User talk:Asterion/Archive 12

Randroide

I also suggested an alternative wording I think is a bit more informative that yours: ...alleguedly islamist but disputed 2004 madrid train bombings.

Paste it if you think is better, if not, your wording is good enough for me.

Bulletproof vest is a bad, bad title, really. To avoid endless discussions about which term is more "popular" I suggest to preserve "Bulletproof" as a redirection page with a brief explanation about the history of the term (in the renaissance they really "proofed" metallic armour shooting at it, so the hump of the bullet in the cuirass showed you that the gear was "proofed") and why is incorrect applied to contemporary ballistic vests.

Body armour is also a very bad title for an article about Ballistic vests. For instance: A helmet, any military helmet, from Corinthian classic helmets to the PASGT helmet, is also "Body armour". Nevertheles, Body armor (and Body armour) should also be created.

S**t!!!!!. They are already redirected!. Bad, bad, bad. I have on my desk a book named "Body armour" ISBN 1574882937, that covers from wooden shields to riot police gear. Please fix this mess, Asterion, because the current presentation is misleading to the reader.

Done: I redirected Body armor and Body armour to Armour, that is the correct article. Users groaned and moaned in the talk pages of both pages about the incorrect redirection to "Bulletoproof vest". "Body Armour" can NOT be the new title for "Bulletpooff vest", the existence of Armour is just another reason.

Happy new year, Asterion!. Randroide 19:04, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

cross-posting

I have seen now your message, I was not aware that it was not allowed; I apologize and thank you for you warning. I was trying to alert Administrators to abusive tagging by Wikipedia editors, who joined like a gang, which have been deleting for a long time good science articles at Wikipedia, and no one seems to care to stop them. Thanks --Utad3 02:51, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, how can I contest the deletion "prod"? tag that was posted in the article Creation: The Physical Truth? There was another tag at the talk page of this article for speedy deletion, I wrote there may reasons to constested it but that tag was then removed. May you help please? --Utad3 04:02, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've already found out how to contest that tag. Thanks anyway. --Utad3 04:14, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This same user Utad3 has spammed Wikipedia twice anonymously as 213.58.99.22 with links to copies of its articles on Creation: The Physical Truth and Harold Aspden at PowerPedia - please see User talk:213.58.99.22 and Special:Contributions/213.58.99.22 for details. -- Jeff G. 17:55, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Firefox proxy testing

Firefox proxy testing is not a guaranteed method. I've been wanting the WP:OP experts to post some documentation on best practices but I don't think that's happened yet. Anyway, I have Firefox 1.5.0.7 and go to Tools → Options → on the General "tab", click the Connection Settings button → choose the Manual proxy configuration radion button → type the IP and port number → OK out of the various screens. Now you're going through that proxy and your real IP is being hidden. If you can still get to Wikipedia and get to an edit screen successfully, that means you're in. Again, don't take my word as gospel as I'm sure someone will come in and contradict me before long... —Wknight94 (talk) 14:32, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re Koavf

Fayssal, Koavf's requesting to be unblocked. I think he's been off wikipedia for long enough to reflect about the past and I concur his contributions to wikipedia were also good, problems aside. Would you support a review at WP:AN given the case? Thanks, Asterion^talk 07:10, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Asterion. I'll not be supporting Koavf's return unless he is partially banned on Morocco/Western Sahara related articles as i commented at the AN/I. In order to secure that we must present the case Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee for enforcement before allowing a banned user to return. -- Szvest - ^Wiki me up ® 11:04, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds reasonable to me. Asterion^talk 11:17, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your support

Thank you for your support in the RfA on my behalf. It is an honor to have received your expression of confidence. To be chosen as an administrator requires a high level of confidence by a broad section of the community. Although I received a great deal of support, at this time I do not hold the level of confidence required, and the RfA did not pass. It is my wish that I will continue to deserve your confidence. Sincerely, --BostonMA ^talk 16:06, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disambig Userpages

Hi Asterion,

Saw your comment here - Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names, about the problem with Google searches and Userpages. This affects us all - see [1] but in my case I believe I am the only person on the planet to use my name :).

Anyway my suggestion is - bring this up at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals), and/or suggest that all pages should have code written into them explaining they are Userpages not part of the encyclopaedia, and if an article exists to disambig to it. To try to do this manually is not possible, ever. So though lots of users wont like having such a notice at the top of their page, it will give Wikipedia more cred on the internet.

Alternatively could contact Google and suggest that pages beginning [[User:... are not include in their searches.

Just some ideas - Cheers Lethaniol 11:36, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds sensible. I will put some words together as soon as I get back to England. Asterion^talk 22:59, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, can you please check?

User:Aldux seems to be abusing his moderator powers to push his POV and that of his Italian pals. Check his contributions [2] at Francesco Patrizi, Giovanni Luppis, Andrea Meldolla, Benedetto Cotrugli, Nenad Bjelica, Osijek. He is removing valid upgrades and content to a lesser correct and highly POV versions. The first four are identical disputes as in Giulio Clovio and Giorgio Orsini articles so the policy introduced there should be applied on these articles too. --89.172.207.60 21:51, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies but I am not familiar with any of these historical figures (aside Bjelica because I'm a Real Betis supporter). In all honesty, it looks as a content dispute and Aldux has not used any special admin buttons. Any editor can revert an edit if they think it is not verifiable. All I can say is that you could place a request for comments for uninvolved editors to express their views. Regards, Asterion^talk 22:58, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heh well the problem is I don't really know how to do that, even with the explnation it seems extremely complicated to me. The point is that this is really a minor problem. The person in question (Aldux) seems to removing valid content such as the names in Croatian for those people and cat's connected with them and even corrections to the link. For example in Giovanni Luppis he keeps reverting Austro-Hungarian Navy to non-existant Austrian Navy and putting construction 'Italian Officer' when the man was born, lived and died in Austria-Hungary so he could have been only Austro-Hungarian officer (that he was an ethnic Italian no one disputes). In Francesco Patrizi article he again removes his name in Croatia and Croatian cat while putting cat "Italians from Yugoslavia"?! The man was born in 16th century there was no Yugoslavia, same for Italy, he was Venetian (Republic of Venice) and if this designation is good for Marco Polo it's good for Patrizi as well. The same goes for Meldolla and Cotrugli. And Nenad Bjelica as a Serb is totally unreferenced, there is absolutly no proof or source given to this claim. Please mediate! --89.172.201.74 06:23, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Asterion. Actually, I don't see it as a content dispute, I mean on my part; there is obviously a content dispute among editors, but this doesn't involve me, as I'm agnostic regarding the nationalities of these guys, and really don't care much. To be clearer, if a legitimate editor inserted the same content I would have no reason to rollback, as I'm only interested here in preventing Afrika paprika (talk · contribs) from attempting to evade his ban, and blocking his new socks. All the content Afrika/Factanista is speaking of regards edits made by others, and not by me; as far as I remember, I only copyedited Andrea Meldolla, that had been written in a very bad English. You may have noted that all the articles in question are semiprotected; this was because of Afrika's sockpuppeterring, that forced me to raise a chain of sp articles to make his activities more difficult. To circumvent this, he created Praskaton (talk · contribs), that, strangely, edited only the article that are sp because of Afrika, and restored Afrika/Factanista's previous edits. And a last note: the IP that sent this complaint is in the range of Afrika's ip accounts, see Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Afrika paprika. Ciao,--Aldux 17:34, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

---

---

Post by Nateland (Sry the new heading didn't get posted right.....)

vandalism to article on adolescence/ non nuetral points of view MAJOR HELP NEEDED!!!

I have been dealing with the article on adolesescence, namely the part on adolescent sexuality and neogitiating the removal of data of HIGHLY dubious viability and which is obviously opinionated (Lot's of the data is from a single book by leonard sax which is not easily accessible by the average person) And i have placed in more accurate and backed up Center for disease control data on adolescent rates of std transmission/pregnancy rates which have been CONSISTENTLY deleted along with the references DESPITE my asking for proof of sax's 'studies' and 'facts' to be given in an internet reference and for possible other sources on this controversial subject to be used that aren't obviously against it.

