User talk:Maksdo

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question and then place  before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! &mdash; Scientizzle 15:08, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Pounds per square inch
You asked for it to be deleted as a "cut and paste move that lost the prior history," but that does not seem to really be the case--it was moved correctly and the earlier history is on the page for the redirect from the earlier title: Pound-force per square inch. DGG (talk) 18:03, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I only asked to merge these two to reinstate integrity of the history. Here is what happened:
 * Pound-force per square inch was the original article + history started Jul 30 2001
 * Pounds per square inch was a redirect page created Nov 16 2006
 * On May 25 2007 Rracecarr cut-and-paste Pound-force per square inch content into Pounds per square inch with comment move page from pounds-force per square inch, change some inappropriate wording.
 * If done properly, earlier history was supposed to be transfered in full into the article with the new name. AFAIK when article needs to be moved and new name already exists (e.g. as a redirect), article with new name has to be temporarily deleted. Otherwise, history gets split between article with the old name and article with the new name - which is the case here. We still have one article but its history from Jul 30 2001 through May 25 2007 is missing (i.e. it's on redirect page) which is unacceptable. I hope you are willing to take another look at it. maksdo 20:28, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * According to WP:MOVE what I did it meets the GFDL requirements. There seems to be substantial history now on both pages, so it gets complicated; I think the place to ask for an expert is at WP:RM or its talk page.DGG (talk) 22:42, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Move request for Gomel
I have closed the discussion on the move request for Gomel→Homiel. There has been no discussion on the subject since the request was posted ten days ago, hence there is no consensus to rename the page. I would suggest that you raise the issue with the Eastern Europe Wikiproject and see if there would be support for the renaming of articles dealing with Belarus. &#9679;DanMS • Talk 20:47, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Please remain calm when warning vandals
Hello. I noticed your warning at User talk:166.67.49.202 - note that we don't usually indefinitely block anonymous users, so telling them otherwise is not correct. Please just try to remain calm when dealing with vandalism. Thanks. --- RockMFR 21:33, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I am calm. You have answered to your own comment: "we don't usually" means that "sometimes we do". I just wanted to mention all possible consequences, including extreme ones. maksdo 21:36, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Whoa, Maksdo, calm down! Yeesh! Minaker 10:53, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Just kidding. By the way, good call on FIXING the inappropriate link in the immigration article rather than just deleting it like I did. Next time, I'll know better. Minaker 10:53, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Gomel
Are you serious with that post? So, because I kept the consistency of the article, I am now some sort of a "knee-jerk" editor that is obsessed with consistensy. Oh I'm so baaad, aren't I? Well thank you for reminding me that you are nationalist name crusader and now I won't hesitate to scrutinise every edit that you make from now on (not to mention, go back and fix any innacuracies you have previously made just to prove a point. Nevertheless, you have no authority to tell me not to edit the article, nor say that the article wiill be rewritten to suit your preferences because it won't, not with the consensus keeping it from being moved. Sorry, to burst your bubble, but I will edit the article henceforth revert any more spelling inconsistencies that you try to riddle the page with again. Reginmund 01:11, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


