User talk:Russavia/Archive 16

A favor to ask
Surely you can make this a featured article? Or at least squeeze a DYK or two out of it? :)))—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); February 23, 2010; 14:26 (UTC)
 * I can't do anything with that article, as I am still somewhat topic banned, remember. Apparently it is 11 March I can cast off the shackles and become totally free to edit whatever I want. --Russavia I'm chanting as we speak 11:45, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 * think of a wealth of coolest new article subjects ... like this one. NVO (talk) 23:20, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 February newsletter
Round one is over, and round two has begun! Congratulations to the 64 contestants who have made it through, but well done and thank you to all contestants who took part in our first round. A special well done goes to, our round one winner (1010 points), and to and , who were second and third respectively (640 points/605 points). Sasata was awarded the most points for both good articles (300 points) and featured articles (600 points), and TonyTheTiger was awarded the most for featured topics (225 points), while Hunter Kahn claimed the most for good topics (70). claimed the most featured lists (240 points) and featured pictures (35 points), claimed the most for Did you know? entries (490 points),  claimed the most for featured sounds (70 points) and  claimed the most for In the news entries (40 points). No one claimed a featured portal or valued picture.

Credits awarded after the end of round one but before round two may be claimed in round two, but remember the rule that content must have been worked on in some significant way during 2010 by you for you to claim points. The groups for round two will be placed up shortly, and the submissions' pages will be blanked. This round will continue until 28 April, when the top two users from each group, as well as 16 wildcards, will progress to round three. Please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup; thank you to all doing this last round, and particularly to those helping at WikiCup/Reviews. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, by email or on IRC. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox, iMatthew and The ed17 Delivered by JCbot (talk) at 00:52, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Government ministries of Myanmar
I have nominated government ministries of myanmar for renaming to government ministries of burma. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:40, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Ambassadors of Myanmar
I have nominated ambassadors of myanmar for renaming to ambassadors of burma. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:41, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Ambassadors of Myanmar to Russia
I have nominated ambassadors of myanmar to russia for renaming to ambassadors of burma to russia. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:41, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Ambassadors of Russia to Myanmar
I have nominated ambassadors of russia to myanmar for renaming to ambassadors of russia to burma. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:41, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 March 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 00:34, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 8 March 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 03:33, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

By the way...
I meant to say welcome back! Now, off to work you go! :)—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 15, 2010; 16:17 (UTC)
 * Thank you Comrade Commissar ;) --Russavia I'm chanting as we speak 16:26, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

LT ambassadors to Russia
Hi Russavia - Interwar ambassador, Jurgis Baltrušaitis (1920-1939); post-independence, according to this official site (it's in LT but even if one can't read the language the names & dates are clear):  Egidijus Bičkauskas (1991-1993); Romualdas Kozyrovičius (1993-1999); Zenonas Namavičius (1999-2002); the site stops at Rimantas Šidlauskas (2002-), but I see you have created his successor's article, Antanas Vinkus, thanks.

I'm unlikely to write the red-linked ones anytime soon. Namavičius does have an EN, gov't bio at if you want to take a stab at it. I don't see a similar one for Kozyrovičius. Bičkauskas's status as an ambassador is a little fuzzy, it was an interim, charge d'affaires sort of position, so you might want to think about that one. Hope this helps, Novickas (talk) 23:54, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Re: AE
I made a suggestion here. You may respond if you wish. Thank you.Biophys (talk) 13:17, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 15 March 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 22:01, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

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

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:43, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