What concerns me the most is that it is FILLED with data from just ONE book by a supposed guru on adolescence who claims to have all the facts on teen sexuality and it's dangers and how while my attempts to make the article more nuetral and at least input data from both sides of the debate are overwritten...

There's the fact that some teen or parent might go to the article on adolesence and after reading a few paragraphs on the topic of teen sexuality (Which despite my best efforts is somehow constantly returned back to it's highly biased and non nuetral state by trolls) would declare it horribly dangerous and thus likely cause A LOT of worries, suppression, etc. etc. and EVEN MORE fear about the horrors of teen sex, WITHOUT even allowing for opinions to prove that STD transmission rates and pregnancies have gone down among teens in the last few years without being waaaayyy at the bottom behind the MASSES of Leonard Sax and exclusively right wing opninions, I'm requesting that the topic is locked until a consensus can be reached and if no proof of the dubious (at best) claims about teenage emotional shallowness can be brough out that someone helps me to stop this constant trolling....

The anti vandalism bot reverted my correction where i moved up the CDC data to the top and added teen sexuality based on country to the almost original super biased state...

I've decided to take this to an administrator and i think that you might be correct, currently I am about the only person to be against what i see as unnuetral, biased, and un wikified data on teen sexuality and I'm wondering if you could scan over the current version (It might have been reverted by someone again to it's old state which is what concerns me the most) And perhaps revert it to my version and lock it down until my concerns can be met.

Yours desperately,

Nateland 02:05, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiStalking (User:Rainbowangie, User:LibearyGay...)

Hi. I happened across some of LibearyGay's edits and I think Rainbowangie is just trying to revert some of their overzealous changes. I'm not really sure why Rainbowangie was blocked, but if you take a look at Libeary's edit history you will see they are going around adding speedy deletion templates all over the wiki for petty reasons on articles that if they were to be deleted should probably be taken to AfD. I'm not really familiar with wiki-stalking, but I think Rainbowangie's behavior is justified. Anyway, I'd appreciate another head being involved with the situation. Thanks. Paul^C/_T+ 11:06, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I will have a look. Asterion^talk 11:11, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with what you were saying about the single purpose account thing. I thought it was odd that two new users would have such an intricate knowledge of templates and stuff. I do have a comment about the speedy delete template. "If this page does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, or you intend to fix it, please remove this notice, but do not remove this notice from pages that you have created yourself. If you created this page and you disagree with this page’s proposed speedy deletion, please add:" Rainbowangie was cited for removing the speedy delete template, but as evidenced by their edit history, did not create the article. What is the procedure behind removing inappropriate speedy delete templates? Should that wording be changed that only administrators should remove the template? Just curious what you thought. Thanks for helping to get this straightened out. Paul^C/_T+ 11:47, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is a good question but I do not have the answer myself either. Personally if someone edit war over adding/removing tags, I would say it is disruption per se. However I agree that it needs further clarification indeed. Asterion^talk 11:56, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK

Will look for it. This was something I always watch in the news (yah now, I would feel strange if you wanted sources for Stalin being a Georgian ;). I'll try to find something viewable online. --PaxEquilibrium 20:50, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

A belated thank-you for the welcome message you left. Sześćsetsześćdziesiątsześć 23:54, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

70.232.140.196

Thanks. Not only is he NOT me, I've already reverted his bizarre little freakout essay. Thanks for being on the watch, I've already reported him to the admin who blocked his other IP. ThuranX 22:13, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It appears you've already beat me to the revert, and we edit conflicted... but i didnt' get the EdCon notice... anyways, he's gone way over 3RR on the Heroes page, pretending to be an NBC lawyer. We definitely need admin intervention. Cna you step in, or should I go to AIV? thank you. ThuranX 22:22, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I called that. He's at it again. User:69.150.85.94. I've told User:Wknight94 as well. ThuranX 22:42, 9 January 2007 (UTC)(and thanks for the Semi, that should help.)[reply]

That one has been blocked too (by User:Wknight94). Asterion^talk 22:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:68.91.212.118. Again. ThuranX 23:13, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Given the heavy vandalism from multiple sources, I had to protect the article too. Asterion^talk 23:36, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[3] see there, he's at it again, same 'ace ass shadow' and 'thugs' comments. definitely the same, despite the religio-philosophic rhethoric he's cut n pasting around. (also posted to Wknight94.) ThuranX 04:55, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Marzipan

One last thing. I hope it's not presumptuous, but I went and left a note for the IP editor who added the recipe. I think he or she is really trying to help, so I tried to steer her in the right direction. [4]. ThuranX 22:27, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No prob. and it does look like a good recipe. Now that I know it's in the history, I might even try it out, LOL! ThuranX 22:34, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maps

Hi there -- thanks; I've no further changes to make, but will keep your suggestion in mind. I might even take a crack at creating SVG maps that look like the PNGs now used widely. Quizimodo 22:57, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, good luck. Asterion^talk 23:11, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Racak incident

Thank you for the answer. Have you read my comments about the Racak incident? I would also like to know why we can not use the word massacre when all the sources use this word. Why can we use it here e.g Kragujevac massacre --Noah30 20:30, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will be reverting the title of the Podujevo article to Podujevo massacre. Generally massacre is used for "individual events of deliberate and direct mass killing, especially of noncombatant civilians or other innocents without any reasonable means of defense". As Racak is still unclear, this is why this is called "incident". Regarding Podujevo, I can not find anyone disputing the civilian nature of the victims, therefore I think that it is better to keep the original title. Regards, Asterion^talk 20:51, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have copyedited and wikified the Podujevo massacre article. Hope you are happy with the result. Please note that I think you made a mistake regarding Goran Stoparic, as he was not involved in the killings. He actually testified against the two Scorpions according to the CBC article. Regards, Asterion^talk 21:47, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I also edited Gornje Obrinje massacre. Please note that the text needs to read "allegedly commited by Serbian forces" as no court case has been brought. Asterion^talk 22:27, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hope we have but behind us the misunderstandings. It was not my intention to offend you. --Noah30 08:19, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

None taken. Have a nice day. Asterion^talk 18:01, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scilit (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Maybe. But he was warned several times about it and just kept on going without discussion. Just seemed like a serial spammer type. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 08:59, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and rescinded the block and explained the general policy on the user's talk page. Sounds like he simply didn't know. If he can get consensus on adding that link to a heavily trafficked article like Bacteria, great. It's just not a good idea to add links en masse like that. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 09:06, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I usually would agree with my rationale too. :) But it looks like he really just didn't know. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 09:07, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. Me too! :) We get so used to the bad that I think we sometimes forget that some people are just...newbies. :) --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 09:10, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mig 11

Thanks for noticing. The user is somewhat disruptive. If there is to be any investigation, I'll come down on your side. Evlekis 09:22, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So what are you waiting for, just do it! Just because I don’t share the POW of Asterion I am automatically a “disruptive user”. Very interesting!! No administrator or not even the creators of this encyclopaedia can change the reality in Kosova. What are you trying to create here in all Kosovarian articles it is almost mythological. I am not afraid of you guys. You think that with your threats, you can stop me of writing my answer on you? I don’t delete messages on my talk page, like Asterion does. That tells a lot about him...--just a happy girl :) 13:05, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Read User_talk:Asterion#Please_read_this_before_posting. If I leave a message on your talk page, I will answer there. In any case, it is clear you are here for the wrong reasons. Asterion^talk 13:09, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism of my pages

Hi. Thanks for semi protecting my user page but could I ask that you remove the protection on my talk page. I would prefer if vandals post comments about me on there as opposed to by vandalizing articles to which I am associated such as what is happening with Huddersfield and Electrical engineering. The vandal in question has returned once again using the IP 172.212.96.179. Thanks for your help. Adambro 14:40, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your choice, of course. I unprotected it. Regards, Asterion^talk 14:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AOL proxy

hmm I am not too sure. AOL does use proxies but the one you tagged lookes like someone on a home IP which lasts until the next router reboot. AFAIK people bypass the proxy when they use a browser other than AOL's. Agathoclea 14:51, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just realised after reading Wikipedia:AOL. It is no longer shared. Would your recommend a range block? Asterion^talk 14:53, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not too sure. I am dealing with with one vandal at Fiona Phillips - one edit made me think it is the same, but the other edits were out of profile. Range block would effect a lot of people. What I do do though, is if the vandal returns block strait away as "previously warned on different IP of same range". But you only can do that if there is a very clear pattern. Agathoclea 15:01, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm sure it is the same guy but would not like to kill a fly with a nuke either. I've semiprotected many of the articles s/he's been hitting. Cheers, Asterion^talk 15:07, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Valencia(band) deletion

