I genuinely felt that people who had contributed to The Truth talk page would be interested, and have a valuable judgement. I've not been at all involved in any community activities, so was unaware (and still am) of such facilities as the "Village Pump". If I have need in future, I will post there. Cheers. -HarryAlffa (talk) 21:34, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Readability
Here it is not ten minutes into the new day, and already I have learned something. Thanks, Wikipedia! - Eldereft (cont.) 04:07, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Ericsaindon2
I think you're right. That explains some of this actions. I've blocked and tagged the account. Any of his edits may be reverted. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 04:19, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

(re) benimerin and flag ratios
Hi there... Enric, what can I say? Just go ahead as he won't stop! Just take a look at Talk:Senyera Real. You'll see for yourself... Tell me what's your decision... Cheers. --MauritiusXXVII  (Aut Doce, Aut Disce, Aut Discede!) 18:44, 14 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not saying that 2:3 is correct or not. Both are correct, and both are used in different cases. In the case of 1:2, it's used when it's alone, specially in historical meaning, and 2:3 when flag of Spain is used together. There's no law telling that, because it's tradition, and traditions sometimes aren't written anywhere. But, in any case, there's no reason to override sistematically all depictings of 1:2 as Maurice27 is doing, in way to make it dissappear quite completelly from wp. It's supposed from him that as in 1:2 the "senyera" part is bigger depicted 2:3 within flag of Valencia, so he is against this symbol as he clearly showed an anticatalanism biasing. Salut. --Benimerin -  كُنْ ذكورا إذا كُنْت كذوب  - 19:35, 14 August 2008 (UTC)


 * See? That's what I meant... He just doesn't care... --MauritiusXXVII  (Aut Doce, Aut Disce, Aut Discede!) 20:59, 14 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Again, I've no intention to replace 2x3 by 1x2 everywhere from Wikipedia. But Maurice27 is replacing elsewhere all 1x2 depictings by 2x3. I'm only undoing this replacements, I'm not replacing those 2x3 that has been put in first. There's no mention about the Valencian autonomous flag in ratios, but only as a flag of City of Valencia because of a law to municipalities (2x3), not to the autonomous community wich is not applicable. No official ratios is used, but there are photos that illustrates perfectly wich is the costume, both ratios are correct. Anyway, it was Maurice who started to be unrespectful overriding the mediation done in Talk:Flag of Valencia after a several months, replacing all 1x2 depictings by 2x3 under no reason.


 * And, again, I've no intention to undoing editings from others. In Valencian Community the new editing is from me, adding new info with this template. Valencian is Catalan, as Castellano is Spanish. The user who are undoing editions are Mountolive and Maurice27. --Benimerin -  كُنْ ذكورا إذا كُنْت كذوب  - 10:57, 15 August 2008 (UTC)


 * But you're overriding that the sources provided by Maurice is ONLY applicable to municipalities flags, not to the flag of the autnomous community. This is what the Act is saying: "entidades locales", it refers to municipalities, not to Auotonomous Communities. The law about the flag of Valencian Community has no mention to proportionssee this. This is not appliable to the flag of the Valencian Community, so in this case he's in the same situation as me: only photos showing that the senyera is 2:3 together flag of Spain, while I'm showing that 1:2 is used when it's hoisted alone.


 * The compromise solution was that both are correct, and both can be depicted here, just the same I was saying from a long time ago. Because both are correct, and both ratios, as a flag of Autonomous Community of Valencia, are unsourced as official flag of it, but clearly used in "real world". There's no reason, so, to replace a ratio by the other one, I haven't do this. Maurice was starting to replacing, overriding the compromise solution, so I'm undoing this unrrespectul attitude.


 * As the compromise solution reached, the Valencian senyera in 2:3 must be used in Valencia city, because of local law. And because of this equality of the solution, 1:2 can be used as Autonomous Community, as both ratios are used in public buildings. --Benimerin -  كُنْ ذكورا إذا كُنْت كذوب  - 12:31, 15 August 2008 (UTC)


 * You continues to ignoring that 2:3 for flag of Autonomous Community is not referred anywhere, and the evidence given by Maurice27 is only appliable for entidades locales, that is, for municipalities. So, replacing sistematically one ratio by another is not justified in any case. Both you and Maurice27, should give source that support the usage of 2:3 for the Flag of the Autonomous Community of Valencia, not only me for 1:2. As for me, I will undo all the replacings made by Maurice27 after the compromise of solution. Cheers. --Benimerin -  كُنْ ذكورا إذا كُنْت كذوب  - 13:59, 15 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Enric, You asked me not to edit war to restore the Calvo & Gravalos reference, letting Benimerin state on the talk page what problems he has with the reference to see if we can reach a compromise there...
 * Well, you seem to begin understanding how this users acts (Erasing sources; claiming sources not to be acceptable (even if the book has an ISBN code); negliging scans of the book made only to make him believe it (even if the ISBN code is proof enough for the source to be shown in wikipedia); satisfying the burden of proof; Being reverted having brought like ¿6-7 sources? (in addition to all these brought by an annon editor) meanwhile he hasn't brought ANY SINGLE ONE; Having to deal with him accusing me of lying about the authenticity of the scan... etc...etc...).
 * Like with sclua, you seem to be following the good path with him. Asking him for references, asking him to explain his edits etc... You are in front now. Do what you believe must be done in order to reach a consensus, but I warn you it will be impossible with him (as shown by his last edits).
 * On the other hand, understand I already tried all that before as proved by the hundreds of Kb of writing in several talk-pages, so I believe my point already explained. If you need any help or information, I will be glad to be of help.
 * I'm not at home these days full-time. I'll probably have the chance to scan the book this week-end, but, the text about the flag was already written in the reference and an example of another ratio flag is already present in the very same scan (The flag of Castile-La Mancha is despicted just below the valencian one as a 1:2 flag).
 * For the sake of everybody's benefit and the respect I owe you, I will stop reverting him while you discuss with him. cheers. --MauritiusXXVII  (Aut Doce, Aut Disce, Aut Discede!) 22:41, 15 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks, man. Let's see if I can get Benimeri to follow wikipedia policies. Btw, that reminds me that I still have to clean up after some of the stuff that Sclua broke :P --Enric Naval (talk) 23:38, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Frencher
Is this guy User:Frencher running some kind of fantasy-baseball-league game with radio personalities, then altering Wikipedia to match his game? That's what seems to be going on, but I don't want to go further until I get a reality check from you. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  19:15, 15 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, let me see:
 * ✔️ provides no sources for his changes
 * ✔️ when questioned, he is unresponsive or leaves only confusing misterious messages
 * ✔️ never communicates at talk pages of articles
 * ✔️ local editors provide RL confirmation of hoaxes
 * ✔️ when providing sources, he only links to the main page of the website, and not to the relevant page with the info
 * ✔️ unlinks pages that don't fit his changes, with no explanations given for why the link is no longer valid
 * ✔️ extraordinary claims with no proof "[this show] has most requested hits that you've aired for all listeners"
 * ✔️ when he creates an unsourced article, and other editor tries to find sources, the details on the sources differ significantly from the ones on the article. For example, for Request Express, the relevant source lists different DJs (Laila instead of DJ Martin). When searching google to confirm his version, the relevant hits are from the wikipedia article that he created or from sites using wikipedia as source
 * ✔️ adds items to lists with no explanation or comment, and there is never any confirmation by other editors of any of his additions
 * ✔️ there is a IP creating hoaxes on the same topic area, and some details of those hoaxes appear on the contributions of that editor (compare this edit that introduces a hoax and several djs with this edits that changes djs. Both add "Lil'lsoy" to the list, a name that returns zero hits on google.
 * ✔️ the unverifiable details are mixed with easily verifiable ones, which makes the unverifiable ones even more suspicious. On the above edit, the addition of "Dahnnie" is correct, see google search and his profile at Star FM website . That same website has no profile for "Lil'lsoy".
 * ✔️ he is discovered after a wave of hoaxes on articles that he edits
 * So, yes, this guy is most probably creating hoaxes all around, and he is using also User:125.60.252.50 to do it. In some cases he introduces correct stuf, but that is always mixed with obvious hoaxes. Also, he's just wasting other editors' time, since every one of his edits has to be checked for hoaxes. (You can copy this list somewhere else if you need it as proof). --Enric Naval (talk) 20:18, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Senyera Vs. Flag of Catalonia
Enric, I was reading the Senyera article and I found out it has many similarities with the Coat of arms of Catalonia Vs. Coat of arms of the Crown of Aragon "problem" we had some weeks ago.