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

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:52, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 22 March 2010
Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 19:23, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Nina Valentinovna Anisimova
Hello. Just to let you know that unfortunately your moving N.V. Anisimova's article to simply her full name has already caused confusion - someone gave it a ballet tag, confusing her with Nina Aleksandrovna Anisimova. I have therefore moved the article on N.V. Anisimova to Nina Anisimova (sportswoman), the reason being I'm afraid most English speakers (i.e. those most likely to use the English language Wikipedia) are not used to identifying Russians by their patronyms, and it's much clearer to them to have two Nina Anisimovas distinguishable by their profession. Hope that makes sense. :-) Alfietucker (talk) 23:39, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 * It is standard practice on English Wikipedia that Russian people be disambigged by their patrynomic name. It shouldn't matter that someone tagged an article incorrectly; we as editors are responsible for our edits, and the editor responsible for that should really have read what they were tagging. If you have any further comments, perhaps you wouldn't mind contacting User:Ezhiki, as he is full bottle on things like this. --Russavia I'm chanting as we speak 05:08, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Gee, thanks, way to pass the buck here :) However, Russavia is correct that disambiguation of Russian people by patronymic is our standard practice&mdash;occupational monikers should only be used when the patronymic is not known (or for people who share the exact same first and last name and the patronymic).  There are great many reasons for this, not the least being that a person only has one patronymic, but disambiguation monikers can be many, varied, and not always intuitive to guess.  Creating redirects with various monikers is by all means encouraged, but the target article's title should be as unambiguous as possible.  Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 25, 2010; 13:16 (UTC)
 * It's a fairly late hour here, and I've just seen your replies, so forgive any lack of focus in the following. I can see your point to an extent, but it seems to me common sense to make an exception here to the 'standard practice' you mention (btw, I can find no ruling on this 'standard practice' at the link Russavia provided) when - as I say - the vast majority of English-speaking users, certainly those wanting to know more about the ballet dancer, will not be familiar with patronymics, and IMHO will find the Nina Anisimova they are interested in more quickly if the heading to her article includes her profession. I notice that Russavia seems to have tacitly accepted this on the disambiguation page, not having changed the link "Nina Anisimova (dancer)". Besides, adding a descriptive parenthesis not only works well enough for articles on non-Russian individuals (such as the various men named Michael Oliver, for instance) but is also so widely used on Wikipedia that I would imagine most Wikipedia users think in those terms more readily than having to discover the correct patronymic to find their article. In other words, I'm all for making access to desired information as straight-forward as possible, rather than placing yet another hurdle in the way of users less familiar with the conventions of Russian naming. Alfietucker (talk) 22:29, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
 * But of course it works just for Russian individuals; not many other nations have a concept of a patronymic! Russavia, by the way, was not correct in citing WP:RUS as the grounds for the move he made.  That guideline only deals with the romanization issues.  And you are also right to a degree&mdash;there is no spelled-out guideline in place regarding this practice.  What is in place, however, is hundreds of articles named using this convention, which, I should mention, had been discussed quite a few times before.  There is also no requirement that for disambiguation purposes editors must search for the person's patronymic when it is not known; the practice merely calls to utilize the patronymic when it is already in the article.  We don't ask you to spend your time on trying to meet the guideline you were not even aware of; we simply ask to accept the change that's made to conform with the status quo.
 * Russian patronymics are very different from Western middle names in that they have a more official status and also enjoy a much wider use. Consider, for example, this.  We do try to create articles about people (in general) using both their first and last names.  Technically, with a disambiguation moniker, using just the last name should suffice, yet we are not doing so.  One reason for it is the fact that using the first and last names allows to resolve many potentially ambiguous situations.  Using a middle name or a patronymic allows to resolve even more such situations, but that returns me to my original observation&mdash;middle names are not used formally as often as patronymics are.  Russians, you may say, have a "disambiguation advantage" here (pardon the wikinerd talk, but it's necessary :)).  We are merely employing this advantage to our benefit.  A full name is less ambiguous than an incomplete name with an occupational disambiguator by definition&mdash;with Anisimova, for example, should readers expect the article to be located at (dancer)?  (ballet dancer)?  (choreographer)?  (ballet)?  (theater/theatre)?  (something else I haven't thought of but readers surely will; they always do)?  Either one of them could be a target, which is exactly why none of them is perfect.  Patronymics have no such problems.  You can create redirects from all those occupational disambiguators to one title that is the most unambiguous and logical of them all.  With non-Russians, no such benefit exists, so do has to be made with less perfect solutions ;)  Have I convinced you at least one bit?—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 26, 2010; 01:20 (UTC)
 * I guess the bottom line is to make sure that non-Russian readers looking for the Nina Anisimova who is the ballet dancer and choreographer are given some help in finding the right article even if they don't know her patronymic. So I guess so long as anyone who simply types in "Nina Anisimova" in the search box (ie with no patronymic) is sent to the disambiguation page rather than either of the articles - whether for the athlete or the dancer - that's fine. I'll check if that also works for those who only know the surname. Alfietucker (talk) 07:55, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Anyone searching for Nina Anisimova, the ballet dancer, will expect to see an article about her after typing her name into the search box. They will not expect to land on a disambiguation page.  However, since that is unavoidable, the important thing is that Nina Anisimova they are searching for is listed on that disambig.  As long as that is the case, it ultimately does not matter (from the reader's point of view) how the article is titled; what's important is that there is a good description allowing to instantly pinpoint the entry being searched for.  We might as well be using serial numbers to label the disambig page entries :)  With a good description attached to the entry, the actual title doesn't matter that much.  And if it doesn't matter to the reader, why not title the article in a way that matters to the editors?
 * The problem occurs when a person being searched for is not listed on a disambig page. In that case, readers would have to resort to searches, and as I illustrated above, they can try searching for any number of things&mdash;a (dancer), a (choreographer), a (ballet dancer), or (Nina Alexandrovna).  Some search terms are more likely than others, but it is not always possible to pinpoint one that's going to be the most likely.  Readers' success here, again, depends mostly on our search engine efficiency, not on the exact title of the article.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 26, 2010; 13:23 (UTC)

