User talk:Skybon/Archive 2010

Metro station links
When you moved Chkalovskaya to Chkalovskaya (Moscow Metro) and then redirected the old title to the disambiguation page Chkalovsky, you seem to have overlooked this guideline, which explains that when changing the page that an existing title links to, "it is strongly recommended that you modify all pages that link to the old title so they will link to the new title." In particular, the disambiguation page Chkalovskaya metro station has a link to Chkalovskaya, which is supposed to take readers to the article about the Moscow station, but instead now takes them to another disambiguation page which links back to the first one. As a result, your changes were distinctly unhelpful to readers. There are also links from other articles that need to be fixed. Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, but in future please take more care to assess the consequences of your changes. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 10:53, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox Moscow Metro station/Line color
Template:Infobox Moscow Metro station/Line color has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. SkyBonTalk/Contributions 19:46, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

MMTS
Спасибо, SkyBon за Ваше внимание к статье Московская монорельсовая система транзита.

Buggie111 (talk) 12:55, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

To-do list
Aww, thanks for that update. I'm just too lazy to finish translating it. Leave some of the work to me, ok? Buggie111 (talk) 21:51, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Of course :) The article is too big for me to be translated and corrected completely any time soon. SkyBonTalk/Contributions 09:44, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Greetings
Hi SkyBon, I liked your idea of forming a team of indefinitely blocked ruwiki users here in enwiki. Let's work on Russia-related articles in English. I think we should also invite Lvova, Serebr, Ole and other authors expelled from ruwiki. Let me know your ideas on what articles should be written. SA ru (talk) 12:48, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It should be articles from different scopes. Write what you like. I am personally improving articles about Moscow Metro and Moscow Monorail just because I like it. SkyBonTalk/Contributions 12:56, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * OK. Let's work on the Metro articles. Let's invite Lvova and other dissidents. SA ru (talk) 12:58, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, if you like and if you can. For example if in RuWiki you were writing about biographies of living persons it would be better for you to do the same here. SkyBonTalk/Contributions 13:24, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I am still active at ruwiki, but I am not writing biographies of living people. SA ru (talk) 02:29, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Koltsevaya Line route diagram solution
Hi, after your revision made to the map, I think of creating a half (or even thinner) height STR ochre to separate between the transfer station icons. So colorblind readers won't confuse the connected transfer station icons. What's your opinion? -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 01:00, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

After some experiment I find that there're gaps appear around the thin version icon. So I try the old way which is previous used by the Russian railway diagram: User:Sameboat/x5. The syntax is a bit tricky but works quite well. And you can easily adjust the height of filler rows however you like. Currently it's 5px high. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 04:52, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Notablility
Please prove the notability of the controversy you are adding. "Enough notable" is not an argument. vvvt 15:41, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Result of the 3RR case
Please see the result of WP:AN3. You exceeded WP:3RR on the Russian Wikipedia article on 26 February. Blocks may be issued if warring continues when protection expires. Do not restore the contested material unless you get consensus for it on Talk. EdJohnston (talk) 17:26, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Warning
Reverting a page to your preferred version after a page protection has been expired and then asking for the page to be protected on grounds that there is edit warring is inappropriate, especially when you are the only one that had reverted. Please don't do it in the future. NW ( Talk ) 11:32, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Administrative okrugs of Moscow
Please kindly stop moving the articles about the administrative okrugs of Moscow. With South-Eastern Administrative Okrug, for example, just because our disambiguation page is located at Southeast does not mean every entry included on that page must be spelled without a dash (note that some aren't). Grammatically, both spellings (with a dash and without) are correct; spelling preference in such cases is usually retained as per the original contributor's choice, and in this case spellings with a dash are closer to the original Russian anyway.

