User talk:Onopearls/Archive 3

Sathya Sai Baba
Thank you, I am confident that over time this article will get to a respectable standard. I've included this article on the BLP Noticeboard.I think you understand that certain editors like myself just want to see this article get to a respectable standard and be fair to Sathya Sai Baba and the general public. Fair in the sense of portraying his life accurately without outlandish distortion. Even though we consider the "allegations" beyond impossibility, we have to accept them in the article. This is the difference between us and those inimical to Sai Baba. They believe it is an immposibility that Sai Baba is who he says he is, yet they are not willing to accept any thing that paints him in a good light in the article. That evidence alone should speak volumes. The irony for me of this experience so far is that its becoming painfully clear that Wikipedia is not reliable at all, even though its MO is content based on "reliable" sources. That won't stop me though from working to get an article that accurately reflects the life of Sai Baba. A true article in the ideal wikipedia sense would neither affirm nor deny the extraordinary life of Sathya Sai Baba, it would just report and leave it to the reader to make their conclusions.yours Sbs108 (talk) 18:36, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * After reading the comment page of Sathya Sai Baba I must compliment you on your balanced view, moderate tone and wise decisions in a very difficult situation. I am a fan of Sai Baba myself, but appreciate your efforts of making an article worthy of Wikipedia. I was sorry to see you have abandoned it. Again, my compliments, and wish you more joy on other articles on Wikipedia.--Satrughna (talk) 16:12, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Russia in recession
Hi - I undid your revert here to Russia, because the information taken out was wrong. Check here　for a reuters report:. All the best. VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 04:10, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

DRC
Hi: I can see on first blush who it might not look that way, but please take a look at the article history and the history of this IP. A user created new maps for all the nations of the world, and proceeded to change every nation's articles to remove the previous location maps and include his. After engaging in several edit wars over this, as well as abusive comments aimed at those who tried to explain consensus policy to him, he "retired". Within two days, this IP began re adding his maps to all the articles from which they had previously been removed, again without discussion.

Seems like a pretty clear case. T L Miles (talk) 14:48, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

The Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma
Hi!

As the editor who originally put together the article The Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma, I just wanted to say that I fully endorse your merger of it into the article Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma. The old article was an attempt to maintain some sort of complete and neutral coverage during a time when the CNO was being redirected out of existence. Since that is no longer the case, you have my thankful approval WRT the merge. Poindexter Propellerhead (talk) 20:14, 22 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I see that political activism on this issue isn't resolved yet, and that the redirect is back in place, eliminating reference to The Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma. That may or may not be the tribe's official name now, but it absolutely was its official name for decades, as witnessed by many court filings and other official documents (including its own constitution) the tribe made under that name. This (revisionist ownership of articles) is why I don't edit Wikipedia anymore. Poindexter Propellerhead (talk) 18:00, 5 July 2009 (UTC)


 * The fact that you have "talked with the Cherokee Nation Principal Chief Chad Smith about this issue. It is a political matter as far as the Cherokee Nation is concerned." constitutes WP:OR and isn't relevant to the discussion. Thanks,  Ono pearls  (t/c) 20:10, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

The fact that I have addressed the issue with the elected head of the Cherokee Nation, who says the official name of the tribe is "Cherokee Nation" and not "Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma", is one of the most relevant items in the discussion. After looking through the nation's website for over an hour, I could not find one reference to the tribe as "Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma." There were hundreds of references to "Cherokee Nation" though. Phil Konstantin (talk) 21:41, 24 June 2009 (UTC) Phil Konstantin

My point is the leaders of the nation go out of their way to NOT call this group of Cherokees the "Cherokee Nation Of Oklahoma." Using that title leads to other misunderstandings.

There are dozens of groups which call themselves a Cherokee Tribe of some sort of another. Phil Konstantin (talk) 00:55, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Sai Baba Wiki News Link
My rational is this. The wiki news link was created by users. It was based on one article. That means I could create a Wiki news link on many articles showing Sai Baba's good works that were written in reliable sources. Why this link, Why this article. Here is a link from the NY times. A Friend to All the World, New York Times Article Should I create a wiki news article link and then put it on the Sai Baba page.If one wikinews link should be there than we can have others as well. Out of the entire life of Sai Baba and all the good humanitarian works done, to have this one story linked is not proper. I don't mind having this link as long as we add some others.Sbs108 (talk) 04:31, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


 * If you look at the actual article that the wikinews piece is sourced from you will see that whoever wrote and edited this wikinews had a clear intention to mislead people with regards to the title to make it look as though the "allegations" were "current." The correct title of the article was. "The Indian living god, the paedophilia claims and the Duke of Edinburgh awards." The other two sources were based off this article. Can you read the sourced article and then tell me that the title isn't pushing a POV or misleading? Thanks.Sbs108 (talk) 19:27, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Canaan
Okay, I will try to get more factual information, but I live 25 miles south and I am speaking from experience. Also, on page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_Peltier twoards the bottom is USP Canaan, PA in linked red. I would like to have this link redirect to my newly created page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Penitentiary,_Canaan. Can you help me?