I have problem with this deletion for a few reasons. For one the WP:CSD A7 states that "If the assertion is controversial or there has been a previous AfD, the article should be nominated for AfD instead." which is was not. Another problem is that they fit Wikipedia:Notability (music). [5][6][7] They also follow criteria 3 through multiple national tours of the US as well as multiple international festivals in Japan including the Fuji Rock Festival.[8][9] Acidskater 04:23 15 January, 2007 (UTC)

It was recreated content which has been speedy deleted previously(A7 was the reason provided at the time, merely quoting it). This is the reason why I speedied it again. Ideally it should have been taken to deletion review before recreation. As I notice that you are not the same person who originally created the article, I will restore it and file an AfD later on today. Regards, Asterion^talk 07:26, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A Barnstar for You

		The Original Barnstar
		For the excellence in neutrality and editing style; specifically, for the excellent work on If Americans Knew. Your very concise editing style is a great example to us all. .V. (talk) 07:59, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semiprotection of article

I don't like you partially protecting Craig Charles' profile, though. It was being vandalised by two IPs (probably one person using two computers), and that was it. Certainly that wasn't enough to warrant protecting it.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.84.77.209 (talk • contribs)

Given that your IP is similar to the one that was being used to vandalise the article (from the same IP range belonging to an Australian service provider) and that you have just been blocked for further vandalism, I will therefore ignore your request in the meantime. Asterion^talk 18:26, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats

...on the adminship.--Hadžija 19:30, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just realised you might not have realised I'm Estavisti. I changed my username recently.--Hadžija 19:38, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOL! I did not know at first. It got me quite puzzled but then read further up the talk page. Asterion^talk 19:40, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Giulio Clovio

As to your message, I would like to warn you that you are abusing your admin account rights. All my reverts are already covered by very extensive discussion on the talk pages. The point is - I've removed pseudo-historical claims : a) Kingdom of Croatia did not exts after being conquered by Hungarians 1189 - ask about it a qualified historian of the medieval Europe b) Clovio's Croatian origins is forgery coming from today's Croatia. The message, as left on my talk page I could understand only as a grave ofense.--Giorgio Orsini 03:58, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Care to explain me in what way I am "abusing my powers"? Forgive me if my words were harsh. You have basically been reverting on a serial basis for the last two weeks. Edit wars are disruptive by nature. It does not matter whether you think you are right or not. Please take a moment to familiarise yourself with the dispute resolution procedure which I recommend you follow. Please take such disputes to requests for comment, requests for mediation, or requests for arbitration rather than continuing to edit war. Regards, Asterion^talk 07:35, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Catholic-link

A deletion discussion in which you voted, that of Template:Catholic-link, is up for deletion review, where the template may be deleted or retained depending upon the review discussion. You are welcome to comment and/or vote at Wikipedia:Deletion review#Template:Catholic-link. The key point of this discussion is whether the "default keep by no consensus" result was correct; discussion of the template itself is secondary (but may still be important). — coelacan talk — 04:37, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Translation

Thanks. And, what about the tidbit about "he drowned" not being reflexive in Spanish? Duja► 14:44, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a mistake, I think. In Spanish, to drown is said ahogar(se): "Pedro se ahogó". It can be used in non-reflexive meaning as well: "Pedro ahogó a la gata". I think that it would be the same in Italian but Aldux should be able to confirm this. Asterion^talk 20:00, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well, I guess I'll have to find some Spanish/Slavic bilingual to find a working example. Btw, I had no idea our language groups had so much similarity in this regard (French a bit less, AFAIK) before I started this research. Duja► 21:13, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And, btw, are you from Sevilla or its vicinity? How often do you visit Spain? Duja► 14:44, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm from Seville. I usually go back four or five times a year, Christmas time, Seville April Fair and whenever I have some chance suring the summer. Regards, Asterion^talk 20:00, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I asked because I'm an occasional visitor, so if I happen to pay a visit, maybe I'd find someone to hang around. Last time I had to cross entire city all by myself (not that it wasn't a pleasure though :-) ). Duja► 21:13, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for your good work on If Americans Knew. Jayjg ^(talk) 17:11, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proabivouac

I noticed that you have made an endorsement of the RfC regarding Proabivouac, and thought that I would mention to you that some of the alleged "evidence" that has been presented there might not be exactly what it appears to be. I don't know if you have already made a close inspection of the diffs presented there, but I am concerned that several of them might be quite misleading, and I have mentioned some of my concerns here: User_talk:FayssalF#False_evidence -- Karl Meier 20:13, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thank you

for fast response to block attacks on my user page. Paul 22:21, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barrington Hall

I'd like to ask you for a recommendation on how best to handle the situation at Barrington Hall. Consensus has been reached on the talk page, but two editors continue to keep adding unsourced information. Any suggestions? Thanks. --Milo H Minderbinder 22:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I promise to have a look tomorrow. I'm in the UK and it's kind of late now. Regards, --Asterion^talk 22:40, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --Milo H Minderbinder 22:45, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you have a look at this (related to maps issue)

Hi, I am no administrator, and I am not sure what to think about this, but I was pretty shocked reading Mark Thomas remark here: User talk:Jortegag. As you seem reasonable enough, what do you think about this kind of ways of getting out from Wiki rules (which I think should be lived to the spirit not the letter). Arnoutf 10:22, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bosnian War

Could you take a look at Talk:War_in_Bosnia_and_Herzegovina#Mujahideen and perhaps comment. I've been having a rather fruitless discussion with a person who doesn't care for my sources, but refuses to present any alternate ones because He Knows Better and I'm "ignorant". Cheers // Hadžija 20:44, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Second Montenegrin Wikipedia proposal

I have started up a second proposal on the Montenegrin Wikipedia, I think it should be time to restart it. If you want to vote, the link is: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Montenegrin_2

Just wanted to let you know. Thanks again.

Request

Could you please delete my userpage and talkpage?--Hadžija 05:14, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete it all, I'm leaving Wikipedia (again :)).--Hadžija 01:37, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What's the problem man?--Hadžija 04:56, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but could you lock them as well? I wouldn't want any User:Bosniak types editing it.--Hadžija 19:03, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My user name

Exactly HOW is my user name "AwfulTurkey" offensive? It is in no way a violation of any rule. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Awful Turkey (talk • contribs)

The name was never meant to be offensive to the country of Turkey. I have used it since I made an account here and not once has anyone been offended by it. I could understand if my username was something vulgar like F***Turkey how that would be offensive and NEED to be changed.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Awful Turkey (talk • contribs)

Answered on your talk page. --Asterion^talk 22:01, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Bosniak again?

I'd appreciate a second opinion, as not completely familiar with his editing patterns. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Bosniak again? Thanks, Asterion^talk 18:58, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I responded on AN/I; I think there's sufficient evidence here to justify a checkuser. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 19:31, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You helped choose Wall Street Crash of 1929 as this week's WP:ACID winner

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive. This week Wall Street Crash of 1929 was selected to be improved to featured article status. Hope you can help.

AzaBot 01:02, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on being nothing but a stuck-up bully.