The content of the Senyera article rather feats in a "generalistic" article about the flags derived from the medieval arms of the Crown, while it lacks of the specific information about ratios, construction sheet and legislation of the present flag of Catalonia. It is a similar case to the Flag of Valencia, when I decided to create a separate article (as "Flag of Valencia", before Xinese-v changed it to "Señera real" opening la caja de los truenos).

So, my wonders are, if you believe that it is reasonable (before doing it in the talk-page) to propose to make the Senyera article a specific article about the vexillological symbol of the arms of Aragon which could include in its content a disambiguation or link to its heirs, the Aragonese, Balear, Catalan and Valencian flags.

I guess some Catalanists users will complain for not "reserving" the name Senyera as the Catalan flag (Benimerin at the head), but I really believe it will improve the chances to make a good specific article about the flag of Catalonia without having to be extremely cautious not to hurt the feelings of people from other regions which also claim the "Senyera" or "Señera" as theirs.

Tell me about your feelings... Cheers. --MauritiusXXVII  (Aut Doce, Aut Disce, Aut Discede!) 22:14, 15 August 2008 (UTC)


 * It looks to me like quite a good idea. It's obvious that a Flag of Aragon article will have very different content from Flag of Valencia, Flag of Majorca and Flag of Catalonia, and that all of them will have a lot of duplicate content that should be merged into a single article on the common origins. --Enric Naval (talk) 23:35, 15 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok, I'll open the debate in the talk-page. Would you be so kind to copy/paste your answer there? cheers. --MauritiusXXVII  (Aut Doce, Aut Disce, Aut Discede!) 23:47, 15 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah. --Enric Naval (talk) 23:50, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Warning
Hi Enric!

Thanks for the warning. All your points are correct. Yes, "FOPOY" is an ridiculization of "FYROM". Yes, Greeks might get angry-same as Macedonians can get angry because of FYROM.--Aradic-es (talk) 18:23, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Hmm I though that FOPOY is My original invention. LOL

anyway, the insults made by greek users are much heavier.

Such as User:DIMISM2008 here  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aradic-es (talk • contribs) 19:36, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi both,

Sorry if I insulted you Aradic-es. I will not discuss which was the most insulting comment. I didn't come up with the word FYROM. Your country agreed to use it on 1993... Just think that when you use the word Macedonia it is an insult for me and my country too. As I said this word is a part of our history too. Just think that YOU are "less" Macedonians than some others are. My insult come after yours. Do I lie? Anyway, sorry...--DIMISM2008 (talk) 04:25, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * To DIMISM, Aradic is Croatian. Just reflect on some of your comments now....
 * To Aradic, I don't think anybody thought of the P as "pashalik", so in a way it is your own invention ;)
 * To Enric, keep up the good work :)  Balkan Fever not a fan? say so! 06:44, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes... I noticed that he is Croatian but that was too late... lol He should be more carefull then. Anyway, I will rephrase: "Just think that Slav Macedonians are "less" Macedonians than some other are" and of course this: "Just think that when you use the word "Macedonians" to describe the ethnic group on the north of Greece it is an insult for me and my country too", does not change.--DIMISM2008 (talk) 12:30, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Semen Images
If you have time to participate and offer your honest opinions regarding the images in the semen article, we would appreciate it. Although one editor seems to have the view that having no image would be beneficial for the article, I don't think that he consciously has censorhsip in mind. Another editor things that four images of semen may be more than necessary -- he may be right about that. Atom (talk) 21:47, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

(re) official images
I sincerely have no idea. There was a case, in which User:Zscout370 changed the name of one of the flags so as to stop the edit war: "Redoing of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Flag_of_the_Land_of_Valencia_%28official%29.svg so it fits the 2x3 ratio (and to stop an edit war)".

I also found this article Image renaming. Looks like we have to ask for the renaming to admins. --MauritiusXXVII  (Aut Doce, Aut Disce, Aut Discede!) 19:46, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Sources to create coat of arms of valencia
I saw your edit about it... Would you be willing to cooperate on it? I have a sandbox section in my user page which could be a good place to start creating it. Tell me about it... Cheers.--MauritiusXXVII  (Aut Doce, Aut Disce, Aut Discede!) 20:20, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Emo
Hi, I just wanted to express a quick word of thanks for contributing to the emo article and actually providing reliable sources to back up your claims. Too many editors are simply tossing out their own opinion on the matter, without any attempt at referencing, and expecting the rest of us to accept it as fact.