I will move the articles back later today. If you continue to disagree, please file a move request so a broad input could be thought. Thank you.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 12:48, January 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, having dug deeper, I see you mass moved pretty much all of the NW/NE/SW/etc articles to a uniform spelling. I have reverted them all for the following reasons.  While being bold is a good trait, when one finds oneself in a position of wanting to perform an action on a mass scale, it's a good sign that discussion is warranted first.  I don't preclude the possibility that some of those articles can (or even should) be moved to a different spelling, but such an action should be performed only upon due consideration, not as a part of "I'm gonna move 'em all anyway" decision.  I already explained why the administrative okrugs of Moscow should stay where they are now; similar good reason might exist for other articles (as far as I can see, you have neither asked anyone nor even explained a reason for the moves in the edit summaries).  If you believe some (or all) of them should be moved, please submit proper move requests.  I know it's tedious and boring, but in this situation it's the due process.
 * Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions. Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:56, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:District
Template:District has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:14, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

Krasnye Vorota
Sure, no problem. Done. There's still some cleanup left that needs to be done (redirects, templates, incoming links, etc.).—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 19:34, January 22, 2010 (UTC)

Volokolamskaya and Chistye Prudy
Done and done. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:43, January 25, 2010 (UTC)

Tyoply Stan
Done. By the way, someone needs to fix whatever the problem is with the route diagram. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); February 22, 2010; 15:27 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the offer, Artem, but I must decline. I'm already involved with three projects dealing with infoboxes, not to mention a bevy of other pet little projects I want to work on, and the thirty-something pages-long to-do list of things that actually need to be done.  I'll be happy to assist with little maintenance things here and there, but a full-time commitment is not something I can presently afford.  Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); February 25, 2010; 14:14 (UTC)

Spelling
I moved Sergei Eisenstein back to that spelling because it's the most common version. If you have any evidence to show that the "Sergey" spelling is more common then please add it to the thread at talk:Sergei Eisenstein.  Will Beback   talk    20:23, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Mendeleyevskaya
Actually, no, that's not how it works. The names of the articles are supposed to match predominant English usage, which is exactly the case with Dmitri Mendeleev. "Mendeleev" is simply the most common form used in English to refer to that particular person. Since most (notable) people have an easily identifiable form under which they are known in English, that's the form we normally use, in full accordance with WP:UE. Now, for cases where there is no predominant English usage, romanization is used to produce a standard form. This is usually the case for low-profile entities, such as villages, districts, metro and railway stations, etc. There are, of course, many systems of romanization and transliteration, but Wikipedia, for the sake of standardization and consistency, uses BGN/PCGN-derived WP:RUS.

Once the need for romanization is established, one has to work with what's given&mdash;and that's a string of characters in the original language (in our case, "Менделеевская"). Then the rules of romanization are applied to that string to produce the standard form. External factors (such as the word from which the word being romanized is derived) play no role there. There's a good reason for that, too. While you and me know full well that the station is named after that particular Dmitri Mendeleev, it is not necessarily true for people trying to locate an article about that station in Wikipedia (indeed, the very reason why they may be trying to locate that article might be to learn who is the namesake, and whether there even is one!). Those people should be able to apply a standard set of romanization rules to the original and get the standard form. Adding considerations of the derivatives on top of that simply hinders the standardization for no good reason, and ultimately leads to confusion.

I hope this makes sense. I didn't delve into all the details, but I hope it's a good enough overview. Please let me know if anything is still unclear, though. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 11, 2010; 14:28 (UTC)
 * I understand what you mean, but in this case "Bulvar" is not a specifier of the type of the street, but a part of the proper name, and we never translate proper names (or their parts). So, it's OK for the actual boulevard to be referred to as "Sretensky Boulevard" (i. e., a boulevard called "Sretensky"), but it's not OK to refer to the metro station as such (because it's a metro station called "Sretensky Bulvar").  Does that make sense?—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 11, 2010; 19:51 (UTC)

AfD
Please state your vote in a standard way: keep/delete in Articles for deletion/Suppressed research in the Soviet Union. This is useful when the closing admin will judge the arguments. - Altenmann >t 16:53, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