 * No, I understood your point. And now you are still making delirious claims.
 * No, I did not take offence to your post. I just thought that it was utterly inane,
 * Please do not claim that the editors in favour of keeping the page are ignorant philistines just because you don't like how they casted their vote. That is very immature of you.
 * Please do not predetermine what will happen in the future, just because you do not like the result of a vote. You do not have the Divine Right to do so, nor claim that it is currently not written in proper English. "Gomel" is a perfectly legitimate transliteration of the toponym into English
 * Please refrain from being condescending by assuming that I don't understand the subject that I am editing. This just goes to show that you writing this article is a red flag to Wikipedia due to the fact that you will crusade the article with your nationalist agenda as you are doing to my talk page. Henceforth, you are a far cry from being the person understanding the subject that you are editing which makes you a hypocrite.
 * Yes I am consistent. You apparently left out the fact that I mentioned there are many other variants, however, the lead sentence should not be cluttered with them. This just goes to show that you are completely inconsistent with editing this or any article and that you attempting to censor it to suit your POV will just harm the integrity of Wikipedia.
 * You appear to be dangling on to this idea that you have the Divine Right, that I am "editing for the sake of editing". Well, actually I am "editing for the sake of preventing stubborn Wikipedians from trying to prove a point such as yourself". Ironically, it is you who is hurting Wikipedia.
 * You may call the city Shangri-La if you desire, however that is no excuse to riddle the page with inaccuracies just to prove a point. Unless there is an ulterior motive to your action besides the fact that you are a nationalist crusader, I would like to hear it.
 * Now what you are saying is the fact that I am preventing your nationalist crusading from leaving a mark on Wikipedia makes me a bureaucratic label-crusader that has nothing better to do than undo you supposed "good-faithed" edits to rid the page of its evil consistensies and oh-so sinful consensus. In other words, you want me to stop reverting the bad-faithed edits you have been trying to make just because you oppose consensus and think that your opinion is better than everyone else's. The next time you try to riddle my talk page with nonsense, try not to make up words such as "clickomania". If you don't know how to do something so simple like edit a Wikipedia article correctly, then you are a far cry from becoming a lexicographer so don't bother to try.
 * Now the grand finale! Of course a nationalist crusader like you wouldn't dare to end his/her crackpot filibuster without a personal attack! Well, I'm sorry to burst your bubble but actively participating in naming discussions does not make an inclination that Wikipedia is my notebook. However, rampaging Wikipedia to illustrate a point makes you out to me nothing more than a common troll. Reginmund 22:29, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Sooooo, why wouldn't I expect that after your point being completely shambled by embarrasing yourself, you have digressed to your favoured personal attacks again! Well, talking to you is like talking to a dead ferret with a large dagger through its spleen. Now you can imagine how I feel. I am sorry but you sound like an obsessive, hypocritical, sentimental, nationalist, stubborn, delirious, angry, fussy, immature, pretentious, disturbed, sensitive, taking everything too seriously, upset middle-aged stalker flaming you mid-life crisis on my talk page. Relax, take some Prozac, shoot up some heroin, do something but just immobilise your nerves for a moment.


 * A lot of other editors have picked up on this line as well, you are obsessing on these issues on which you are obviously incorrect too much and you are going to blow another fuse out of your hair plugs. Your edits are superfluous and inane, you make rules up to claim that I am not allowed to edit Wikipedia because your hair plugs tell you to do so. You start WikiStalking me, a place where you do not belong. Well it still would have been all right if your stalking was reasonable to point out a mistake. So far, you have failed miserably. Judging by your talk page and having witnessed your nationalist crusading first hand, I have to agree with other editors: no, all of the time you completely and utterly have no idea what you are doing or know anything about the material you are editing whatsoever. Your recent crackpot filibuster serves as the ultimate example for your obsession and stupidity within your creed to edit this encyclopaedia with your nationalist POV and Divine Right ideals.


 * As a result, you are now crusading my talk page for reasons that you again cannot fully understand: you are the one who is making an idiot of yourself in the end. I wish we could call a psychotherapist. You seem to be digressing from your opium-induced point. If you want to write a concise and serious post, turn off the television and focus.


 * I am almost finished. Friendly advice: free yourself from denial and admit that you are wrong and... get a life... or at least something left of it, the alcohol poisoning will kick in soon enough. Or better off, get yourself some rough trade. Take a walk into a sanatorium, buy another prescription of Paxil, the world doesn't revolve around you and your cruft. Don't be so hypocritical. Sanity and diligence are always a plus. End of this discussion (unless you haven't matured yet). Reginmund 03:06, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Well! I guess we can move onto the subject matter now. It makes sense to provide an IPA simply because many city toponyms, despite some being generic, have an altered pronunciation from their original transliteration. I, myself have had confusion over whether it is pronounced /ˈɡɔmʌl/ or /ˈɡoʊmʌl/. Secondly, both my citation and IPA are acceptable and correct. Please explain to me how the web site I had given is not legitimate. My IPA is neither "like" homemade, an assuption I have no idea where you got. Gomel is specifically pronounced with the mel as mʌl, the pronunctiation being contracted slightly. But that is something we have to deal with concerning many words in the English language. Hence why the pronunciation of ɡɔmʌl is accurate to the toponym Gomel. Reginmund 15:23, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Template:SkyTeam
Regarding the email you have sent me, please see WP:NFC, specifically criterion 9. Image:SkyTeam banner.png is a non-free image, and that means it can only be directly used in articles. That means they cannot be included in user pages, talk pages, templates, etc. For future reference, please contact the user directly on their talk page, not by sending an email unless if you really have to. Thanks,  O2  (息 • 吹) 23:37, 01 November 2007 (GMT)
 * I appreciate your comment and agree with you. I was not aware of limitations imposed by Non-free_content_criteria_exemptions on templates. Image use and copyright tags is the subject still somewhat confusing to me. Will restate all pages affected. Maksdo 21:24, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