Aurum ore (talk) 02:50, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 28, August 9, 11 and 18, 2008.
Sorry I haven't been sending this over the past few weeks. Ralbot (talk) 06:00, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

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 (talk) 06:00, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

RFC
Dear Enric Naval,If you have time and are willing to share your point of view. Can you give your comment arguments about the current discussion in the bates method article. Paragraph : Elwin Marg was an optometrist ! appreciate your comment, Discussion is about whether or not the profession of Elwin Marg should be mentioned in the external link section. Seeyou (talk) 21:48, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Comics Guaranty LLC
Thanks for the help with Comics Guaranty LLC. If the vandal actually bothered to read the article, they would see that the current version is not without criticism of the company. However, I just noticed that since this person isn't getting their way at the CGC article, they grafted their version of the article to comic book collecting instead. *sigh* --GentlemanGhost (talk) 20:41, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * LOL, that's such a sneaky move from him. I added it also to my watchlist. --Enric Naval (talk) 20:49, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Love the lolcat, BTW. --GentlemanGhost (talk) 20:54, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * basement cat also wants you to assume good faith :) --Enric Naval (talk) 21:08, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Remote Viewing Historical Extenders
Hello Enric;

I have gone back to the Wiki "Remote Viewing" discussion area, in response to additional information on the subject. I hope that What I have provided will give a better improved understanding on the word and interpertation of "Remote Viewing".

I've had this ability since I was a child, and when I was professionally tested and utilized in the subject of RV. As an individual that been there and done it, I can discuss this subject in an open and objectiveable professional manner. Looking foward in helping you improving this article.

With Good Intentions;

A. Edward Moch Psychical Analyst and Consultant.

Aedwardmoch (talk) 04:01, 27 August 2008 (UTC)AedwardmochAedwardmoch (talk) 04:01, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Underblast's self-made policies
Hi! Do you still remember the guy that keeps on editing Philippine radio articles in his self-made rules? (User:Pinoybandwagon) Take a look at this comment by User:Underblast. He seems to be back at his attitude of putting his own policies in Wikipedia. -Danngarcia (talk) 16:24, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * User:Enric Naval said in my talk page that What I did on Radio Station articles looks like a good compromise that avoids edit wars and does not misuse too much the infobox, and he can live with it. He thanked me for trying to find an intermediate solution and for actually following the manual of style on the lead formatting. See User_talk:Underblast. Underblast (talk) 12:06, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I think Underblast is right here. Looking at this diff showing both versions, his version complies better with WP:NC. However, Underblast, please don't leave comments saying that articles should follow your own conventions. You should point people to the relevant policy page, and if possible use the talk page to do that.
 * Also, if you find that some editor makes a comment about making the lead in a different way, please consider looking at his arguments of why the lead should be different and tweaking your version if he makes a good argument. Wikipedia is not static, so the preferred version can change from time to time.
 * Danngarcia, you are right about pointing people to his own self-made policy. However, Underblast is probably right about how the lead should be written (see below).
 * For both: in this case the relevant policy is not WP:NC but Lead_section, which says to use the title of the article on the bold part of the lead, and then bold also alternative names. Underblast's vesion follows the style guideline better. --Enric Naval (talk) 17:27, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

User:Morpheuzzz Violating WP:NC Radio Stations on 99.5 RT (a.k.a. DWRT-FM)
User:Morpheuzzz had been violating WP:NC Radio Stations on 99.5 RT (a.k.a. DWRT-FM) in this link. According to the first paragraph, we should use the CALLSIGN first, but User:Morpheuzzz used the callsign and frequency instead. Let's fix these things up to make User:Morpheuzzz use the CALLSIGN first in every Radio Station Article. Underblast (talk) 12:00, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Request to move article Giovanni di Stefano incomplete
You recently filed a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves to move the page Giovanni di Stefano to a different title - however your proposal is either incomplete or has been contested as being controversial. As a result, it has been moved to the incomplete and contested proposals section. Requests that remain incomplete after five days will be removed.

Please make sure you have completed all three of the following:


 * 1) Added    at the top of the talk page of the page you want moved, replacing "NewName" with the new name for the article.  This creates the required template for you there.
 * 2) Added  NewName  to the bottom of the talk page of the page you want to be moved, to automatically create a discussion section there.
 * 3) Added  PageName  to the top of today's section here.

If you need any further guidance, please leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Requested moves or contact me on my talk page. - JPG-GR (talk) 00:59, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 25 and September 8, 2008.
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 (talk) 21:24, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

OK
I understand now, so I should stop reverting fascist albanian POV? Whenever I see something totally POV (like Republic of Kosovo in Albanians article) I shouldn't edit it to NPOV because it is disruptive? And whenever I revert such a pov I will be called a vandal and someone who makes personal analysis? That's pathetic. WIKIPEDIA is turning to fascist! --Forsena (talk) 08:52, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

When you say anything has to do with Serbia AND Kosovo then you are saying Kosovo is not Serbia, Kosovo is separate country. That's Albanian POV, but we're looking to make all wikipedia users happy and we can make that but not claiming any false and unrecognized countries. If UN recognizes Kosovo-Metohija as a part of Serbia (and it does) then you cannot make borders between Serbia and Kosovo. In article Albanians there are several POVs, first of all HOW COULD you revert my anti-POV (when I removed Republic of Kosovo flag and Kosovo as a country). There is also a problem with unreliable sources that say there are over 1,960,000 Albanians in Kosovo. That is ridiculous. --Forsena (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 18:20, 13 September 2008 (UTC).

Thanks!
You are a good fairy. Thank you for fixing my tags on my User_Talk page. ::hugs:: -- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode) (talk) 19:25, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

SqueakBox
I see you've been having some trouble with SqueakBox. Has he also been routinely ignoring NPOV guidelines and reverting edits without consulting the talk page in your case? Also, any personal attacks from him? Agnapostate (talk) 08:02, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Meh, he has done some of that, but he has done no personal attacks (notice that warning people for edits to articles is not considered a personal attack on wikipedia). Also, I read the two sources to one of the sentences in dispute, and I agree with his edits to the goldsmith's article.


