User talk:Yandman/Archive5

Ceyockey
A generic but nonetheless warm "thank you" for your words of support in my RfA. I'm glad that you affirmed Radiant's nomination and I'll be measured in my use of the cleaning closet's contents. User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 23:08, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Baristarim 6
It is 6, isn't it? :) Sorry for earlier. I shouldn't have made it so personal. I will try to notch it down.. Baristarim 19:28, 17 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Was the above comment for me? I just noticed. By the way yandman, thanks for your revert earlier at my user page. I hadn't even noticed! Cheers! Baristarim 17:57, 18 December 2006 (UTC)


 * No, I thought it was from you! No problem. yandman  07:46, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Skryinv
He won the price because he criticized Turkey, not for his literary work, this was admitted by Turkey and they have tried to go to court with this. And I find that neutral to mention, so you go ahead and do whatever you want. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skryinv (talk • contribs)

Aecis
Arctic Monkeys - Bet that you look good on the dance floor :) A  ecis  Dancing to electro-pop like a robot from 1984. 11:02, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

DavidJJJ
I would like to thank you for your comments on my editor review. I found them very useful and they have helped a lot in understanding what is required for a good admin. Once again thank you very much for your advice. DavidJJJ 17:28, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Zanimum
I know he's doing nothing but argue about this co-founder stuff, but he's being civil, neither trolling nor vandalising. Therefore, I don't think that removing his talk page posts is the right thing to do, especially as a member of the Wikimedia Foundation's Communications Committee. I hope you understand. Cheers. yandman 18:30, 19 December 2006 (UTC)


 * By posting to 50 talk pages, he's trying to start 50 different arguments, and thus significantly up the chances of getting horrible quotes for the media to use next time he woos them into having a story about Citizendium. I've changed the section into a link to the exact same post on talk:Wikipedia. --  Zanimum 19:07, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

NikoSilver
Articles for deletion/Human rights of Kurdish people in Turkey: Hey man. Sorry for sounding a little harsh there, but you can see what we have to deal with every wiki-day of our lives in our neck of the woods. It's good that you proposed this AfD, coz I see the debate there leads to a viable solution for the info (which was my original concern). I think Fut.Perf.'s/Baristarim's/your proposal and Yannis' aren't that far from each other, and I suspect that had the title not been so definite, the debate would be far more reasonable. Cheers! NikoSilver 13:00, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Baristarim 7
I see what you mean :) And this is exactly what is pissing me off actually. But I have to register my disaccord with the recent move. This article is nothing but a Frankestein sewn from bits of wildest info out there. I really don't think that such a move should have been done before the end of the AfD. The disruption issues raised have not been addressed at all. There are four different articles, what is the need for this one? You very well know that it is going to stay some sort of a bastard POV fork for ages. If an article is in a dire state, it can be deleted even if it can be renamed to something else. It is first put on sound footing, then it should be recreated under the alternate name. The article is still a POV fork. There is already an article called HR in TR that is not even a long article. The information here has been copied directly from two other articles. You know, yandman, whatever might happen in Wikipedia, among all those constant insults of pan-Turkism, comparisons to Nazis etc, never a group of Turkish users have created a genocide page for a completely unrelated country per WP:POINT, despicably engaged in votestacking to disrupt the works of many editors to Wikipedia simply to seek results as you have suggested (which is racist by the way) and replied sarcastically when this was pointed out. I hope that you realize this.Baristarim 15:06, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Cat out
Human rights of Kurdish people in Turkey: Can you remerge a few differences and delete the dupe article? -- Cat out 13:12, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I think the article redirect should go, as you said, but the AfD redirect should stay for a few days IMHO (unless you've replaced all the links). We'll have to wait for an admin to drive by. I'll try and merge/clean the article. yandman  13:46, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * There were only 4 referances, 2 on user talk pages, one on ani and one afd transclusion. So I had already taken care of it when I nominated it for speedy deletion. That redirect can go to wiki-hell now. :) -- Cat out 16:37, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Tvoz
Lennon pic: hi - I'm not the photo police, in fact I've had several rounds with them and am not particularly in agreement with their point of view or their tactics, but I have to tell you I doubt that the "historic" argument will fly. I'm not going to object to it, but I just wanted to forewarn you. This same pic has been up and down on the page - I don't know what their rationale is for removing it exactly, but I'm betting it's that there are "free" pictures available, so we should use those, not a presumably copywritten one. But let's see if and what they do - if they let it stand, good for you! It's a much better picture, obviously. Just wanted you to know why I reverted to the other one - I didn't want to get into a situation as we've had before where no picture is up or some really awful one. But I'll leave it be for now, and let's see what happens. Can't promise no one else will take it down though. Tvoz 09:49, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the warning. I'm not sure the "historical" tag is perfect, but I was undecided between that one and "promo photo". This picture being the iconic photo of Lennon, the fair-use rationale in general seems to be fairly acceptable. Well, time will tell. yandman  08:50, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Tractorkingsfan
Tractorkingsfan would like to wish all of his Wikipedian friends, of which you are one, safe and happy holidays. Cheers, --Tractorkingsfan 06:15, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Writtenright
Dear Yandman: Thank you for ripping that 'school paper' out of the 'Ode on a Grecian Urn' article. Wikipedia is not a free publishing service for someone's little books.Writtenright 23:52, 26 December 2006 (UTC)Writtenright