Arbitration/Requests/Case
I have referred your arbitration enforcement request to the Committee; please see Arbitration/Requests/Case.  Sandstein  07:06, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Hello Russavia - would you please advise whether you intend to comment on that proposed case? Steve Smith (talk) 04:25, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
 * My internet access is intermittent at the moment - during the big Perth storm last week I experienced some problems with house and car, and need to get those things fixed first, as well as regain access to internet, which in my area is still topsy-turvy. I will have full internet access again by Friday of this week, so I will give input at a time suitable to myself (this weekend more than likely). In the meantime, the Arb committee is more than welcome to peruse the evidence given at WP:AE, whilst they wait for a condensed version. Thanks. --Russavia I'm chanting as we speak 15:26, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I will be waiting for your statement. So, the storm had happened on March 22, and it is unfortunate that you was less active since then. Biophys (talk) 17:04, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I owe no-one anyone any explanations as to why my personal circumstances are what they are at the moment. It might interest you to know though that my car windscreen was damaged during the storm and it will not be replaced until Wednesday of next week. It may also interest you to know that I was borrowing a friends Dodo connection for a couple of days last week. Right now, I am sitting at the end of the street, down the road from my boyfriend's place, using an unsecure wifi connection that someone has not password protected. It may interest you to know that my b/f's house is in one of the worst hit areas of Perth, and because of the storm our internet connection hardware was fried and needs to be replaced. It may interest you to know that none of this is anyone's business, and I will respond at the ARB pages on the weekend sometime once I have had a chance to replace hardware destroyed in the storm. If people don't like what I have said, then tough titties, they will have to deal with it. --Russavia I'm chanting as we speak 18:52, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Please accept my condolences. I only said I will be waiting for your statement. Please take your time. It would be best if I do not come to your talk page any more, although any offers towards the reconciliation remain in force. Biophys (talk) 19:42, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 29 March 2010
Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 19:02, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 March newsletter
We're half way through round two, and everything is running smoothly. leads overall with 650 points this round, and heads pool B. currently leads pool C, dubbed the "Group of Death", which has a only a single contestant yet to score this round (the fewest of any group), as well five contestants over 100 points (the most). With a month still to go, as well as 16 wildcard places, everything is still to play for. Anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Although unrelated to the WikiCup, April sees a Good Article Nominations backlog elimination drive, formulated as a friendly competition with small awards, as the Cup is. Several WikiCup contestants and judges have already signed up, but regular reviewers and those who hope to do more reviewing are more than welcome to join at the drive page. If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox, iMatthew and The ed17 Delivered by JCbot (talk) 22:21, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Mykola Kulish
What are you talking about Ukrainian was not a nationality? Just because the Russian Imperial government called it otherwise it does not really mean that he did not considered himself as such. And what is prevalent? Would you please stop with the googling thing. That does not justify scientific research. I wrote it under the official transliteration rules. All of his works that I read his name was Mykola not some Nikolai. On the other thought, you are right that he probably was officially recorded as such, because Russian was the official language in the Empire. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 16:43, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * However in Soviet Union during the times of korenizatsiya his name was Mykola and the Russian language was no longer officially the only language. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 16:49, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