You're nothing but a stuck-up bully. You didn't follow up on the false AIV complaint against RunedChozo at all, you just wanted to smack someone around and you found an easy target, and now you're gloating about it. You should be de-adminned. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.178.235.28 (talk) 01:33, 26 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

ZakuSage still at it

See [10]; it's up to you, but I'd block him for a week too, if I were an admin today... Georgewilliamherbert 01:36, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

huh. Nevermind. I misread the timestamp; that was before Runed got blocked... My bad. Zaku seems to have been quiet recently. Georgewilliamherbert 01:43, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As opposed to the other guy (see above). Asterion^talk 02:39, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BZZT, wrong, egotistical bully admin gets it wrong, do not pass go, please get desysopped before you hurt wikipedia, thank you for playing, offer not valid in utah....—Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.178.235.28 (talk • contribs) 02:45, January 26, 2007

Asterion, you might CU that sock and Runed. There are some other people who are upset over this, too, it might not be him. Georgewilliamherbert 02:54, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm on it, just finding some diffs. As it reads now, "suspected sockpuppet of..." Asterion^talk 02:56, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the format/usage was wrong there; I usually see a new CU request on the main CU page, you edited the archived copy and removed the old CU results... I'm too tired to fix it right now, but if you have the time... Georgewilliamherbert 04:18, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Big surprise. Bully admin found someone new to attack. Bring it on, I'll be your pinata, why the hell not.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.178.235.28 (talk • contribs)

GiorgioOrsini

I left him a stern message on his talk page. Hopefully he will understand and stop with his nonsensical antics. I have also fully protected Giulio Clovio, the page he was edit warring on. Nishkid64 23:39, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chulito

Please be aware that "chulito" has a different connotation in Mexican Spanish than it does in Spain. In Mexican Spanish it is a common term of endearment and people even call their children chulito/chulita. Kaldari 16:26, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing this out. I will leave a note at WP:RFC/NAME--Asterion^talk 19:13, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:

Wow i really feel stupid lol, thanks for the notification :) Nareklm 20:17, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks goes for you to! :-) Nareklm 20:37, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help over at CAT:CSD

Hi, and congrats on your promotion! Per this discussion, I'm dropping a friendly note to some of the recently-promoted admins requesting help with speedy deletions. I am not an administrator, so if you don't feel comfortable diving into deletions - or if you need more info - please don't come to me, but I'm sure that Cyde Weys would be happy to guide you if you want to help. Any help is great, but I'm sure that Cyde and others would deeply appreciate it if you could put the page on your watchlist and do a bit of work there on a regular basis? Maybe weekly? Thanks in advance! Anchoress 18:27, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Random Smiley Award

For your contributions to Wikipedia and humanity in general, you are hereby granted the coveted Random Smiley Award
originated by Pedia-I
(Explanation and Disclaimer)

--TomasBat (Talk) 22:18, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{UsernameDiscussion}}

Hi, I was wondering- do you think this template should be made a bit more friendly? What do you think of:

Hello User:X, thank you for your contributions. Wikipedia has a policy on what usernames editors can use. Unfortunately, concerns have been raised that your username may be incompatible with that policy. You can contribute to the discussion about it here. Alternatively, if you agree that your username may be problematic and are willing to change it, it is possible for you to keep your present contributions under a new name. Simply request a new name here following the guidelines on that page. Thank you.

It seems worth pointing out how easily names can be changed and that no one is necessarily accusing them of bad faith... WJBscribe 03:19, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Along the same line of thought, I've created a followup, {{UsernameAllowed}}, to tell the user if the discussion was closed in his favor. Otherwise, the first notice would linger on, still saying the issue is in doubt, still pointing to a discussion that isn't there any more. Please consider this a "matching bookend": the two templates indicate the beginning and (favorable) end of the RFC/NAME. Thanks! Ben 05:59, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And another new template, {{UsernameConcern}}, to begin discussion directly with the user before going to RFC/NAME, for those of us too harried and/or tired to type up a long and diplomatic note by hand. Ben 00:59, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Location Maps

On the WikiProject Countries talk page, you had either explictly declared a general interest in the project, or had participated at a discussion that appears related to Location Maps for European countries.
New maps had been created by David Liuzzo, and are available for the countries of the European continent, and for countries of the European Union exist in two versions. From November 16, 2006 till January 31, 2007, a poll had tried to find a consensus for usage of 'old' or of which and where 'new' version maps. At its closing, 25 people had spoken in favor of either of the two presented usages of new versions but neither version had reached a consensus (12 and 13), and 18 had preferred old maps.
As this outcome cannot justify reverting of new maps that had become used for some countries, seconds before February 5, 2007 a survey started that will be closed at February 20, 2007 23:59:59. It should establish whether the new style maps may be applied as soon as some might become available for countries outside the European continent (or such to depend on future discussions), and also which new version should be applied for which countries.
Please note that since January 1, 2007 all new maps became updated by David Liuzzo (including a world locator, enlarged cut-out for small countries) and as of February 4, 2007 the restricted licence that had jeopardized their availability on Wikimedia Commons, became more free. The subsections on the talk page that had shown David Liuzzo's original maps, now show his most recent design.
Please read the discussion (also in other sections α, β, γ, δ, ε, ζ, η, θ) and in particular the arguments offered by the forementioned poll, while realizing some comments to have been made prior to updating the maps, and all prior to modifying the licences, before carefully reading the presentation of the currently open survey. You are invited to only then finally make up your mind and vote for only one option.
There mustnot be 'oppose' votes; if none of the options would be appreciated, you could vote for the option you might with some effort find least difficult to live with - rather like elections only allowing to vote for one of several candidates. Obviously, you are most welcome to leave a brief argumentation with your vote. Kind regards. — SomeHuman 7 Feb2007 20:01 (UTC)

Aludx and his lackey Giovanni Gove again

I am wondering what can someone do to stop vandalising and propaganist revisionism on Wikipedia? Currently there are a number of Italian users (User:Giovanni Giove and User:GiorgioOrsini), among them even a moderator (User:Aldux), who constantly revert and have reverted and prevented others to remove their falsifictions with the help of the mentioned moderator. Their target: medieval, baroque and renaissance Croatian writers, philosophers, scientists, etc. from Venetian Dalmatia have been stripped of their Croatian notes and identities in Wiki articles. These people lived in bilingual society where one had two and somtimes even three or more versions of their name: Croatian, Venetian (Italian) and Latin most commonly. You can find examples of such reverts all over the place: Benedetto Cotrugli, Francesco Patrizi, Stjepan Gradić, Joakim Stulli, Republic of Ragusa, Ivan Lučić, Giovanni Luppis, List of Croats, Andrea Meldolla, Ivan Duknović, Juraj Dalmatinac, etc. , etc....it's getting ridiculous and no one is doing anything about it. Are Italians allowed to do rewrite history to their wishes?! --89.172.230.220 18:03, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just to inform ya, Asterion, this is User:Afrika paprika. --PaxEquilibrium 22:16, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick answer. I will try to look into this later on. First, I do not think Aldux is doing anything else but enforcing the community ban. Second, I have warned User:GiorgioOrsini in the past and will be keeping a close eye on him indeed. Third, I suggest you try to appeal your ban as it is wikipedia policy to revert any edits by banned users, independently of whether you think these are legit or not. Regards, --Asterion^talk 18:32, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to join WikiProject Graffiti

Regards, Dfrg.msc 07:15, 12 February 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Catalan-speaking template

Hi Asterion, according to your comments: «This is a country main article. having an extra side infobox (i.e. Catalan world) is bad practice and clearly disruptive. Feel free to create a footnote template as {{Latin Europe}})» Simply for reference, before further discussion, would you have any reference about that from within Wikipedia? Toniher 13:01, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just have a look at USA, Canada or Australia and you would realise there is no more than a single infobox, i.e. no such a thing as a generic English-speaking countries side-infobox. Regards, Asterion^talk 21:12, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Motion to revoke remedy of Kosovo arbcom (October 2006)

Asterion, on 21 October 2006 the Kosovo arbcom found that I had been given 96 hours probation for edit warring on the Srebrenica massacre article and based on this (presumably) gave me one years probation and revert parole. I have raised some questions regarding this remedy (see below), and Fred Bauder has now initiated a motion to revoke these remedies. Since you partly raised this issue with Dmcdevit following the original decision([11]) I thought I should notify you of the ongoing motion. I have also posted some comments regarding Dmcdevit's reply to the motion, here. The questions I raised regarding the decision of the Kosovo arbcom were:

• why did the Kosovo arbcom consider my misconduct on the Srebrenica massacre article? Nowehere is the Srebrenica massacre article names as a 'related article'. Nowhere is the reasoning for linking the two articles given.
• it seems a rather harsh remedy to give me one years probation and revert parole for a 'crime' which I had already served time for (so to say).
• is it possible to appeal the Kosovo arbcom's decision?