Can you give me more info on experiential data versus factual data?

Thanks...

Are you looking to adopt? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Getmet79 (talk • contribs) 07:22, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Getmet79 (talk • contribs) 07:29, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Can I personally take photos of this institution and insert them into the page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Getmet79 (talk • contribs) 07:33, 16 July 2009 (UTC) I have downloaded one picture to use, how do I get it uploaded?--Getmet79 (talk) 07:37, 16 July 2009 (UTC) --Getmet79 (talk) 07:42, 16 July 2009 (UTC)--Getmet79 (talk) 07:42, 16 July 2009 (UTC) Now I have http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:United_States_Penitentiary-Canaan.jpg#filehistory and would like it to be shown on my/Wiki page,,, can you help me with that?--Getmet79 (talk) 07:54, 16 July 2009 (UTC) Nevermind, found it out! Now to find captions!--Getmet79 (talk) 07:56, 16 July 2009 (UTC) It's looking good for now---I'm going to sleep for a little while, it is 4am here!--Getmet79 (talk) 07:58, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

RE:Your adoption program (Well... my adoption program)
I would love to help you with your program. The reason I started making the help pages and tasks was because my earliest adoptees didn't ask many questions and seemed to want much more input from me. It seems that the relationship between most adopters and their adoptees involves Q & A and the adopter watching and correcting their adoptees edits. This wasn't enough for me, so I have taken on more of a teacher/student with my adoptees. I started giving my early adoptees tasks and pointing them towards wikipedia's own help pages for an explanation. However, this didn't work out so well as those pages were extremely complicated, this led to me producing my own help pages.

I would first recommend that you produce your own help pages from wikipedia's ad your own knowledge. I found that I learnt new things during this process. This will give you the best foundations for improving your adoptees knowledge; and your own. You can then move on to making task and/or guiding your adoptee. I hope this helps, and feel free to use the format of my adoption program. If you have any more questions or want me to look at anything please don't hesitate to ask. Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk |Sign 13:07, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Russia and WMD
Please go and read the article on nuclear states. The largest stockpile belongs to either Russia or the U.S., by a loooong shot, so that dubious tag you keep adding is definitely not warranted. --Eightofnine (talk) 06:48, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Question: did you bother to check the page history and see why the tag was added in the first place before you decided to keep readding it? It was added because the article at the time was claiming Russia possessed the largest stockpile. That particular sentence no longer claims that, making the dubious tag completely unnecessary. Not to mention if you had actually read past the first sentence you would see that when information becomes less general and more specific, citing numbers and such, sources are provided. Your edit summary ("According to whom?") gives the impression that it is you who disputes the sentence, not the original author as the sentence is now different, which is why I directed you to the appropriate article. And yes, you are reading incorrectly, as there was nothing condescending about my tone other than what your imagination served you. --Eightofnine (talk) 01:40, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

China's Agricultural Tax
proof?

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/FC12Ad03.html

70.236.3.62 (talk) 07:25, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:55, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

script-tags
All the script-tags are awkwardly worded, as they right now automatically make a claim about the origins of terminology -- a claim I wasn't making. They should be changed to something like "it is requested that XYZ-script be added to this article". Seb az86556 (talk) 08:42, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

on the military of venezuela
I was aware that my edit of the article was not perfect but I think you canceled a lot of good information. The main question is the point on the national militia which is not part of the national guard but a separate entity with a separate command structure, hierarchy, mission, infrastructure etc. Please review another time the changes you made. Raskiy (talk) 23:57, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Welcome back
I am happy to see you back on the Sathya Sai Baba article discussions. I updated the talk page discussions with the arbitration enforcement case I had put on the 'Anti-Sai Baba' activist well known in the web some time back. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive45#Arbitration_Enforcement_request_in_the_Sathya_Sai_Baba_article.