SkyTeam Template
Please do not touch the Template:SkyTeam. While you may think it's proper English to make that change, this template has been the way it is for sometime now and all revert edits made against your are going to stay that way. The only way your edits will be implemented is if we reach a consensus.--Golich17 16:50, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure. What seems to be the problem? Do you want to discuss it here on my talk page or on:Template talk:SkyTeam? I understand you are editing as User:68.41.99.60 (Talk | contribs) and User:Golich17 (Talk | contribs). Maksdo 17:25, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * My mistake for not logging in always. Sorry for that.--Golich17 01:07, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * My basic point is the way it has been seems to be working. I don't think it is right to put, Airlines of SkyTeam.  It only seems right to add the "the" part of speech.--Golich17 23:58, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I understand. But the very minute they emphasized member hierarchy (full, associate, former, future, future associate), one-dimensional navbox wasn't up to a job anymore. I really believe by adding very simple groups we can enhance the navbox and make it easy to digest the structure and member row of SkyTeam. I am still vary of injecting "the". What would you say of "Members of SkyTeam"? Flows nicely. Maksdo 08:33, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't really care whether you include or omit the "the" operator, but I ask you to not change my edits as to wikilinking the phrase to the page rather than just the word. This way, the user viewing the navbox can click on the whole phrase and it will link them to the right page. You have no justification as to why not to do it the way it has been done for a couple of years now. Golich17 (talk) 21:14, 16 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually, WP:MOS-L indicates the pipes should be used minimally, only if required. Linking the complete phrase indicates a link to a list of SkyTeam members.  The titles really should only link SkyTeam and Star Alliance. Torc2 (talk) 10:49, 26 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree with you but I didn't push it last time. Maybe we should give it another try. It should be Members of Oneworld. Yes, Members of Oneworld fails the WP:MOS-L as its not what it looks like. Frankly, I haven't found a similar navbox title with a solid link. Maksdo (talk) 16:28, 26 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, that one too for sure. There's probably a specific Wiki policy or guideline saying "that's the way it's always been" isn't a good enough excuse, but even if not, Golich17 seems to be treading on WP:OWN with these. Good luck! Torc2 (talk) 21:03, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Your request
Here it is. Regards. --Tone 15:52, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

WP:EL and Article to United States Permanent Resident Card
Hi Maksdo, I noticed that you were expressing an opinion about the removal of external resources from the mentioned article. Please have a look at my detailed case for having a limited number of other resources included in this article at the moment. I also commented on the user talk page of the user who removed the links and invited him to look at my case and my argumentation as well. Thank you. --roy&lt;sac&gt; Talk! .oOo. 12:54, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

March 2008
Hi, the recent edit you made to Will Smith has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Sceptre (talk) 02:37, 24 March 2008 (UTC)


 * "Unconstructive"? Surprise me how... This is not even a word. "Constructive" or "destructive" are. Anyway, this edit is correct. Both User:Sceptre (Talk | contribs) and User:Kww (Talk | contribs) have to chill out. This is just Will Smith, no need to babysit it...  Maksdo (talk)

Disambiguation link notification for August 12
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Blond, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Polish. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi
Hi Maksdo. Can you please read the last section in Template talk:COVID-19 pandemic data/United States medical cases by state? Chopanero77 (talk) 23:15, 4 June 2020 (UTC)