Sincere regards Osli73 14:17, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not really sure what could be done. I think the best place to start would be WP:AN, where you could explain the situation in the same way you have done to me. I have actually mentioned this relatively recently when discussiong User:Bosniak's recent misconduct (i.e. that it should also be applied equally if the arbcom decision where to be interpreted broadly). Regards, --Asterion^talk 18:25, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see you're a busy admin

Would you have time to join our humble Wikipedia:WikiProject Spain, especially since I'm trying to migrate the discussion about that new proposed Spain template (that you commented on) to the WikiProject talk pages! EspanaViva 08:22, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Um...

About this edit to RunedChozo's talk page...
You do realize that's entirely false, right? His talk page has been "protected" (ie. hushed). As such, he doesn't have the option of requesting an unblock via that method, does he? Bladestorm 21:44, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was merely informing the user of the indefinite block as per WP:AN/I. I suggest you take up the talkpage protection with the admin who enforced it. Thanks, --Asterion^talk 22:09, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Couldn't you simply remove the line, "If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by replying here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}}"? (I can't, because it's protected)

I'm not saying the page needs to be unprotected. I'm just saying that only accurate information should be added. Bladestorm 23:09, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Andalusian

Hi Asterion. I see you are both Andalusian and a civil wikipedian so I thought it was good to check this with you first: in the Spain main article, the Languages section has Andalusian dialect included. I feel like this doesn't belong in that context. So, don't get me wrong, not that I am denying that may be important for some but I think is overstating its importance to display it in the Spanish languages section. I'd go and remove it but, just in case you added it or just have a different opinion, I would like to hear it. Thanks! Mountolive 00:16, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will remove it. Feel free to restore if you don't agree. Mountolive | Talk 16:21, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the delay. I have been quite busy lately. I have no strong feelings about it but think it would be best if a note is left in the article talk page beforehand requesting comments from other editors. Thanks, --Asterion^talk 20:20, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem at all with the delay. While not denying the differences, I just thought that it didn't belong in the main article, not even in the relevant section which, in my opinion, should be more focused in "proper" languages (if you asked me whether "Asturian" or "Aragonese" are proper languages...I'd better keep my mouth shut). There has been some cleaning up effort in the article lately and I think is a good idea try to reduce content there and redirect it to more relevant articles. Besides, I am guessin that "andaluz" in Almería is quite different from "andaluz" in Seville and the same say between Cádiz and Jaén, in other words, this info is best explained in detail in the relevant article, instead of presenting a bulk info in the main article. Anyway, it seems we are fine with this. Thanks for the feedback Mountolive | Talk 21:28, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this seems to be a common problem with Spain-related articles. People just try to fit everything in the main one instead of starting individual ones and adding a link back. Hopefully if the Spain Wikiproject takes off the situation will improve. Best wishes, --Asterion^talk 21:33, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nearly Headless Nick RfA > RfC

• I've C&Ped the statements from the RfA to Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington (2nd RfC) on the basis that there seems to be agreement that the issue should be taken up in RfC. You may wish to ratify, modify, withdraw, etc your statement if you have made one, or add a statement if you have not. Balancer 23:52, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Hey Asterion, thank you very much for the "Firm but Fair Award". I really appreciated it. :) All the best, Sarah 15:41, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trabant photo

Hello,
I am interested in using your Trabant 1.1 photo for a German project I am working on. How should I cite your photo?
Thank you,
Busfault 03:18, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay. Feel free to use it. A mention of wikipedia would be fine. I may have some other Trabi pictures somewhere else. Cheers, --Asterion^talk 20:14, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Next step on the Srebrenica massacre article

Asterion, I'll move the "genocide deniers vs critics" entry on Wikipedia:NPOV to the Talk:Srebrenica massacre page as you suggested. However, I'd like your more general opinion on how to deal with the Srebrenica massacre article, especially since I know that you were involved in the Kosovo article where much of the same type of seemingly irreconcileable conflict paralyzed the article. I've tried by suggesting a fresh start but (so far) have not had a very prouductive response. What are the possible options for a next step? Answer either here or on my talk page. Regards Osli73 09:02, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Serious Vandal on Transnistria page

Hi there, for some reason I remember you as an admin, am i correct. If so take a look at Transnistria we have a crazed vandal there today. Buffadren 15:09, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why you speak like that? maybe you're a vandal.--Criterium 15:41, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IllyrianKosova case

Although a troll, I am most certain that he's not Hipi Zhdripi. Hipi (in the Albanian wikipedia known as Dan) retired from September-October 2006 from all wiki-activity.

You can do what you like, the account smells to me like a throwaway abusive trollish one, but if I were you, I'd put it on parole.

Cheers. --PaxEquilibrium 18:34, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid you're wrong in this instance. Hipi's definitely back. The language is the same and he is also editing from AOL dynamic IP addresses as before (i.e. 172.180.227.247. Regards, --Asterion^talk 00:58, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GreaterSerbianist link on wiki

Hi, Asterion.
You (or some of admins) should look on what's going on the page History of the Serbs.
On the "external links" section, there's a link to the page, that openly declares itself as part of "Highduke's Greater Serbia Homepage".
Even worse, that page is titled "The origin of the Serbs and all Serb-derived pseudo-ehtnic groups in the western & central Balkans (Montenegrins macedonians, bosniaks, stokavian ‘croats’ & albanized Serbs)".
Are we going to tolerate that? Kubura 20:59, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Same story with the article Serboi. Look the section "external links". All links are from the same, openly GreaterSerbianist, page. Kubura 21:06, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I could not visit the link as it was dead. In any case, I do not think a geocities website can be considered "reliable", hence I removed it. Regards, --Asterion^talk 20:11, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm here to inform you that the "famous" link works [12]. See the site title. Also, see the subpage of that site [13] and insulting contents in the page title ("pseudo-" etc.). Kubura 20:29, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You helped choose Atmosphere as this week's WP:ACID winner

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive. This week Atmosphere was selected to be improved to featured article status. Hope you can help.

AzaBot 01:17, 7 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Trentino-South Tyrol and South Tyrol

Hi Asterion, could you lend some input to the polls we are conducting on Trentino-South Tyrol and South Tyrol? I remember you followed this debate for some time. Any opinion, and one hopefully that includes some reference(s), explanation, recommendations, etc. would be very appreciated. We made some progress on T-ST so far. Anyway, this is not to replace the mediation by Lar, but he just hasn't been able to get around to helping us find a global solution. So, we get kind of impatient maybe. :} take care, Taalo 01:28, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning your Admin Coaching assignments

Your name is still listed at Wikipedia:Admin coaching/Volunteers. The department is heavily backlogged with admin coaching requests, and we need your help!

Note that the instructions may have changed since the last time you checked, and the department now follows a self-help process.

If you don't currently have a student, or if you believe you can handle another one, please select a student from the request list at Wikipedia:Admin coaching/Requests and contact them. See the instructions on Wikipedia:Admin coaching. Good luck.

If you are no longer available to coach, , please remove yourself from the volunteers list.

Thank you. The Transhumanist    03:20, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:216.20.110.226

Hi Asterion,

Could you please review this user's talk page and see if any administrative action is required.

Thanks Blipadouzi 13:16, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

motion to close mediation

hello there,

there was a mediation offer quite a while ago concerning the issue of Trentino-South Tyrol. I am happy to announce that the issue has been discussed, voted upon and settled. However the mediation offer still needs to be officially closed. Please take a minute to visit the page Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-10-20 Trentino-South Tyrol and put your signature at the bottom if you agree with the decision, thank you. sincerely Gryffindor 20:25, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• A very important note. This mediation offer concerned the greater overall naming convention to use in this region, not just the name of the region itself. We came up with a very good compromise for the regional name itself. I for one am still looking forward for Lar to help us out. Taalo 21:33, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

President of Spain

Hey there. You left a message at my talk. Did you mean me or were you responding to Steve? Cheers Raystorm 22:19, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry mate, wrong talk page. I should have left it at Steve's. Cheers, --Asterion^talk 22:23, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*Grin* I was indeed a bit confused when I read it. Thanks for the quick response. ;-) Cheers! Raystorm 22:24, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If I get a chance, I will probably take this to WP:RM to sort things out once and for all. I would drop you a line given the case. Thanks, --Asterion^talk 22:32, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

Thanks, SqueakBox 15:09, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Admin to the Rescue!