 * (moved part of this comment to Talk:Neil_Goldschmidt)


 * Squeakbox is right on this case. I also see that other editors agree with this assessment. Notice that my complaints to Squeakbox are only about his edits to the Giovanni article, and they don't extend to his edits on other articles. --Enric Naval (talk) 13:28, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 15, 2008.
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 (talk) 05:26, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Mediation
IMo we need to invite all those who oppose or support my deletion to engage in mediation, see Josh Z's edit on the subject at hand, for instance. But its you who set up the mediation so its your call right now, my own participation is unconditional until we start talking about the subject bio. Thanks, SqueakBox 21:48, 21 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Yep, I agree. I was doubting between leaving a note on the talk page of the article or leaving notes to individual editors. I think I'll leave notes to editors, and then leave a note on the talk page only if it looks like necessary Oh, doh, it must be standard to add a warning to the talk page of the article, there is even a template for doing it RFMF :-/ . Gonna check up the names of everyone who participated on related threads and/or reverted or restored the edit. P.D.: Done. And now, time for sleep, and tomorrow I can make out the discussion thing works. --Enric Naval (talk) 00:24, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * OK thanks for your message about this - I couldn't see that the exclusion of the information was warranted as a BLP vio, but I am not sure I can add anything to your request for mediation - Presumably the mediator/admin will see the entry and the talk page and the facts will speak for themselves. My belief is that the information about GDS's exclusion from NZ is a notable episode in his life, and not there just to 'do him down' as SB seems to think. DavidFarmbrough (talk) 06:12, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


 * it would be helpful if both you and Geni could participate in mediation, especially given the case is likely to go to arbcom if mediation fails. Thanks, SqueakBox 18:20, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Request for mediation accepted
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.


 * Weeeee :) --Enric Naval (talk) 00:24, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Tanoli
so that always changes, it is clear the tanolis soon pashtons origin of afghanistan is not Indian and not of the same branch of pakistan Tanoli lives in Khalabat hosted the tribe Tanoli Utmanzai where most speak Pashto and HINDKO, from the tribe of Tanoli Tarbell villages and the homeland Tanoli Tanawal majority branch of Tanoli speak Pashto, but there are also those who call themselves Tanolis speak HINDKO that many Hazara tribes of pakistan pashton speak this language, the tribe of Barlas not have to see anything, also argue that have migrated from a place called "Tanubal River" in Afghanistan Tanoli Some tribes still live in Gardaiz and Ghazni (both cities in afghanistan and pakistan race of Tanoli also spoke Pashto, but in the Hazara area in pakistan HINDKO speak Urdu and where most speak this language, also my family also belongs to the tribe of Tanoli and we speak Pashto language itself, if you're too Tanoli and does not speak Pashto, spoken another language with this thing about us is not about nothing And for your information Tanolis Swat came to Afghanistan after the invasions of Sabuktagin Sultan.They came to form a new state. The head of the Swat state at that time was Anwar Khan Tanoli, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.154.226.89 (talk) 15:36, 23 September 2008 (UTC)


 * The thing is, you have provided no reliable sources for the claims that Tanoli were Pashtun. You have to realize that Tanoli progressively adopted Pashtun language, and that the tribes may have mixed and inter-married, but that happened later. You just think that you are Pashtun because you see many modern Tanoli that speak Pashtun, but Tanoli didn't speak Pashtun originally. You are just trying to insert your personal opinion which is not based on reliable sources, and you are also mercilessly spamming pages with your version which has no sources. At this point, you still have no sources, and you have vandalized a great number of pages. How exactly did you expect me to respond to your actions? Stop copy/pasting your personal theories everywhere, and start getting some reliable sources that explain Tanoli's origin in a neutral way. And don't tell no to edit an article just because I don't speak the language of the subject, this is the wikipedia on english language, so you only need to be able to read an write english to edit articles here. And it's not about Tanoli, it's about having articles sourced on reliable sources, and not on what some person on the internet thinks that the history, ok? --Enric Naval (talk) 15:47, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

"I saw a comment on Slashdot about this matter"
On my talk page, you said "I saw a comment on Slashdot about this matter". Do you still have the link? I'd love to see it! Misterdiscreet (talk) 16:52, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello for the first time
We should specifying if the user is a country or territory or a sports club. I will fix it.Mike Babic (talk) 08:54, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Replied on user's talk page --Enric Naval (talk) 12:41, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Anonymous
G'day, I replied here. Giggy (talk) 07:08, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Names
Of course, I am just tired of people keeping double standards. Kapnisma ? 17:05, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Aegean Macedonia
Hi Enric. You don't need but simply google the term and see the kind of sites they refer to it. All of them Slavic Macedonian and most of them ultra-nationalist. What I might agree to though, is that in the native Slavic Macedonian language, it is not ALWAYS used in an irredentist context, because they are taught that Macedonia is divided in these three regions in their schools. Some people there genuinely believe that these are the terms used in international academia. However, these terms have never gained acceptance outside a Slavic context. In the West the term is non-existent. In Greece it is offensive. In Bulgaria it was used during the Macedonian conflicts of the beginning of the century and is not used anymore (since it was also deemed offensive). So when I see people pushing for these terms inclusion, I naturally am cautious.--   Avg     19:34, 4 October 2008 (UTC)


 * It's true that it's used a lot by those, but it's also used by other neutral sources like human rights associations and that it's a natural result of being near to Aegean sea, just like islands on that sea are called Aegean islands. You ought to consider that most people will just consider it a name of a region, just like in the Britannica, where it's just a handy name. --Enric Naval (talk) 21:22, 4 October 2008 (UTC)


 * There are some issues that you might find interesting having a look. There is some very real history regarding the Slavic need for access to the south seas. Bulgarians for example wanted "Aegean" Macedonia to be their passage to the Aegean Sea and this is an undeniable fact. In a Slavic context, only Macedonia has any connection to the Aegean. In a Greek context, "Aegean" is completely unlinked to Macedonia, since it refers to the Aegean islands. I'm sorry to say that "handy" hardly qualifies in terms of encyclopedicity, because there are "handy" terms from Greeks referring to Republic of Macedonia and ethnic Macedonians ("Skopje" and "Skopjans"), but I don't see them anywhere in any article, without explicitly mentioning that they are offensive. And at the same time, the offensive term "Aegean Macedonia" is on the dab article and also the even more offensive term Aegean Macedonians has its own article. So to sum up: Aegean Macedonia is used only in a Slavic context (and mainly by irredentists). Even the main article on Aegean Macedonia specifically mentions all these things (and I haven't had anything to do with it).--   Avg     22:38, 4 October 2008 (UTC)