By the way I also noticed that there was an arbitration enforcement case going on Dilip for the other article - Falun Gong. Case link - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Dilip_rajeev Thanks Radiantenergy (talk) 15:19, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Russia
I have specified a source at 2395 BCE.

http://www.novgorod.ru/read/information/history/clauses/sloven/


 * And the source is bunk. It's allegedly from 1679, dates the Earth as 7500 years old, and talks about Noah as a historical figure.VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 10:28, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Request For Comment
Hi Ono, Can you please add your comments here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Daily_Pioneer_.2F_Sandhya_Jain Here's the problem:
 * The Daily Pioneer by Sandhya Jain covering the Alaya Rahm trial was discussed for a week in WP:RS by well respected wikipedians here and was declared as reliable source. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard&diff=304058770&oldid=304057209#Question
 * It was also declared there that removing 'The Daily Pioneer' will be a BLP violation.
 * Bhimaji and others oppose this source because it mentions Robert Priddy's name. That cannot be a reason to reject a source its already been discussed in the talk page. In the new discussion there is no mention of any of the facts. The commentators seems to be openly biased and supporting Bhimaji's claims and looks like they are just waiting to get rid of this source. They are not even willing to look at the earlier Wp:RS discussion. Your comments there will be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Radiantenergy (talk) 19:27, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Commiserations and Thanks
Dear User Onopearls:

I regret that you have been subjected to the indignity of a 24 hour ban for zealously defending my 37 words of factual references about Sathya Sai Baba. Thank you very much for your support in this increasingly nightmarish process. (I have assumed that one is allowed to talk to Wikipedia prisoners in the "slammer". If this is a mistaken assumption ... Gulp!) Ombudswiki (talk) 02:00, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I would generally reply to comments on your talk page, but I'm not allowed to edit other user talk pages. I personally found it helpful when reading the opening. Considering I had no former knowledge of Sathya Sai Baba before March of this year, I feel that I can offer a subjective and neutral perspective on the article. So I was shocked that J929 would rather engage in an edit war than just further elaborate on his reasoning for removing a short phrase. And I'm sure I'm allowed at least one visitor whilst in the virtual lockup. Lol. Thanks,  Ono pearls  (t/c) 02:42, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

No one is in 'virtual lock up', blocks are preventative, not punative. They are put into effect to stop the further escalation of conflicts. 3RR blocks do not place any judgement on who is right or wrong. The community has 3 revert restrictions to prevent instability and disruption. Editors on any side of a content dispute are explicitly not allowed more than 3 reverts in 24 hours. No editor should either engage in, or allow themselves to be dragged into, a revert war. Mfield (Oi!) 03:08, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I felt that it was rather obvious that I was being facetious. I didn't feel the need to point out that I was not serious, but if that is the case, I'll elaborate out I was not being literal, I was making a failed attempt at a joke. Thanks,  Ono pearls  (t/c) 03:18, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

September 2009
You have been blocked from editing for to prevent further disruption caused by your engagement in an edit war. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below.

Discussion on the Daily Pioneer

 * Ono, in the new RS discussion here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_44#Daily_Pioneer_.2F_Sandhya_Jain has ended. Nothing has been concluded.
 * This discussion started with a wrong link and there was no proper conclusion or recommendation. It was more like argument between two parties with out arriving at any conclusion.
 * RS board is the golden standard and hence the earlier RS discussion recommendation http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard&diff=304058770&oldid=304057209#Question which was discussed for a week by independent wikipedia and arrived at proper conclusions should be given its due weightage.

Why is this source important to the Sathya Sai Baba article?
 * Earlier RS discussion had a detailed discussion about the 'Alaya Rahm trial' covered in the Daily Pioneer article unlike the new RS discussion.
 * In the 'Alaya Rahm' 2006 trial which was filed in the 'Superior Court of California' did n't find any wrong doings by Sathya Sai Baba as alleged by 'Alaya Rahm' in the earlier 2004 BBC documentary.
 * As per the 2006 'Alaya Rahm' trial - Alaya Rahm cannot file another law suit on Sathya Sai Baba in US or in India.
 * Earlier RS discussion clearly mentioned that removing the Pioneer article while leaving the BBC allegations will result in BLP violation to the article subject 'Sathya Sai Baba'.
 * Comments from Priyanath in the RS discussion: To Clarify: The BBC video as a source, by itself, clearly doesn't "get the article right". I don't think it belongs in the article. However, if the BBC video as a source remains, then the other two sources must also be allowed in order to fulfill WP:BLP.
 * The other source referred above is the 'Daily Pioneer' article covering the 'Alaya Rahm trial' whose allegations were main part of the BBC documentary. :::
 * This BLP issue should be fixed in the 'Sathya Sai Baba' article as per the earlier RS recommendation.