There are numerous encyclopedias that have his name recoded as Mykola. His nationality is Ukrainian. His citizenship might have been other then that, but his nationality is Ukrainian. He wrote most of his works in Ukrainian, he come up with Ukrainian alphabet. So I do not understand what your problem with it. Prevalent is not a scientific justification, only the truth (fact) is. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 17:01, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Dude, he was even executed, because he was recognized by Soviets as the Ukrainian nationalist. What Nikolai are you talking about? Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 17:05, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Your request
Just for information: WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request. --тнояsтеn &hArr; 07:49, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Please put a short note to the linked request if fulfilled. Thanks --тнояsтеn &hArr; 12:56, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

In groups of no less than three...
Talk about congestion in the skies... Choose google maps: 50.05152°N, 8.61659°W

NVO (talk) 23:11, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

One question
WTF?! :)—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 19, 2010; 00:59 (UTC)
 * Ahh, WTF indeed. It should have been this instead of BLP. Thanks for picking it up. --Russavia I'm chanting as we speak 15:54, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
 Ron h jones (Talk) 16:34, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * In case you haven't found it yet, you can show hidden categories by enabling the "Show hidden categories" checkbox on the Appearance tab of your preferences. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); April 5, 2010; 17:23 (UTC)
 * Yep, I have that already. The reason it wasn't showing was because I forgot to actually add the category to the template (i.e. ). Silly me. --Russavia I'm chanting as we speak 17:24, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

2010 Moscow Metro bombings
While I myself had moved some of the pix closer to the standard 180px, I would suggest that you revert your further changes. The 180 number is not a hard-and-fast rule, and where a different number makes sense (e.g., detail is small, or it fits better next to adjacent text) it is appropriate to vary it, as it was before your revert). Many thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 20:14, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Arbitration/Requests/Case/Russavia-Biophys
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Russavia-Biophys/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Russavia-Biophys/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, ~ Amory ( u •  t  •  c ) 05:15, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Would you like to talk?
Would you like to talk about the AE/Arb case or our problems and misunderstandings in general? No blame games, just the business or perhaps explaining something which is not clear. Thank you.Biophys (talk) 14:13, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Just to clarify. If the case is taken, would you agree to file a motion asking to dismiss the case because we are capable of resolving all our problems (and in fact, we do not have any serious problems at the moment). Otherwise, we are going to waste a lot of time and receive "draconian sanctions" (at the very least, I would have to respond to the comments by you and every person who commented about me at the AE). Do you really believe this is the way to go? I do not.Biophys (talk) 23:11, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Since you did not respond here, I will have to submit some evidence, and it will not be pretty. Main problem: I can not really explain the situation without talking about other users who commented in your AE request. You are still very welcome to discuss anything with me.Biophys (talk) 12:54, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

In regards to the AE report, you can see that I have not been involved in a single article due to my not editing Russian subjects for 6 months. My thread at AE was simply myself being the messenger; if it wasn't me it would have been someone else. As you very well know, edit warring and proxying for a banned editor are unacceptable actions, and it would have been reported eventually. This is not interpersonal in nature mind you. As you write at User:Biophys/AE, this is not about occasional edit warring; it is actually about long-term and sustained edit warring on numerous articles, and proxying for a long-term banned user; which you admit to, and which you know is totally unacceptable. --Russavia I'm chanting as we speak 15:51, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Thus, you think your filing was completely appropriate rather than a battleground action, and you want to continue pressing the charges. Of course I disagree with all your assertions above, but this is not the place to dispute them now.Biophys (talk) 17:02, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 April 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 03:27, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Tagging
Would you not tag redirects, please? That's the third one in two days... Thanks!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); April 7, 2010; 15:19 (UTC)
 * Grr, those pesky redirects. I should check them when they show up on my main watchlist eh. --Russavia I'm chanting as we speak 15:36, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I found this tool to be useful. It takes a bit of getting used to, but it colors the different types of links nicely, so you can tell right away which links on a page (or in your watchlist) lead to a redirect, which to a disambig, and which to a stub even.  On the down side, all pages look as if someone spilled random amounts of paint on them...  Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); April 7, 2010; 15:45 (UTC)