 * It's just a geographical term. It doesn't have a pejorative term "Aegeans" to go with it. There's a difference between a geographical term that some find offensive and a term that was coined with the intention of being offensive. --Enric Naval (talk) 13:31, 5 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Enric I'm afraid you're missing some major elements of this story. You seem to have adopted the claim that the term "Skopje" has been created from scratch in order to be offensive, but this is simply not the case. It has been universally used in Greece for decades because names containing the word Macedonia are reserved only for Greek Macedonia. It's the Slavic Macedonians who find it offensive. In fact, Slavic Macedonians in their speech never refer to Greek Macedonians as such, they always refer to them as only Greeks, because they have reserved anything Macedonian for them. So see "Aegean Macedonia" in this context. Since it contains the word "Macedonia", automatically creates a link between Slavic Macedonians and the area, as something 100% Greek would never contain the word Macedonia in a Slavic Macedonian context. Slavic Macedonians may not have created the term in order to be offensive, but the Greeks find it offensive because it implies a Slavic Macedonian presence. And in any case "Skopje" is "handy", however I agree it is not appropriate in an non-Greek context. In the same manner, "Aegean Macedonia" might be handy, however it is not appropriate in a non-Slavic Macedonian context. Anyway, following the "everything should be included" principle, I accept it to be mentioned, however it should also be mentioned that is not a scholarly term and it is only used by Slav-Macedonians.--   Avg     13:48, 5 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Avg, we are back again at the same place. Greeks refuse the existance of anything called Macedonia outside of Greece, so they use "skopjan", which is used on a derogative way, and they refuse to use "Aegean Macedonia" because then that implies the existance of Virdian and Parn macedonias (however they are spelled). I repeat, Aegean Madedonia is a geographical term that happens to be used by irredentists, but it's also accepted as a valid geographical name. --Enric Naval (talk) 15:18, 5 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't want to flood your talkpage and it is certainly not my intention to lecture you on the nuances of international politics, however I definitely would be more cautious when I use the word "accepts". This name is not accepted, nor mentioned in any treaty whatsoever. Anyway, Wikipedia is mainly interested on another issue, who uses it (the description and not prescription thing). This is why it has to be mentioned that only one side is using it. Third parties use "Greek Macedonia". --   Avg     15:58, 5 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I already pointed you at one neutral source using it, a human rights association, to which I add this paper, google scholar shows both irredentist sources and neutral sources, and other editors have pointed you at the Britannica article using the term. So third parties don't use only greek macedonia.


 * Btw, you are mixing your arguments, I didn't mention any treaty, that must be from some discussion with BF, and anyways a geographical term does not need to be mentioned on any treaty to be accepted or used :) --Enric Naval (talk) 21:30, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

WP:AIV
Simple vandalism can be reported there. Bearian (talk) 22:35, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * P.S. I hardblocked IP 119.30.69.117 for one month. Bearian (talk) 22:43, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you :) There are some many noticeboards to choose from.... --Enric Naval (talk) 22:44, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Pashtun people
Do not remove images from the infobox of Pashtun people article. You are reverting the article to the racist banned User:Beh-nam's version. , User:PashtoonGhafar is confirm sockpuppet of Beh-nam, he is young ethnic Tajik from Toronto, Canada, and he wants to make fun of Pashtuns by putting stupid pics in the infobox, he wants to show the world that Pashtuns are taliban and terrorist, he is using this IPs 67.68.52.82. He is bashing Pashtun people and you're helping him succeed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.30.70.82 (talk) 03:07, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Please, NisarKand, stop disrupting wikipedia. --Enric Naval (talk) 11:17, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Specialforces in Kosovo
Hi, can you please add this info, to the article about the Kosovo war. Apparently there was a question regarding my sources. Please add in appropriate place:

" HJK ( Special forces of Norway ) was the first specialforces to go into Pristina. The HJK job was to clean the way between the striding parties and to make local deals to implement the peace deal between the Serbians and the Kosovo Albanians. This was done under very difficult sircumstanses. The HJK was chosen to do the job, ahead of American and French special forces. The recomandation to use Norwegian HJK, came from the British SAS. "

Here is a source stating that US and Norwegian elite forces were the first in theater. The specific info mentioned before is from a Norwegian book on the subject. Article: http://www.janes.com/defence/news/kosovo/jdw990420_01_n.shtml

Book: " Norges hemmelige krigere " by author Tom Bakkeli. The book is in Norwegian: ISBN: 9788248907220 : http://www.norli.no/NORLI_HTML/ibeCCtpItmDspRte.jsp?item=2965230 Mortyman (talk) 15:30, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

What are you talking about?
Do you understand the concept of authorship and how is different from ownership? Authorship is when you author something. There is nothing wrong or negative about being the author of something, (it's also a factual and not a judgment thing, you are either the author or you are not), ownership is a completely different concept. Please learn and understand the difference between these two, it's important for basic understanding of GDFL which was the topic of discussion. Hobartimus (talk) 18:32, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Not sure I would agree with Hobartimus that the authorship of something is as black and white as that - authorship is often disputed, even when the facts are known - for example some refer to directors as 'authors' of films, others would use producers or writers. Collaborative processes are a mire of authorship disputes. DavidFarmbrough (talk) 03:56, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I have a really hard time trying to guess what your problem was, you think I wanted to delete the other article or just misunderstood the discussion in edit summaries about WP:GFDL? Hobartimus (talk) 18:57, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I answer on your page right now --Enric Naval (talk) 18:59, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Responded on my talk. Hobartimus (talk) 19:51, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for editing @r$eholes for civility
I understand civility, but this did just cost me and others several hours of edit and poking around in PubMed to fix the dangerous and misleading treacherous and suicidal crap added to medical articles. The concept of civility has its limits. This vandalism was well disguised. 70.137.179.88 (talk) 23:40, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, even annoying vandals don't deserve being called certain things :) --Enric Naval (talk) 23:59, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Accreditation Association for Ambulatory Health Care
A tag has been placed on Accreditation Association for Ambulatory Health Care, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:19, 16 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Copy/pasted to User_talk:GeoffreyCP, as he is the original author of the article --Enric Naval (talk) 01:24, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