April 2010 GAN backlog elimination drive
–MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 18:14, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Russia 1 logo.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Russia 1 logo.png. 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) 00:21, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:YablokoLogo.svg
Thank you for uploading File:YablokoLogo.svg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 12:45, 2 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:45, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Start date and age
Please explain your recent edit to Start date and age, on its talk page. Andy Mabbett (User: Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 10:11, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Novoyasenevskaya
Thanks for clarifying why the move was made, but could you, please, add the former names (which you intend to disambiguate) to the appropriate disambig page prior to or soon after the move? This way it would be immediately clear when a title is disambiguated for a reason and when it is done in error. By the way, which other station was called "Novoyasenevskaya"? Thanks!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); June 7, 2010; 14:17 (UTC)
 * Я буду приводить названия к виду название станции (Moscow Metro) с целью унификации и упрощения как для читателя, так и для редактора. Да и к тому же нет такой транспортной системы как метро, зато есть Московский Метрополитен. Artem Karimov (talk | edits) 19:21, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Насчёт Metro vs. Moscow Metro у меня претензий нет, это дело вкуса, а вот поголовная "унификация" названий всех статей без разбору ни к чему хорошему не ведёт. Согласно WP:AT, неоднозначности следует разрешать только тогда, когда они существуют. Если название само по себе уникальное, уточнять к какому именно типу сущности оно относится совершенно излишне.  В английской википедии подобные излишние уточнения делаются для очень немногих статей и то только в тех случаях, когда существуют хорошие для этого причины (как, например, WP:UE для статей о населённых пунктах США).—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); June 7, 2010; 20:03 (UTC)
 * Артём, а зачем вы опять статью про Бабушкинскую передвинули? Вы ведь даже на этот пост ещё не ответили.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); June 21, 2010; 13:28 (UTC)
 * Да я вот кручу-верчу статью, хочу доделать оформление, а уж затем скорректировать ссылки и перенаправить Babushkinskaya на Babushkinsky. Artem Karimov (talk | edits) 14:45, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Дык не ambiguous же title, не ambiguous :) По родам мы статьи да, группируем в один дизамбиг, но смысл перенаправлять "Babushkinskaya" на "Babushkinsky" есть только тогда, когда есть более одной статьи, которые можно было бы назвать "Babushkinskaya".  Сейчас такая статья у нас только одна &mdash; про станцию метро, соответственно и смысла её двигать нет.  Вот если будет ещё статья про какую-нибудь деревню, улицу, астероид или whatever под названием "Бабушкинская", тогда другое дело.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); June 21, 2010; 14:51 (UTC)