Shimeru
Wonder whether you might want to take a look at Znám's problem -- you left it on hold during GA evaluation two weeks ago, and your points were addressed shortly thereafter. If you haven't got the time to re-evaluate it, please let me know ASAP and I'll be happy to; just don't want to step on your toes if it only slipped your mind. Shimeru 05:31, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


 * My apologies, I've been spending far too much time in the real world during the festive season, and have neglected a few of my duties... Corrected. Thanks for pointing it out!  yandman  13:53, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


 * No problem. I thought that might be the case, and real life should always come first.  Thanks for looking it over. Shimeru 19:49, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Baristarim 8
So :) Hmm.. Don't you think that it would fit better in the foreign relations section? The history section has definitely become lopsided, the whole Ottoman reign is talked about Let's just not add too much in that section please. I will revert based on the BBC source cited, it is with relations to how it relates to Turkey today, people can go the related article if they want to learn more about it, its stance etc. Baristarim 20:34, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi Baris. It's just that the sentence sounds strange, saying they don't call it genocide, but not actually saying anyone does call it genocide (and avoiding mention of the g word in the internal links). yandman  20:37, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I can revert myself as long as if you can explain to me that the other version is related more to the title than as is now. The wikilinks are there and is very well written, and reflects the BBC overview of the whole debate in a concise fashion. As for the interlink issue.. Many of the wikilinks are used in that fashion for stylistic purposes, and it was a non-Turk that added it there. Please have a look at the BBC link, I copied the general idea from there. Improvements can always be to the actual formulation, but pls raise them in the talk page. cheers Baristarim 20:45, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I know what you are trying to say, you know that I do! But at that point it might be more appropriate to raise the issue in the talk page and steer the article from these dangerous waters :) Also remember that that section might be expanded to balance the history bit. But just wait a while, I will take a shot at fixing the length problem in that section and possibly expand it so that two of the paragraphs can be merged. I will let you know when I have taken a look at it.Baristarim 20:47, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


 * OK. Editing this article is like skating on a frozen lake... yandman  20:52, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


 * lol. What would you think of moving it to the foreign relations sections as is (or with your changes) and cover the issue in a whole paragraph? My worry is that the whole history section becomes lop-sided, unintentionally to be fair. I will let you know soon (hopefully before tomorrow morning) when I will have had a chance to take a look at the relevant sections. I am also getting heat from some TR users, so I know that editing that article is like skating on a unfrozen lake :) Baristarim 21:06, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Morwen
true, actually - see for example. not sure that it especially belongs in article, mind. Morwen - Talk 22:31, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Well I never. Not that expensive, either. But is this a one off, or a regular occurence as suggests the sentence? I noticed Pratchett wasn't the only author in the auction, so maybe the detail isn't that suited to the article in question, but then again it is rather interesting. I'll see if I can dig up any other articles about it. yandman  12:48, 1 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Trying searching for "Marco Soto", that's another one I remember. Morwen - Talk 12:57, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