About DTFD and DTFDB
On talk pages, there are some things that really don't belong as stated by the guidelines on WP:TALK. I created these templates to mark these sections. I originally created it when I saw people placing ban templates and vandalism warnings on the talk page of User:Example. I put the templates over these section with the comment that "this is all refined stupidity and wikipedia is not a place to chat, joke, and do things for laughs." As for the technecal functions of the template, it's actually a modified OOCO (out of chronological order). DTFD goes on top and DTFDB goes on the bottom of the talk page section you'd like to discuss as to weather to delete it or not. So use it as you wish. --Ipatrol (talk) 01:31, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Missed city?
Missed city? You mean Graz? Russian Luxembourger (talk) 20:54, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * No, I meant Lyon. I had classified as a city not on the official list, but it's actually on the list --Enric Naval (talk) 21:16, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

GDS
Enric Naval, with reference to &mdash;

I suppose if GDS wishes to go fishing, I could have an associate meet him at La Guardia, and then we could head south. Unfortunately, I do not use email: too risky, too many predators at large. Tell GDS to give you his Flight-info and suggest "bonefishing" in Key West; I'm not certain if his waiver will permit entry across the Mexican border. (In December though, I may be on Wikibreak, skiing in Switzerland...) *smile* -- Hag2 (talk) 14:31, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Saint_Petersburg
Hi there,

You seemed to have some interest for Saint_Petersburg, can you come to Talk:Saint_Petersburg and give your opinion regardless of what you think about my contributions? I am looking for a completely "third party view". Thanks,

Miguel.mateo (talk) 14:57, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Louise Hopkins page
Enric, I'd like to put three images of her paintings on the Louise Hopkins page and she has given permission, via her gallery owners, Mummery and Schnelle, for me to do so. I have a permissions email from Wolfram Schnelle. Can I do a similar image license page to the one I did for Z'ev ben Shimon Halevi, over which you helped me?

Many thanks. abafied (talk) 09:19, 24 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Replied on your talk page --Enric Naval (talk) 17:24, 24 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Many thanks, Enric. I'll now reduce it to two as the third would not look good on the page. I can justify the two because each shows a completely different style - one aggressive and one lyrical. Presumably I'd have to put each justification on each's image page? Perhaps you would let me know. 19:46, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Removing comments from discussion page
Hi! I've noticed an act of removing comments by an administrator from a discussion page in talk page of the Greece article, regarding a map that had been recently removed from the article. All the time in wikipedia, I have noticed that comments do not get erased, but hidden into a beige box in case they are offensive (I've seen you doing this). So, I would like to know if this is valid.--Dimorsitanos (talk) 10:09, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Of 3 edits by that IP, 2 have been attacks on Fut Perf. And one of them is starting a votation on banning him. Yeah, in such a clear case it's ok to remove the comments by WP:RPA remove personal attacks. And, yes, unless it's a very harsh personal attack, you are right that it's better to collapse the content and make an explanation of why the comments are inappropiate (like explaning that you don't "vote" on talk pages to ban editors, and explaining where he should complain about an editor's behaviour). It gives better results on the long run.


 * Btw, if you see someone summarily removing edits from an IP, ask him first before reverting him, he could be reverting a banned user. --Enric Naval (talk) 17:22, 24 October 2008 (UTC)


 * ok, I don't revert talk pages.--Dimorsitanos (talk) 19:10, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Apology
Enric, I owe you an apology. I was not prepared for the sweeping "in & on" changes, and I should have paid more attention. Nevertheless, the two characters who appeared suddenly from nowhere annoyed me greatly because of their zeal, especially the one who took it upon himself to revert. The subject of "in & on" is a grammatical nicety that, I suppose, ought to have been addressed on an individual basis. Anyway, please accept my apology for bringing this nonsense into the foreground, and ignore me completely when I make off-handed remarks. Hag2 (talk) 22:24, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
 * No worries. From my experience on the spanish wikipedia, if you do as much as change an accent citing a certain gramatical rule that you learnt on school, you can expect an admin to suddenly appear, correct you mercilessly, and indoctrinate you on how the Royal Academy of the Spanish Language changed that gramatical rule just last year. I swear that they can smell those edits :) --Enric Naval (talk) 22:33, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Re:long Polish comment
It is a public domain text about the corresponding geographical entity from Zygmunt Gloger. I like to keep it there until somebody finally translates the content into the article. We have space, and if we remove it, fewer people will consider doing this.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 17:24, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Good point about wikisource. Wikisource pl has a page for Gloger; the texts should be moved to - so far red-linked - entry "Geografia historyczna ziem dawnej Polski". --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 20:03, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

FYRoM POV pushers doing reverts on "Greek Position"
Hi Enric. I had a great experience with you the first time so I thought I'd come back to you again for a little help.

A FYRoM national and Futper (whom I consider an admin with an anti-Greek agenda despite his occasional reverts against FYRoM nationals that engage in obvious defacement).... have twice reverted one of my edits (and that of another Greek contributor that agreed with me) on the Macedonian Naming dispute article. I opened a section on the matter on the article talk page yesterday (the Ottoman census data and official US government position of the non-existence of a Macedonian ethnic group in 1944 and viewing such as "demagoguery" against Greece)... to which neither replied yet still found time to resort to revert warring on the issue.

The small edit in question includes TWO references (both verifiable)... in a section called the Greek position (i.e. a section explicitly dedicated to Greek POV)... is supported by two Greek WP contributers (and my guess the vast majority if they knew about the current debate)... and yet now FYRoM supporters are representing the "Greek position"?

IMO they should either be arguing on the talk page why Greek contributers (with many edits under their belt on this issue) aren't better qualified to provide details on the Greek POV... or they shouldn't be making the reverts(FYRoM nationals are more likely to offer the "Greek position?). I realize FP is an admin but Wikipedia's admin code of conduct explicitly states admins don't own articles any more than typical authentic contributers.