Asterion,

I'm sure you are very busy with Admin duties, but maybe you can spare a moment to help with a small issue.

Swdavis67 has now reverted TechCrunch#Criticism 14 times. Indeed, these 14 reverts are his only contribution to Wikipedia. The exacting wording of TechCrunch#Criticism was recently settled by this Mediation, and yet Swdavis67 continues to revert this section. He has been warned on his talk page and did not respond to the invitation to participate in the mediation.

This user's entire function on Wikipedia is to revert TechCrunch#Criticism. I respectfully appeal to your sysop powers to best deal with this issue as you see fit.

Your help is very much appreciated. All the best,

Jonathan Stokes 00:59, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Update: This user continues to revert TechCrunch#Criticism. I have notified Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism for help. Jonathan Stokes 05:18, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am also following the issue. Though not involved in the initial issue I helped organize the medcabal case and am trying to see it through dispute resolution. Is there any way to lock the TechCrunch#Criticism section so it will not be further vandalized? Wikidemo 02:32, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PSA

Hi Asterion. I was updating this table and have hit here [14] the PSA. I know what's that, it is the Partido Socialista Andaluz, which in the first Catalan elections to the Catalan Parliament won a handful of seats.

Now, the question I have for you is: do you know if this is a defunct party? I suspect yes, but I don't know.

I think this is not to be confused to the latter Partido Socialista de Andalucía by Pedro Pacheco (la justicia es una cachondeo ;) because the latter seems to be a Andalucía only and newer party, but I don't have a clue for the Partido Socialista Andaluz, which shares the acronym with...is it a refoundation?

The Partido Socialista Andaluz (the one which took a few seats in the Catalan election) does not have an article in the Spanish wikipedia either and the existing entry for the Pacheco party does not mention the former, so I am confused.

Anyway, you have a nice Easter and just let me know when possible, so that I can complete the updating of that table. Mountolive | Talk 05:27, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mountolive, technically speaking, it is the Partido Andalucista (at the time, still including Pacheco in its ranks). The PSA was born in 1976 out of Alianza Socialista de Andalucía (ASA) and Reconstrucción Socialista de Andalucía (RSA). ASA was the main regionalist party and one of the most active members of the democratic opposition during the late Franco period. Shortly after, the first ever mitin since the Spanish Civil War was organised by ASA in February 1976 (it was also the first time the Andalusian flag was allowed to be waved in a public event. This article is quite comprehensive. The PSA cannot be understood without considering the situation of the Andalusian immigrants in Catalonia. You could even say that at the time, it was more successful over there than in Andalusia, where it ran in coalition with Tierno Galván's Partido Socialista Popular, got a single MP in 1977, who later defected to PSOE, leaving them without parliamentary representation (got to love politics! ;-)) Asterion^talk 11:58, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Había que vernos, dando voces en andaluz por los pueblos de cinturón de Barcelona a favor de Jordi Pujol"...yes, really, you've got to love them! :D

That's an interesting paper indeed (thank you)...and not only because you got to see Federico Jiménez Losantos as the responsible of the PSA-Aragon branch.... in Catalonia, which sounds kinda humourous these days, don't you think?

Still, mhh... there's something I don't get: you say that the PSA is the immediate predecessor of the PA but, I seem to understand from that paper that they were not in the same structure (I mean PSA in Andalucía and PSA in Catalonia, Aragón and elsewhere) but they were autonomous cells, in other words, there was not any General Secretary in Seville or anywhere in Andalucía that the PSA Catalan branch reported to, they just freely coordinated policies, is this correct?

I need this info to list the PSA in that Catalan politics table either as a local party or Spain-wide.

What seems confirmed from that paper is that the PSA is definitely defunct, right? I will list it as defunct party there, then.

Thank you for your help. Mountolive | Talk 06:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Organisation / Organization

Considering that the most important High IQ societies, Mensa, was created by an Australian and an Englishman, I find quite disruptive your "spelling" corrections. Please refer to Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#National_varieties_of_English.--Asterion^talk 15:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This was addressed on the Mensa International talk page (where they use -ize) ... I was just following the precedent set last summer ... BTW, American and British English spelling differences says ...

Worldwide, -ize endings prevail in scientific writing and are commonly used by many international organizations.

... regardless, it's a tempest in a tea pot and not worth edit waring ... "Two peoples separated by a common language." —68.239.79.97 (talk · contribs) 16:55, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lada picture

I have just found a picture of MY car (yellow Lada 1500 WLU 599S) taken at Stanford Hall May 2006. I am quite pleased that this image can be seen world-wide! One small correction, it is titled as 1600cc but is actually only 1500cc

Regards, Martin —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.200.141.86 (talk) 19:36, 8 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Glad you liked it. I think I got the info off the DVLA website but it could be incorrect or maybe it was a typo of mine. I will get this changed for you. By the way, I did not see the car in Stamford Hall this year. With the kind of miserable weather we had, I guess it was the most sensible thing to do! Cheers, --Asterion^talk 19:40, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous user in Salvador Allende

Hi, please see User talk:CSTAR#Anonymous user again. Vints 06:54, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of songs containing covert references to real musicians

You may want to weigh in at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 April 15#List of songs containing covert references to real musicians, since you were involved in a previous discussion of this article. - Jmabel | Talk 05:40, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Satesclop

User:Satesclop is doing it again. Badagnani 17:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He is doing it yet again. Badagnani 19:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bosnian Genocide

Whatever the context, and whatever Philip Baird Shearer's motives and justification, thanks for pointing out that that sort of drastic and arbitrary action taken without previous involvement in debate at an article's Discussion page are simply provocative. All the best. --Opbeith 10:20, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:24 - Day 3 - 6 pm END TITLES.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:24 - Day 3 - 6 pm END TITLES.JPG. 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 06:55, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Admin coaching.

I would like to know what you think about my prospects for an RfA. I have been here a while now and would like to help out more. I would appreciate if you would consider coaching me for adminship, if you have the time. Joshua John Lee 12:47, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to disappoint you but unfortunately I am pretty much inactive at this moment. I wish you luck. --Asterion^talk 19:30, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blanking

User:Satesclop is back! http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3ANational_Anthems_of_Europe&diff=133447393&oldid=132101182 Badagnani 16:59, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ciudad en Andalucia

¡Hola! Quiso preguntarte algo a tí porque estás de Andalucía y escribiste en el artículo sobre Antequera. He hecho dos fotos ([15], [16]) de la alguien ciudad en Andalucía entre Granada y Sevilla. He examinado las fotos de tales ciudades en Wikipedia y WikiCommons y me parece que es Antequera pero no estoy cierto. ¿Puedas determinar cual ciudad es este? ¿O quizá conoces a alguien quien puede?

ps. perdoneme por mi español ) Alæxis_¿question? 14:48, 30 May 2007 (UTC) pps. no es offtopic porque quiso cargar la primer foto al WikiCommons ))[reply]

Hi Alæxis. In all honesty, I have only driven past the A92 a couple of times but I reckon it could be Antequera. The church tower looks similar and the building on the top of the hill appears to be the Moorish castle. De todas maneras, no estoy completamente seguro. El problema es que vivo en Inglaterra por lo que no te puedo asegurar que vaya a estar cerca de Antequera en los próximos meses. Saludos, --Asterion^talk 19:34, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see. Thx, anyway. Alæxis_¿question? 09:54, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He mirado las fotos de Antequera al flickr y ahora estoy seguro que fotografié esta ciudad. Alæxis_¿question? 18:29, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Me alegra de que hayas resuelto tu duda. Saludos, --Asterion^talk 18:45, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Blowland

Can you please block User:84.241.150.26 and User:Blowland? They have no constructive edits whatsoever, and keep on vandalising my userpage. Can you please, have this activeties stopped by banning 'em? My page is being vandalised on a near daily base now! -)-(-H- (|-|) -O-)-(- 09:11, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was banned for edits on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariano_Pavone

My IP (86.41.74.50]) was banned for supposed "spam" edits. I was updating the page as the player has moved to another club. A link added by some else was not allowed by that Bot thing. I was unaware of this and every time it was changed back to the original edit I couldn't understand why. Now I know so things should be ok. The thing is however, when I updated the page the link was still there, but when the bot re-edited it, it was still there. You guys should sort that out. Kind of stupid to punish me and then revert it back to the problem you had mentioned. Strange. Also how is a link to a fansite spam???