Your turn to give advice...
Take a look at this (and also note that it's just a basic no-frills setup, which can be tweaked in many different ways). I'm sure it can be made into something useful and/or fun, but I have mulled over it for a week or two, and no good ideas came to my mind. Any thoughts?—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); April 9, 2010; 14:42 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, so let me get this right, basically the bot selects a random WP:RUSSIA article and refreshes it everyday. How to incorporate it into the project? Well obviously somehow on the main page...but where and how...hmmm...ideas...ideas...i am not drunk enough as yet to have any brilliant ideas....can you help? --Russavia I'm chanting as we speak 15:31, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah, it's Friday, why the hell not... Are you flying in or do you expect me to? :)
 * Anyway, I wanted to point out that it can be not just any random WP:RUSSIA article, but also a random WP:RUSSIA article by class and/or importance, so you could do, for example, a "random High-importance Stub of the day" or plug a random FA into the portal, or whatever...—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); April 9, 2010; 15:43 (UTC)

Plane-crash-related DYKs
Hey Russavia. Was interested to know your thoughts on how best to put articles expanded because of the 2010 Polish Air Force Tu-154 crash into DYK. I've only done one, but I recall reading that you might have been doing some. Normally I would pick some interesting fact from their life, but it hardly seems appropriate here. Thanks, - Jarry1250 [Humorous? Discuss.] 13:05, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Jarry, unfortunately, the article has appeared at In the News, so it is ineligible for WP:DYK. --Russavia I'm chanting as we speak 13:17, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Obviously for the main article, but all the subsidiary articles? The people who died, for example? - Jarry1250 [Humorous? Discuss.] 13:31, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah ok, now I am with you. With articles that I take to DYK, I generally try to find something quirky (if possible), or if that isn't possible, a little known fact on the subject, such as Talk:Air Madagascar and Talk:Albert Sylla which appeared as a double DYK. It is still possible to refer to the crash, such as "DYK...that "Joe Blow", who was killed in the "2010 Polish Air Force crash", was blah blah blah (interesting fact)"...try to link them together if needed. If you show me an example of such an article you want to nominate at DYK, I can perhaps make a hook suggestion for you? --Russavia I'm chanting as we speak 14:22, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * That seems a good way of wording it. Slawomir Skrzypek was the one I was thinking of (perhaps not quite right for DYK yet, but getting there), but there may be more. - Jarry1250 [Humorous? Discuss.] 14:26, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Maria Kaczyńska


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

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

Thanks for deleting that 'stuff' from the article page! I have fixed her age. Enjoy your cookie! --220.101.28.25 (talk) 19:19, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you, it was delicious :) --Russavia I'm chanting as we speak 10:00, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

2010 Polish Air Force Tu-154 crash
Можно вас попросить расширить информацию о состоянии самолёта выполнявшего данный рейс? В рувики я написал этот раздел достаточно подробно и привёл авторитетные источники. Благодарю.--89.102.135.192 (talk) 21:27, 11 April 2010 (UTC) Generous (ruwiki)

Kyrgyzstan (airline)
This airline seems to have taken over as national carrier, R8 flights are not listed at Manas airport time table here and in photo database on net, infact photos of the two are together showing them as a merged company here, last photo of R8 at airliners.net was added in 2005.119.155.75.174 (talk) 09:47, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * That is indeed correct. Kyrgyzstan Airlines went bankrupt in 2005, and in 2006 Altyn Air rebranded as "Kyrgyzstan". Both articles are on separate companies, and hence both need to be expanded to reflect the history of each company. Is there anything in particular I can help with? --Russavia I'm chanting as we speak 10:00, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