Thanks. Radiantenergy (talk) 00:54, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Accusation of Being SSS108
Dear Onopearls, User Crotalus is accusing me of being SSS108. I would appreciate you coming to my defense but if you do not want to that is all right. He seems very angry that he is not getting his way.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement Sbs108 (talk) 16:04, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Editor review archived
Since it has been well over 30 days since you requested to be reviewed, I've gone ahead and archived your request as part of my effort to cleanup Editor Review. You may view your review here. Thanks & happy editing. If you have any questions, please message me on my talk page. =D Netalarm   talk  00:03, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

China in Africa
Hello Onopearls, and thanks again for your costless corrections~ !! I posted a topics there : Talk:Sino-African_relations. We face difficulties because on the field of Sino-African relation, we almost only have sources on "Chinese in Africa". In this case, make an article [China in Africa] and an other [Sino-African relations] is meaningless. I'm sad to say it, but it may be need to explose 'my' article in five middle size article... -__- thus rewrite [Sino-African relation] into a shorter '4 pages overview-introduction'. Then, the articles will talk about the same subject (mainly: Chinese in Africa), but then CLEARLY at different level of precision. What do you thing ? Please answer on Talk:Sino-African_relations ;) Yug (talk)  14:42, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

France
I understand both yours and Suomispeudo's position. In fact, France has lived through so many political convulsions, that their full listing shall take a lot of space. Therefore, may I suggest that you leave the article Frane as is now and prepare another page: Listing of the various regimes in the History of France?

I wonder how many paragraphs you shall come up with.

Cordially

claude (talk) 08:43, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Can you stop changing the original name of Bolivia, when you put " Plurinational State of Bolivia that pisses me off, the original name means the same it is a Republic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dortega94 (talk • contribs) 00:46, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

I wanted to talk to you, I changed the name of the country again,when you put Plurinational State of Bolivia it doesn't make any sense because even ehen it is translated to Quechua or Aymara it doesn't me and the same definition, since the independence of 1825 it was always known as : "Republica de Bolivia" , who do you think you are to change the name of my country , people who still live there still call it "Republica de Bolivia" , me as a Bolivian citizen will keep changing the name till you give up, I am not like you that put any link that says that the new name is blah blah blah,the old article that was describing the country who knows if it is real, it can be written by anyone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dortega94 (talk • contribs) 18:52, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Genovia
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Genovia. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/Genovia. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:13, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

2020 Olympics images
Dear Onopearls, As an answer to your question, I must say that the image's creators have created these images for the public domain as logos. I must also admit I didn't really know in what section to classify these images: I am a quite recent Commons user, and these are among the first images I add to the Commons library. Please excuse me if I made an error: I had no intent of wrongdoing or violating anyone's copyright. Kartin (talk) 21:54, 30 December 2009 (UTC):52, 30 December 2010

Greetings
Hi Ono, Wishing You a Very Happy and Prosperous New Year 2010. Radiantenergy (talk) 22:04, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

China-Africa
What do you think about: Economic relations between mainland China and Africa The talk page is quiet, and there's only one other person opposed to the name switch (out of 5 votes). Just trying to put down some consensus. Ocaasi (talk) 01:21, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Does mainland sound like a loaded term, is it too "forky", suggesting Taiwan is not really a part of China? ---*Would the more precise but perhaps overspecific (and longer) Economic relations between the People's Republic of China and Africa be better?
 * There was also your comment preferring 'involvement' to 'relations'. I'm also considering 'interaction', which would leave: Economic interaction between the People's Republic of China and Africa

Vote for consensus. There's a vote for consensus at Talk:Involvement of the People's Republic of China in Africa. I'm re-proposing a name: Economic relations between the People's Republic of China and Africa. I saw you preferred 'economic involvement'; there doesn't appear to be consensus for that version. Could you support this one? Ocaasi (talk) 04:39, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ken Purdy (politician)


A tag has been placed on Ken Purdy (politician) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Steam Iron  04:22, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

wow eally —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.178.60.190 (talk) 20:32, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

jasmine mcdonald: cheeroke indian
who knows about the cheeroke indians —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.178.60.190 (talk) 20:34, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism in Venezuelan Presidential elections
I am sorry, I did not think it was vandalism; and they weren't test either. I was just rounding the election results, just like it has been done with most other elections on Wikipedia, such as the U.S. ones. Either way, if what I did was wrong, I'm sorry. 201.210.35.221 (talk) 05:15, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Nam Phan
I did NOT put any personal analysis on that edit I made. Just told the truth. Probably in the first edit, there was some personal opinion, but the second was totally neutral. Anyway, thanks for communicating it to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.36.209.18 (talk) 01:44, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Takht-e Soleymān
Reliable sources (like Iranica) don't support such claims, actually they state otherwise: "During the Arab conquest, a peace treaty with the margrave (marzbān) of Azerbaijan guaranteed religious integrity to the sanctuary and allowed the population of Šiz to dance undisturbed in their festivities (...) The place developed as a prospering Islamic town". --109.60.21.44 (talk) 17:36, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Red-eye gravy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fried potatoes (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)