Also I forgot to log in so this is me logged in. --It's simple, really simple.... 17:46, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Nordic Crusader

While I definitely your intervention on the article Negroid, I do believe a closer inspection the dispute is warranted. User:Nordic Crusader is reverting against the consensus of two other editors and his edits are basically vandalism or troll like, and he or she is trying the best to make them appear as genuine. He is continuing to violate the 3rr rule.Noticeboard Muntuwandi 11:26, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did in fact make a report earlier on for which he did not pay any attention. It gets a little frustrating when someone is clearly trying to vandalize and nobody seems to be taking any action. vandalism

Acroterion

I wanted to say hello, since I did a namechange recently and discovered afterwards that there was an admin named Asterion, complete with a blue signature like mine. It looked a little too similar, so I've changed my sig. I don't think there will be any confusion (Cecropia apparently didn't think so either), but I wanted to alert you to my existence. Acroterion _(talk) 12:15, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. --Asterion^talk 22:43, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:White canary.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:White canary.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Psychonaut 13:59, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Departures Magazine Image Request

Hello,

My name is Megan Cummins. I am with the photo dept. at Departures Magazine, a luxury travel and lifestyle magazine based out of New York.

I am writing to request any hi-resolution images you have of the Lada Riva car from the 1970s-1980s. I noticed you had one image posted on wikimedia. Do you have a hi-res version of that one? Do you have any additional images?

Please let me know as soon as possible, as we are very pressed for time!!

Also, we will be happy to credit you or your company in our magazine.

Thank you!

Megan Cummins 212.642.1947 [e-mail]

Hi Megan, I will check tomorrow and get back to you by email. It is probable that the resolution would not get any higher, as the pictures were on Photo CD format, taken with a standard 35mm camera. Nonetheless, I would see what I can dig out for you. Regards, --Asterion^talk 22:42, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suspected sockpuppet

Hi, Asterion.
I've talked with some other users, and they told be that it might be very possible that user Hvarako is a sockpuppet of user Purger.
The thing that this user is someone's sockpuppet is that Hvarako has no content on his userpage. The link is red, which is the case with user accounts created solely for hiding the identity of the true vandal.
Second, he hasn't replied at all on the talkpage (although he left comments on some talkpages). Kubura 09:32, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would say the editing style is different. If you want, try filing a report. I do not have CheckUser privileges myself, so you would need to follow process. --Asterion^talk 22:20, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

thanks for your feedback,. I though his user page was a forum for discusion. I do not consider my actions as vandalism Hxseeker 19:04, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Userbox

It seems that you think the userbox is acceptable, but that user, together with an admin, blocked and protected the talkpage of User:Anonimu for having a similar disclaimer on his talkpage and later, for having that userbox included on his talkpage. See User talk:Anonimu--Thus Spake Anittas 22:13, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Different admins have different criteria or approach a problem from a different perspective. Personally I do not think that the userpages of active editors should be edited without previous discussion with the involved party. Regards, --Asterion^talk 22:18, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. --Thus Spake Anittas 22:26, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: User:Maurice27

See WP:UP#NOT. All I'm doing is removing polemical statements from userpages. And while it's discouraged to edit other people's pages without permission, it's not prohibited. Thanks, Will ^(talk) 22:19, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is not official policy. --Thus Spake Anittas 22:27, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand there is an active discussion on WP:AN/I. I will keep an eye on it. Regards, --Asterion^talk 22:29, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a guideline. Which means you should follow it. The only difference between that and a policy is that a policy must be followed. Then again, why have that section when no-one bothers following it? Will ^(talk) 22:36, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not use my own talk page to reply to other users. Make your point at the ongoing AN/I entry. Thanks! --Asterion^talk 22:38, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming page Croatian War to its old proper title

Hi, I have started proposal for renaming the page, that is kept under unnatural and POV name by a cabal of Croatian editors (see title for sister Bosnian War - wikipedia should at least be consistent with its names). However, the discussion has been closed quickly, and though I have reopened the discussion I worry that Croatian users are using all sorts of dirty tricks to prevent this move; as you were protected te page and suggested me to start this, I expect you to help support this procedure that you suggested in the first place; clearly many users who were for the move before, like ChrisO who is not Serb or Croat etc didnt even get chance to comment. If this is the way that a clique of editors obviously a minority should push their POV title then I have very serious issue with the way it is dealt. Discussion is prevented and not only move. Hvarako

permission to use photo

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/Van_accident.jpg

hello - i am looking at the photo at this link, and altho it says its use is ok as long as attributed to its author or licensor, i am not sure how to credit it correctly.

i am writer, working on a driver ed project for a client.

i would very much appreciate being able to use the foto and crediting it correctly to you.can you tell me how to do that?

many thanks, karenna c

Simply attribute it to wikipedia user "Asterion" and provide a link to my userpage http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Asterion. Thanks, --Asterion^talk 00:10, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

photo permit

many thanks. the photo is perfect for our natural forces section. i appreciate it. - kc

Thank you

Thank you! Squamate 01:03, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i need your help with an article

dear asterion, i heard that you are an administer so i came to you. in the hobbit movie article, i added a category called "The Hobbit Movie Plot Details" it has very important details and it is much needed in the article, but i am wondering if you can take a look at it and make the neccessary changes that are needed. after all, you have been doing this much longer than i have.

I suggest you discuss the matter on the article talk page. Admins' job is not to rule in content disputes. Regards, --Asterion^talk 20:49, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

something went wrong

i made a new article about lions and saved it, but when i went to read it later, i can't find it. your an administer, can u find out if it was deleted or what happened to ti

Dollar sign/Cifrão

Please reconsider my suggestion for a merge between the Dollar sign and Cifrão articles. Read them both, I'm sure you'll see why I did that. And if you feel the need to remove them, don't just remove one of the merge request boxes; at least remove the one from the Cifrão article as well. SergioGeorgini 09:51, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand what you mean. However, as the Cifrão is only one of the multiple theories on the origin of the dollar sign, I doubt it would be widely accepted by other wikipedians. I have nothing at all against the Cifrão theory and I provided a valid reference to back it up. Simply, I just do not think that merging Dollar sign to Cifrão would give a balanced picture. And viceversa, I believe Cifrão deserves its own article. The reason why I deleted the merge-to tag was because the request was badly formed, in the sense that there was no explanation about it on any of the talk pages. If you want to reinstate the tag at Dollar sign, please explain your reasons for a merge in the article talk page. Also, can you please clarify if you meant merging Cifrão into Dollar sign or Dollar sign into Cifrão? Regards, --Asterion^talk 10:25, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jpmo22 21:38, 22 August 2007 (UTC) I realy dont know how to discuss here, but I want to say that Cifrão and Dollar Sign are different simbols (or signs). Brazilian Real use Cifrão (${\displaystyle \mathrm {S} \!\!\!\Vert }$) and American Dollar use $ (the Dollar Sign). So I cant see a good reason to marge this articles.[reply]

Accounts

I have been looking User talk:UstashkiDom and on user talk is writen how it is not allowed for 1 user to have more accounts. If this is true can you block user Roremaster or Roramaster because this is 1 user with 2 accounts and he is editing only 3 or 4 articles ? ----Rjecina 19:55, 23.August 2007 (UTC)

Done. I blocked the account with less edits. Let me know if abusing multiple accounts occurs. --Asterion^talk 20:03, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think User:UstashkiDom needs a little enforced Wikibreak. Your thoughts? (since you've been dealing with him more) Dina 20:26, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My patience ran out too. I was blocking the account at the same time as you were. --Asterion^talk 20:30, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for tagging the talk. Dina 20:33, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monte

Hola! Thanks for your changes to Montejurra, more references are welcome! However, instead of deleting ref, let's cumulate them! Two refs are always better than one, especially for controversial subjects like that. Your ref to the Economist is interesting, would you have the date by any chance? Que te vaya bien, seguro nos encontramos por otros lados del wiki! PS: tienes alguna idea de quienes son el Partido Carlista de Euskalherria-EKA ? Hay k trabajar sobre los articulos acerca de los Carlistas, y la verdad que para alguien k no sepa mucho sobre este asunto, se pierde muy facilmente... Tazmaniacs 01:19, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