re: 2010 Georgian news report hoax
Sorry Russavia - the vandalism labeling was an error on my part. There has been so much conspiracy related vandalism that I thought you were going around and inserting stuff that Saakashvili has Nostradamus like powers for predicting that the Russian will bomb Kaczyńskis plane. I removed your edit too rapidly, because I assumed after a quick overview that it is yet another "Putin did it by throwing Georgian babies into the engine" theory and we revert these now on sight to discourage conspiracy theorists, who believe wikipedia must give their view ample room... So- sorry for the vandalism - my bad! Although, now that I read your edit in depth, I do not think this merits a mention on the 2010 Georgian news report hoax as it is unrelated to articles topic and just a one persons private conspiracy theory... something which I think should never be posted on wikipedia, especially as you pointed out, that we are just pushing her opinion here: "She really did link", "She has a history", "Her opinion"... My view: remove as it is completely irrelevant to the article. --noclador (talk) 13:53, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Adam Kontras
I noticed that you commented on the Adam Kontras AFD page. Since the AFD page conversation has been leaning to the references and claims being not notable, as per Wikipedia standards. Should there not be a discussion on the pages that are used to reference this issue of notability as well. I found that on the 'Duke Fightmaster show' page there is an interview refenced where in said interview it was stated that Wikipedia was the source of the interviewers assumption that Kontras is the 'first video blogger'. If the Wikipedia standards for notability are not followed on his page, then this link on The Duke Fightmaster show is equally not notable. Further on the 'video blogging' page, there are references to Kontras being 'The first video blogger' and this is supported by equally dubious references. Should not all of these claims be removed and/or discussed until such time as notability may be established? I tried to get this into a discussion forum for removal, and anything I attempt gets reversed, and then I am attacked for vandalism. I do feel very passionate (perhaps too much so) about this and would just like to see the record put in order as to all of this, and have verifiable sourses, and notability issues addressed as per Wikipedia standards. Any help you could provide will be greatly appreciated. 24.125.217.58 (talk) 17:44, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

File:The Motherland Calls.jpg
Hi, I'm no copyright expert, but if File:The Motherland Calls.jpg were public domain, it could be uploaded to commons. However, the photograph is actually a derivative work of the sculpture, which is copyrighted and not in the public domain. Thus, the uploader never could release his image into the public domain, since he lacked the rights required to do so – see Commons:Derivative works. We can of course ask at WP:MCQ if you think I'm wrong. Cheers, Amalthea  21:56, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * ... which is pretty much what Non-free 3D art says too, although that one is specific to US law, so doesn't completely apply here. Amalthea  22:21, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * enwp accepts images based upon their status only in the US - in the US this file has been released into PD; commons only accepts images based upon their status in both the US and their country of origin - in the US the file is PD, but it can't be in Russia - hence it is not suitable for commons, but based upon enwp policies it is PD in the US and able to be uploaded here without any rationales, except for the boilerplate advising it can not be moved to commons due to non-compliance with Russian law - all images from Russia which have been deleted in the past from Commons are eligible to be uploaded to enwp upon this basis. --Russavia I'm chanting as we speak 09:36, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I really don't think so, who says that? Yes, enwp only requires compliance with US Florida laws, but even there it has to be considered a derivative work of the copyrighted statue. Thus, it requires authorization from the copyright holder of the statue, which we don't have, and can't have been released into PD. I've asked for more opinions on WP:MCQ though. Amalthea  09:55, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

See my response at WP:MCQ. Russavia, your understanding is ever so slightly wonky. En:wikipedia will accept content that is not free in its mother country, but you cannot license it as free, even if it is PD is the US of A. In this case, the photographer hasn't committed a copyvio, as they did not take the image for commercial purposes and so don't need the artist's permission (limited russian freedom of panorama), but she cannot grant a free license to the photo, as she took it under a constrained permission. The image should be tagged Non-free 3D art with an additional explanation on the page and in the FUR that while taking the photo was not a copyvio, the photographer cannot release their image because of the terms of the Russian copyright act. Elen of the Roads (talk) 12:59, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * BTW, Russavia, US Freedom of Panorama does not apply to fine arts (UK Freedom of Panorama does), so if the image was in the US, you couldn't take a PD photo of it either.Elen of the Roads (talk) 13:47, 13 April 2010 (UTC)