The Hyb  rid
Alright, thanks for letting my know. Cheers, --  The  Hyb  rid  10:35, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Diez2
Diez2 16:40, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Brunomagrani
Why did you removed that heroes section that was added to the DotA page?--Brunomagrani 23:12, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


 * As a general rule, we try to avoid including long lists in articles. In this case, the list isn't important enough to warrant a page on its own. yandman  10:45, 5 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Moreover, we have to avoid statements that will age quickly, and these heroes can change from version to version, so the list would rapidly be out of date. yandman  10:46, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Athol Mullen
Hi. I note that you have reverted some edits a likely spammer. They have so far edited under, and , and added links to the articles: auto mechanic, surfing, Chincoteague, Virginia, Assateague Island & Microsoft Windows. I placed a multipleip on user talk:71.58.51.204, so if they add these links again, it will be reportable. Could you keep an eye out. Thanks. --Athol Mullen 03:12, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * You reported these IPs recently on WP:AIV. The linkspamming was yesterday. Comments? &mdash; Nearly Headless Nick  10:47, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: They were blocked by Guy a few moments ago. &mdash; Nearly Headless Nick  10:49, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Just being bold. I know the procedure wasn't perfect, but IMHO these accounts are clearly only there for spamming. I seriosuly doubt this is someone who could be coaxed into making useful edits, so I didn't see the point of wasting more dev-t playing the cat and mouse game with him, waiting for him to spam before putting another warning, then waiting a bit more etc... Feel free to unblock if you think this is biting. Cheers. yandman  10:54, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Nah, not biting. I have little patience for these spammers myself. But then again, those policy-wonks are always after my ass. Cheers! &mdash; Nearly Headless Nick  10:57, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Indeed they are. Good luck, by the way. yandman 11:01, 5 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Hmm. Not sure what to make of this. Got email from (note that their edits only added links - I went back and checked and the only other thing added was a coincidental blank line!):

''To whom this may concern, I noticed that you blocked my username and IP address from editing because of one external link that you did not like. I did not see any warnings until today when I noticed that I was blocked. I also noticed that all of the other edits I made were deleted, even though they were appropriate and only one edit was marked as bad. Why was this? Is this how all new users are treated? As a first time user of this site, I really appreciate the encouragement and thanks I got for trying to contribute to your site. I assumed it would be good practice to add my sources as they deal with the context of certain 'key words', especially because the validity of content on your site has not been establised as credible, cannot be used for research, and is only for informational purposes, therefore, the external links can only help. The sites that I posted, besides the one you did not like, would have added value to this wiki. rspowers''


 * In this, they've simultaneously acknowledged that their IP address has been blocked but also tried to pretend that the only message that they saw was the one in their logged in account! Thoughts? --Athol Mullen 23:34, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

To my utter lack of suprise, the webmaster of these two sites is a certain "rayme" (see this and this). No prizes for guessing who the blocked account belongs to... Anyway, "sources"? An amateur site talking about his town with "please please please advertise here" banners and a car-review site with only one entry? No-one knows about these sites except this "rayme" guy. Don't worry about the whole "I'm a poor first time user that got bitten" spiel, these people do it all the time. Fuggehdaboutit. yandman 11:37, 6 January 2007 (UTC)


 * LOL. Pretty much as expected. Thanks. --Athol Mullen 23:04, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Liveandyetdie4
hi.i am sorry 4 my mistakes here.i won't repeatthem.i erased the marked photos.can i erase them from "my contributions" as well?