I am considering a future ANI/RFC on FP's behavior (based on his editing practices I see him in a COI) but of course me being a new contributer, being Greek background (which puts me in my own potential COI), and he being an admin... I need to build up my case carefully first (to hopefully avoid being railroaded by pre-existing WP admin politics and friendships). (btw - I have talked frankly about this potential FP COI issue with several admins... who appear to be on the fence for now...which I find promising given the polarity of our influence on WP)

Until such time though, I'd appreciate it if you gave both the FYRoM national (Cukiger) and FP a suggestion/warning to stop making reverts on my edit (unless they plan to argue the point on the talk page). I believe the points are extremely relevant to the "Greek position", have been mentioned many times by Greek media and politicians, and are easily verifiable with a quick Google search. Further details on the points in question can be found  here but if you need further convincing or details first please feel free to contact me on my talk page. --Crossthets (talk) 02:35, 28 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, I think that Hxseek is making valid points about the census. Concretely about the census classifying people on religion and not ethnicity, and about not existing any macedonian church. Dunno about what Hxseek says about the americans, I would need to know the historical circumstances.


 * I made a comment on the talk page, my main point of contention is whether the greek government has used those arguments or not. That section should not become a pile-up of all arguments that any greek editor feels that support the greek view, it should have only the most notable arguments used by the official greek position, like statements by the greek Ministry of Foreign Affairs, very notable papers or books by scholars, etc.


 * By the way, you'll need to open a WP:RFC/USER, also called RFC/U, not a normal RFC. You'll need to get at least other editor to agree to the RFC and sign it. Notice that there is already a RFC/U at Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Future_Perfect_at_Sunrise, altough it's a RFC about removals of images, and it has nothing to do with greek topics. When you go to this section to create a new RFC you will have to use as name "Future Perfect at Sunrise 2", with a "2" at the end (to avoid name conflicts with the already existing RFC) --Enric Naval (talk) 05:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Probably not a good idea to put such ideas in his head. You ought to remind him also that RfCs need to be certified not just by any random editor but by people who actually have tried to solve a dispute previously. Since there is no legitimate dispute, let alone any attempt at resolution, such an RfC would be nothing but harassment and would easily get him blocked. I've truly had enough of the never-ending disruption from this person, and polite gentle hints are lost on him. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:58, 28 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Heh, ok. I hadn't thought that he could get in trouble by filling an RFC/U without atemptting first other paths. --Enric Naval (talk) 09:13, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

This is FP's version of "politeness" Enric (and an example of how dishonestly he is reporting to you). One of his first comments to me (as a newb).


 * Every sane person with normal adult intelligence can see that your allegations against B.F. are nonsensical. If you can't see that yourself, it's probably no use me trying to explain it to you. I will simply block you if you continue with this topic, for being either a malicious troll or too clueless for rational discussion

Or how about when he disagrees with several Greek contributers on a questionable map he made and refers to them as a "gang of clowns"? Does that seem like proper language by an admin with a newb Enric? I'd also like to add... "neutral" Futper ignored a FYRoM national that made 3 temporarily disputed edits within a 2 hour period on the exact same issue (still waiting for sources other than FYRoM government to confirm Italy)... and a boatload of other edits by same user within 24 hour period on the same article by same user (Cukiger)


 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Macedonia_naming_dispute&diff=248112133&oldid=248108921


 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Macedonia_naming_dispute&diff=248106748&oldid=248102843


 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Macedonia_naming_dispute&diff=248094699&oldid=248085303

(Please check history of article to confirm,

It was also suggested by another admin (Todd1) that because he has a history with me he should leave the threats of blocks to other admins.... which he's now ignored by leaving this gem on my talk page.


 * You have violated the three-revert rule on Macedonia naming dispute. Any administrator may now choose to block your account. In the future, please make an effort to discuss your changes further, instead of edit warring. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:29, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Excuse me FP. But why are you threatened me again.. especially after you've been gentlemanly suggested by another admin not to do so....when my edits in question (over the 24 hour period) were not on the same issue ( only made 2 edits on same issue)... and that my total number of edits that did exceed 3 were reverts (which 3RR does mention),,, were to revert those of a FYRoM national Cukiger (that's done far more than 3 in that period)... THAT YOU DID NOT WARN??? (I might add... none of these points did FP see fit to disclose to you here Enric)

I will work on digging up specific comments by Greek politicians to address your concerns Enric. (btw - Hxseek appears to be a FYRoM national, the League of Nations during the period also did not record the existence of a Macedonian ethnic group either, the American government called talk of a macedonian ethnic group demagoguery against Greece (by communists)... and neither did FP nor Cukiger see fit to argue their own POV for reverting on the article talkpage....whereas I did)

All I ask is you take my concerns of admin bias by FP very seriously despite that I'm a relatively new user. I've seen a tendency by some admins to instinctively cover each others backs rather than accept WP rules that admins as contributors have no special rights nor insights into the issues at hand...and can indeed have biases just like other human being. (I am not implying this of you btw.) I realize being of Greek background I am in a potential conflict of interest here... but I also think its common sense that the "Greek Postion" should not be dictated by contributors that constantly show a bias for the FRYoM perspective. (the vast majority of which appear to be FYRoM nationals)

Thanks for at least listening to my concerns without being patronizing or threatening me Enric I'm not sure if I'm going to go with RFC or ANI because different admins seem to interpret Wikipedia rules on the issue differently. For now I'm just going to keep logging FP incidents in order to continue bringing substance to me beef (that FP given his pro-FRYoM positions on the issues is in a COI). If I sound at all angry at FP... I am. From day one with my long history of experiences with him I feel he's exhibited bias towards both me and other Greek contributors that challenge him on the validity of own edits).

If other admins want to block or ban me without taking my concerns seriously before that time.. I can't do much about it but I would rather have that occur than back down on my principles. While some Greek contributors are more diplomatic on the issue I'd personally call his behavior outright bigotry. I will not see my ethnic group erased from history by decades of communist propaganda and people that have some sort of bone to pick with Greeks. --Crossthets (talk) 15:50, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Here are more example of FP "balanced editing" when it has anything to do with Greek positions. (he constantly undermines Greek ethnicity on any page he can get his hands on)

Recent diffs showing Futper undermining Greece ethnicity
 * On the article page of Ancient Macedonians Futper "fixed" the broken phrase...


 * The Ancient Macedonians (Greek: ?a?ed??e?, Makedónes) were an ancient Greek, according to most researchers,

into
 * the Ancient Macedonians (Greek: ?a?ed??e?, Makedónes) were an ancient tribe"(Notice how the "Greek" went missing)


 * On the talk page of Ancient Macedonians Futper questioned the ethnicity of ancient Macedonians as Greeks.