For Commons
I am requesting a rename on Commons. My current Commons name is SkyBon. Artem Karimov (talk | edits) 12:16, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 16:52, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:YTN logo.svg
 Thanks for uploading File:YTN 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) 05:23, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Moscow Monorail
Hey there. I'm kind of dead in the water due to IRL, so I was wondering if you could help translate the infrastructure section, which I can't figure out. I'll try to work on other parts. Buggie111 (talk) 13:25, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of OpenNet (website)
A tag has been placed on OpenNet (website) 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 web content, 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, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for web content. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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 hangon 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Codf1977 (talk) 14:18, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * just a reminder that you should not remove speedy tags on articles you create yourself. Codf1977 (talk) 14:59, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Moscow State University
Artem, according to my experience the university is better known as Lomonosov MSU outside Russia, probably because there are a lot of institutions like "Moscow State University of Blackjack and Hookers" in Moscow, and it is uncommon in Europe/USA when the titles have common beginnings. So I disagree with the move. Semifinalist (talk) 11:13, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Hm, from my experience, the MSU is known either by the abbreviation МГУ or the full name without Lomonosov's surname (Московский государственный университет). In other words, Lomonosov is not part of MSU's identity just the same as Lenin is not part of Moscow Metro's identity. Artem Karimov (talk | edits) 12:18, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:27, 20 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Just a comment. This is not a poll to keep or shut down Pending Changes permanently.  It's a poll to decide what to do until November 9 where a new version of the software will be ready to test.  Even if "Support" wins out, the new version could flop and we end up disabling it permanently from there.
 * I'm not trying to change your vote, just clarifying the poll. =) CycloneGU (talk) 13:31, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I undestand, but I still oppose PC philosophically. It should be removed for good, period - this is my stance. Artem Karimov (talk | edits) 16:21, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Good faith
Artem, we have never interacted before. Please, do not let yourself be radicalized. Look at the evidence (or lack of it) with your own eyes, read statements by both sides, and make your own judgments based on what you see. Finally, please tell me how "my behavior has not changed". Thank you, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 17:08, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmmm... having considered your statements and your attitude more thorough, probably I will support your request after all. It appears to be sincere and there is enough room for community sanctions anyway. Still, making such obfuscated payoffs is quite inappropriate. Artem Karimov (talk | edits) 17:26, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * My post to Igny was really in good faith. He strikes me as a very reasonable and good faithed editor, and I think we need editors like him to be more active - up to and including becoming administrators. Please note that I did not ask him to comment on the amendment, I did not mention it neither - I just mentioned that he has made comments I appreciated in the past. I also doubt that Igny will bother to become an administrator in the near future (given his activity, similar to yours) but I wanted to say something nice. If seen with good faith, I do not think there are any problems with that post - although if you still disagree, I do appreciate any constructive suggestions for the future on how to say things better. Finally: if I were to say something nice to you, like - for example - suggest I could help you with improving some article you care in the future, would you interpret it as an attempt by me to bribe you? I hope not. People are allowed to say nice things and not to expect anything in return (although psychological studies have shown that altruism is often viewed with suspicion - I mention that specific academic study here if you are interested, this is not just a claim I make out of thin air). In either case, thank you for your consideration of my argument. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 17:32, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe these were sincere and kind words but you have to remeber that considering your past canvassing experience, they will be viewed with suspicion for quite some time. It is not that I am a POV pusher or your personal hater - simply the EEML case influences the deductions that people make. If I were wrong than I apologise for assuming bad faith. But what is written above stands. Artem Karimov (talk | edits) 17:40, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * If I wanted to canvass Igny, wouldn't this be a better way? But you are very right that generalizations like "EEML" are a good way to poison the well, and make people not follow this policy. See also this and this. Take care, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 17:51, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Anyway, we are giving you a chance. Use it and you will regain the trust. Artem Karimov (talk | edits) 18:10, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Moscow Monorail
Umm, we might be able to do some work on this? Buggie111 (talk) 14:26, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe. I have awful lot of studies to do (I'm a student now after all) but I'll see what I can do. Artem Karimov (talk | edits) 14:52, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey, you are not alone. There are many others in the world with your troubles. But sure. I got jammed on the Infrastructure paragraph back in AMrch, and had slacked off after that. Buggie111 (talk) 14:55, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Re: Signature
Not sure what you mean about the frame; talk does look readable to me. But if you have alt suggestions, you are more than welcome to suggest them. See also here. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 15:17, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Petrovsko-Razumovskaya
А что случилось с будущей Петровско-Разумовской станцией на Люблинской линии?—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); October 21, 2010; 18:20 (UTC)
 * Дык это ж будет кросс-платформенная пересадка. Технически как одна станция с двумя уровнями. Смотри случай Третьяковской и Китай-города. Artem Karimov (talk) 18:43, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Ну дык а мне-то откуда это было бы известно? :) Потому и спросил.  Перенёс; готово.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); October 21, 2010; 18:55 (UTC)
 * Благодарю :) Artem Karimov (talk) 19:25, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

File:Channel One (Russia) logo.svg missing description details
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Channel One (Russia) logo.svg is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:51, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:TV-3 logo.svg
 Thanks for uploading File:TV-3 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  06:34, 6 December 2010 (UTC)