thank you --Liveandyetdie4 13:56, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

oh yeah and..sorry that it took me so much to reply.i didn't know how.abt the " dolgopolov" article..i don't have many info but i hope i will get some soon..when the tennis season will start in romania.i hope u get this message soon and don't block my account or smth like that

thank you again --Liveandyetdie4 13:58, 5 January 2007 (UTC)


 * No problem. We all make mistakes. I've tagged the watermarked ones for deletion, so they'll be disappear soon. However, when you upload images, don't upload them twice (e.g. "abcd.jpg" and "abcd.JPG"), as the second will also have to be removed, which wastes everyone's time. yandman  14:00, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

ok.sorry.i didn't know.i thought it's only 4 pix.from now on...NO NAMES

iwazaki
Dear Yandman,

HE has done it again.Has called fellow editors Idiots.I really doubt whether he's going to stop these insults.--Iwazaki 18:49, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

The Mob Rules
Might I inquire as to why you are removing warnings from this user's talk page? He was asked several times not to vandalize Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rec.sport.pro-wrestling (second nomination), or remove a fair-use review tag on an image that he uploaded without fair use rationale or source information (Image:Triple H Book.jpg), and did so anyway. The Mob Rules 12:55, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

This has links to pages outlining the current consensus. Constantly reinserting warnings on a user's talk page is construed as harassment. yandman 13:24, 8 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I am not seeing any "consensus" that a vandal can simply remove legitimate warnings from their talk page while failing to curb their vandalism, which is what you appear to be stating. If that is the case, then why do the warning templates even exist? The Mob Rules 13:31, 8 January 2007 (UTC)


 * They're there for warning people. If he's removed them, he's obviously read them, so he's been warned. End of story. They're not there for branding other editors, especially when the "vandalism" is the removal of an inappropriate fair use review tag. yandman  13:40, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The fair-use review tag was applied because the image was submitted for upload without a fair use rationale or the source of the work. Both of these items are specifically requested by the template in use for the image. The review template states that it should not be removed until an independent review has taken place. I hope you can see why the position you have taken in this matter is not making sense to me. The Mob Rules 13:50, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The claim that he was asked "several times" is totally false, and in bad faith. The last edit to the article was at 08:23  and a plea was made for the edit warring to cease at 08:37 .  The claims of "vandal" and "vandalism" are equally unfounded, and made in bad faith. A quick look at the diffs in question   shows that neither one can be classed as vandalism, in particular the removal of the tags making the outrageous claim that TruthCrusader is a single purpose account, as that was clearly removing a personal attack. Chadbryant used to make the exact same cries of "vandal" and "vandalism" on a regular basis in the same circumstances it should be noted. One Night In Hackney 13:44, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

DXRAW
I just wanted to say thank you for helping me out. DXRAW 22:05, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

User:Sharz
The irony of the situation that User Iwazaki has created was too much for me...I now present to you a piece I like to call "Iwazaki - A History"

I direct your attention to a door, which is no ordinary door, as it leads to a place, where there might be a weird looking mirror or something (If you watch Futurama or the Twilight Zone :P ).

First up, a compilation of abuses by Iwazaki of WP: NPA the page of the leader of the Tamil Tigers. (not created by me, but by another user also having NPA problems with Iwazaki).