 * The political acts of Alexander I tell us something about the political orientation of that king, but hardly about the ethnic background of his subjects


 * He completely removed this rather "insignificant" point from the Macedonian naming dispute article.


 * On May 1st 2007 120 members of the US House of Representatives cosponsored a bill[1] criticizing FYROM for "hostile activities or propaganda" against Greece and urged "FYROM should abstain from any form of `propaganda' against Greece's historical or cultural heritage" and "FYROM to work with Greece [...] to achieve longstanding United States and United Nations policy goals by reaching a mutually-acceptable official name for FYROM.


 * From the Greco-Turkish relations article he removing derived from Greek


 * mainly in the Aegean region around Izmir derived from Greek Smyrna) and in the Pontic region on the Black Sea coast


 * On the talk page of Greek language | he added


 * ''It is also (nominally alongside Turkish),

into


 * ''Greek is the official language of Greece where it is spoken by about 99.5% of the population. It is also (nominally alongside Turkish);;


 * On the Ancient Macedonians article page he added...


 * Avoid Wikipedia:lead fixation. There's no need to jam either "Greek" or "according to most researchers" into the lead sentence


 * On the Greek and Turkish named places article Futper supported the inclusion of Turkish names on first line of articles of Greek territories.


 * I've outed myself repeatedly as a rather strong "inclusionist" on the matter of foreign placenames, so I'm going to present a sketch of a maximum inclusionist solution, as a reference for further discussion, knowing that probably not all of this is going to find consensus.


 * On the United Macedonia article (an irredentist movement in FYROM) Futper removed a verifiable edit on election numbers (that already existed in other parts of Wikipedia) which points to the fact some FYROM nationalists provide vastly inflated numbers of their minority in Greece (i.e. they lie). On removing the factual edit he suggested in the subject header


 * rv, POV-pushing


 * On the Minorities in Greece page Futper removed Slavomacedonians (an unofficial term previously accepted by FYROM nationalists in Greece for decades since there were Greek Macedonians in Greek Macedonia also)


 * whole section out. It's just duplicating the section above anyway. And no, we do not use "Slavomacedonian". No extra POV naming rules for Greek territory.)


 * Futper changed a redirect] for "ethnic Macedonia diaspora" to "Macedonian diaspora' (implicitly taking the position FYROM nationalists should be called "Macedonians" and obfuscating there are other kinds of Macedonian Diasporas


 * (moved Ethnic Macedonian diaspora to Macedonian diaspora over redirect: in normal English usage this title is unambiguous; any remaining marginal dab needs are taken care of by the dab notice.)

... etc... etc... (still building the list)

Ask yourself Enric where are all his Wikipedia article contributions arguing against FYRoM nationalist claims of ancient ethnicity? (which you know first hand are never ending.. why I came specifically to you in this instance) Where are his edits trying to undermine the existence of zillions of other ethnic groups in the world? Why are the vast majority of his Wikipedia contributions seemly solely related to undermining Greeks?

Perhaps in the end WP admins will ignore the mounting evidence, cave into internal politics, and block me rather than the person that seems to demonstrate hatred against Greece. I stand firmly by my words though. Despite the occasional blocking of FYRoM nationals that make obvious defacement (part of his job as admin)....FPs personal WP contributions seem to indicate he has an agenda against Greece. Crossthets (talk)


 * Is there any particular reason why you didn't link to the thread where Future Perfect made the statement above, the one in bold? Could it be that you provoked his clear words by pretending to be stark raving mad? For example, you know, by pretending to be offended by a link from a user page to a map that was printed by one of the most conscientious international newspapers (Le Monde Diplomatique – "first created for a diplomatic audience")? Offended by a map that merely demonstrates the problem of competing regional claims in the Balkans by nationalists, and clearly says so? Offended because you interpreted linking to the map as condoning one of the claims, while completely ignoring the presence of the others?
 * Let's hope it isn't so. Otherwise I wouldn't see why any serious Wikipedia editor should waste his time with you. --Hans Adler (talk) 19:21, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Provoke uncivil language Hans? That must be some new Wikipedia admin rule I am not familiar with. How is it Enric does not appear to have this problem? How about Todd1? How about all the other admins I've dealt with? Why is it I ONLY say this repeatedly about a single admin? (and its not like I'm the first to suggest it given his existing rfc)

Furthermore...


 * you don't appear to be remotely familiar with the issues at hand
 * nor exactly familiar why Greek contribuers are so sensitive to maps when it involves a FYRoM national.
 * nor do you appear to know much about the diff history on the FYRoM national that map was found on
 * nor appear to have considered the ethnical considerations of giving FP his requested sweeping descretionary powers to unfairly hobble Greek, Albanian and Bulgarian contributers...on articles FP is a major contributer too.
 * nor consider actually reviewing FP's contributions with regards to Greek issues to determine if he does show a lopsided pattern of contributions that focus on undermining Greek ethnicity,
 * nor pause to consider why every single block I've had involves FP involvement in some way
 * nor think about why the US congress introduced this bill last year condemning FYRoM government for hosility and propaganda against Greeks

But hey...why bother checking anything at all? It's not your problem since you aren't Greek nor do you feel you are the target of discrimination, not a victim to a COI. It's much much easier to get angry and lecture someone on the basis of your superficial review of a single incident. I mean I'm clearly the bad guy here based on your obviously thorough review of the evidence. Nope... no stereotypes and prejudgments at work here.

Considering all the above... I have another narrative for you here Hans. Given your hostile and patronizing tone to me (especially considering I've never talked to you before yet here you are) and that it is doubtful you have gone through the enourmous number of diffs in such a short span of time.... I think you've come to Enric's page solely looking for a fight with me... rather than prioritizing protecting WP articles by approaching this issue in a truly impartial fashion. --Crossthets (talk) 23:14, 29 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Crossthets, I'll just say that 3RR warnings given by admins are not considered "threats", so presenting it as a proof of a threat on a RFC would damage your case --Enric Naval (talk) 14:51, 29 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok. Enric. I accept your argument that WP culture has its own views on what constitutes proper use of certain words. I'll try to bite my tongue when using the word. --Crossthets (talk) 23:14, 29 October 2008 (UTC)