"For your convenience, I have created a list of a number of such attacks from the report concerned, and listed each as linked to the diff from which they were copied...
 * "written by someone with a kindergarten level knowledge",
 * "Speak for your self, all my comments here are in reply to what others asked..Whether they are related or not, i normally wont disappoint anyone who asks questions from me.A habbit which comes from my fathers side!!" - He is talking about his upbringing on a Wikipedia Talk page.
 * "I bet your self had a rough time ,esp about the copy-righted pictures..So before advising and playing with sarcasm why dont you look after your self ?? i mean afterall u needed advice" - This is really too much.
 * "Since you have done such a poor job in this article,and its not surprising considering your pre-school level knoweldge of hostory and amazing logic !! And this kid is here to make things better."
 * "if you have problem with that, please purchase the book and read it."
 * "it would be really nice if you work on your reading comprehension skills..All my points remain valid and u only have one kindergrten level article to back up what ever you claims",
 * "i mean afterall u needed advice from a probably another pro-srilankan to grasp the idea of copyright policies here in wikipedia..",
 * "i have an enormous respect to wiki and its editors..But like in every society ,there are a few here joking around..And for them i have no respect..Since i take my history very seriously, i dont want kids to come here and screw things up.kids should grasp more knowledge before coming here.",
 * "didnt i tell you to speak for your self ?? what you have written here is not only in low quality ,but lack truth too.some of your sources are highly ambiguous, and do not qualified to be in the article.And thats what this kid do here, pointing out your "hypothesis" to save the standards of wikipedia..You have shown here so many things, lack of "reading conprehension skills", "kidergarten level logic" , "lack of knowledge in srilankan crisis" and most importantly "lack of(or NO) knowledge in our history"..So shouldnt you think ,better to get some history lessons in school ,before even coming here to edits ??",
 * "YOU dont need to take a day-nap to see that truth..",
 * "and unlike some i dont have any hidden agendas.I honor my state, SLA or anyother thing, with a reason..And condemned them too, with reason..Since you have done such a poor job in this article,and its not surprising considering your pre-school level knoweldge of hostory and amazing logic !!"."

Now, Exhibit B:

From page "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/India" - You will have to go into the back logs of this page, I could not find the specific, however, if you do a Google Wikipedia search it will come up with the relevant page.

As one user states on the page " This editorUser:Iwazaki is trying hard to defame me; it is because of my ... Iwazaki, his book doesn't seem to be on sale or even published yet. ..."

Exhibit C: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Myst%C3%ACc the "Dear Arsath" posting is interesting, as he accuses all of editing Sri Lanka related articles contarary to him as well as voting in the "deletion of Terrorist attacks by the LTTE" as being "wrong" or to be more precise moving Wikipedia in the "wrong way".

Just a few, in reply to earlier comments about my alledged abusiveness --Sharz 03:05, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

80.41.125.219
Hey, asshole, before you start going around deleting references/links to articles, maybe you should consider if you should even be a part of Wikipedia. Dick. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.41.125.219 (talk • contribs)

Can you fix the Goldman page please? I added a link for convicted felon David Brown, and I accidentally deleted the entire bottom of the page. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.41.125.219 (talk • contribs)


 * Sign your posts with ~ . I've removed the section, it's unencyclopaedic, and the sources made no mention of indictment. See other articles on similar companies. yandman  13:33, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Yandman, I have put the Criminals section back in, but it has again deleted the rest of the page. Call me if you want to, or I will call you, and we will discuss this. I have a NYC number that rings on my PC over here in London, tel (646) 821-9510. I will call you back if you call me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.41.125.219 (talk • contribs)

Yandman, I have put the Criminals section back in. Do a Google search on David Brown. He was part of the Ivan Boesky insider trading ring - it's a famous case. Call me if you want to, or I will call you, and we will discuss this. I have a NYC number that rings on my PC over here in London, tel (646) 821-9510. I will call you back if you call me. And, by the way, if you read that article, that is the company's latest petition, nothing to do with David Brown's conviction. Brown SERVED TIME in the 1980's for what he did at Goldman Sachs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.41.125.219 (talk • contribs)

Thanks in any event, because this mess helped me figure out how to put in links. A lot of the stuff I put in Wikipedia gets deleted because it is negative, but I have figured out that if I put in links to the negative info, it stays up. That, to me, is the biggest problem with Wikipiedia, i.e. it just contains "puff pieces", and no negative info. Anyway, thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.41.125.219 (talk • contribs)

Yandman, I have decided that I am going to begin following you around and reverting your edits, since you have admitted that you make edits on entries that you do know the subject matter. Let us begin.

See the latest Goldman discussion page. Nitwit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.41.125.219 (talk • contribs)