El problema es que la referencia que borré ya no existe[17]. A lo mejor es posible acceder a ella a través de archive.org pero no lo he intentado. Regarding Partido Carlista de Euskalherria-EKA, I guess it is either the local branch or a splint-off of Carlos Hugo's original Carlist Party. In any case, I would be surprised if it has got any popular support or else, as since the PC entry in IU and prompt exit, the PC has been basically non-existent (I even doubt they have actually contested any local seats since then). Also, would it not make more sense to rename the article Montejurra events, considering that 90% of its content refers to the massacre and not the remembrance yearly acts? Regards, --Asterion^talk 06:26, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

De acuerdo para el cambio de nombre,¿ tal vez Massacre de Montejurra es más preciso? Tazmaniacs 08:52, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Preferiría el nombre 1976 Montejurra events como título para ser más precisos y neutrales, a la par crear redirections desde Montejurra massacre, 1976 Montejurra massacre o incluso Montejurra 76 (he visto este unas cuantas veces). --Asterion^talk 17:44, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am deeply grateful

Impressed as I am that you are in a position to welcome me on behalf of the whole Wikipedia community, I have to say that you are a few months too late. I seem to have managed, and Wikipedia has not fallen over. (Sorry to disobey your instruction, but I didn't want this stuff on my page.) Kirker 12:26, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

U Dom

OK, but still I find it important and appropriate to have a notification for other people to see that it is unacceptable. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 20:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I thought it was a note left to the user. I would not mind to block the account as inappropriate username but I would rather the user to make an effort and request a name change on their own. Cheers, --Asterion^talk 20:59, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still alive and kicking :)

I hope you are having a nice Summer. Weather is all miserable in England for a change... Thanks a lot for the support at Talk:Spanish literature. I have been away from wikipedia for quite a few months. Now that I have some more time, I am trying to expand and clean-up some articles. I have recently got access to several databases and electronic journals. So if you need anything, just drop me a line or two. Cheers, --Asterion^talk 17:32, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh great i'll surely bother you from time to time. -- FayssalF - ^Wiki me up® 03:47, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to participate in Wikipedia:WikiProject Latinos, a project dedicated to developing and improving articles about Latinos and Hispanics. Currently, we are discussing prospects for the project. Your input would be greatly appreciated!

Happy First Edit Day!

Happy First Edit Day, Asterion/Archive 12, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day!

 Socks 01  03:29, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Isla Canela

Hello Asterion. Actually, I'm going to Isla Canela for the first time in a couple of hours. I can't believe I haven't gone there already coz it's just across the river. I might take some pictures for Wikipedia (well, I've already taken some pictures of it, but from the Portuguese side so you can only see a distant shoreline and some buildings) :-) I hope you're having a great Summer. Best regards, Húsönd 11:41, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Asterion. I went to Isla Canela yesterday and loved it. Pretty much my kind of beach, the water was warm, tranquile and so shallow that I felt like I was in a giant swimming-pool rather than in the waters of an oceanside beach. I just created Isla Canela by the way. I didn't like Ayamonte that much, I found it far less attractive, peaceful and clean than Vila Real just across the river. And all the houses there had grattings protecting the doors and windows of the ground floors. Not very appealing really. :-/ I went to Ayamonte again this evening for the Angústias festivities. Not the best occasion for parking a car in the city, no vacant spots anywhere (if we parked the car any further I guess we'd be in Portugal again). The place was totally packed with people at 2:00 am on a week day! But, well, I guess the entire population of Ayamonte has no choice but to go to the fiestas coz people won't be able to sleep anyway (the music can be easily heard on the Portuguese side of the river and it's deafening loud in Ayamonte). I also saw a stall selling ice-cream more than twice the price they cost in Portugal. And quite a large botellón gathering. So Spanish. :-) Enjoy your Summer! Best regards, Húsönd 03:24, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request

I am user:PIO unlogged for technical problem and my request is for impossible agreement with ill-famed POV warrior DIREKTOR in Istrian exodus. DIREKTOR makes only disruption removing my integrations in edit warring with a lot of reverts against a dozen of other editors: you can control related hystory and discussion. I request block DIREKTOR for disruption and long edit warring as troll's manner: DIREKTOR is involved in many edit wars because he started with POV edits, you can read user talk:DIREKTOR#Istria. In alternative you can mediate or total protect article: umpteenth total protection caused by flamer DIREKTOR!!!! You can protect in version -14:09, 7 September 2007 151.33.95.134 (Talk) (15,196 bytes) (Undid revision 156270114 by DIREKTOR (talk)- against DIREKTOR's vandalism. Regards and best wishes. user:PIO, 00:17 9 September 2007

Trivia debate

Could you please spend a moment to add your 2 cents to Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not#Sections vs. collections and also Wikipedia:Requested moves#September 12, 2007? I think that you had strong opinions on this matter on Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Template:Trivia. I understand that you are in favour of trivia on Wikipedia, but I may be mistaken. I am the direct opposite, but in the interest of community consensus I'm letting you know of these two pages where debate is continuing. - Ta bu shi da yu 08:51, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have no strong feelings about trivia but I found the Template:Trivia far more disruptive than most trivia sections. My criteria is to use common sense when deciding on whether something adds any encyclopedic value to an article. But as I said before, I oppose one-size-fits-all solutions. Thanks, --Asterion^talk 19:46, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Marco Polo birth place

The RfC results are quite clear, ad you can judge on your own. I suppose the page shall be unblocked and restored to a more correct version. Regards. --Giovanni Giove 13:50, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I repeat the above request. Please, have a look to the conclusions, otherwise suggest me the way to stop RfC that appears to be concluded.--Giovanni Giove 13:22, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, pure childish nonsense by Giovanni Giove. He posts RfCs, but does not really participate in them (just see the RfC posts on the Marco Polo talkpage), It's just part of his standard "modus operandi" to make his version stick, I'm afraid (see my post on Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Dalmatia).

This guy childishly writes "Conclusion" in the RfC, writes something that goes with his own beliefs, and then calles in any random Admin hoping he might quickly take a look at only his "Conclusion". It is imperative for him that you act quickly before someone can say that there is no conclusion drawn yet, hence the repeated request. In short, he is lying, the RfC does NOT "appear to be concluded". DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 15:21, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Give also a look to the offensive sentences against me, posted in the RfC. All the user agree that the possible birth in Curzola is baseless. Just DIREKTOR and Zem. refuse to face the evidence. You can judge on your own.--Giovanni Giove 17:08, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh come on, Giove! The only ones that agree are you and your (not so radical) friend, and you both belong to one side of the argument. The other side (User:Zenanarh and me) does NOT agree with your "conclusion". Its all there, FFS, why do you constantly try to biase people so childishly? An Admin will check your claims, you know... DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 13:01, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bormalagurski's Ban

Hey Asterion,

Boris who is blocked from editing Wikipedia requested that I transfer you this message:

Hey, you may remember me as a friend from a long time ago, I'm en:User:Bormalagurski, I was blocked for a year after the Kosovo arbitration and my block was due to expire in October 2007. A few weeks ago, I made another account to write 3 articles about my heritage and admitted that the acount was a sockpuppet, because I had no interest in keeping that account since I wrote what I wanted.. But then they lengthened the block to my Bormalagurski account to another year.. When people search my name on google, they can see my Wikipedia account and that I'm blocked. I'm tired of this. I have noone else to turn to, I need your help. Either: 1. return the block to expire in October, so that I can remove the block template in a month and not have people thinking I'm some idiot that got blocked from Wikipedia; OR, 2. delete my Bormalagurski account, the page, the talk page, everything, because I can't stand this anymore.. I hope you understand what I mean. I made my mistakes on Wikipedia, but do I really have to suffer another year of the blackening of my name? I'm making documentaries for Serbian National Television, I only pray that they never search my name on Google, or else my career is at stake... People there don't want "nationalists" (as they describe me on Wikipedia) working for them... I hope you can help somehow. You know the e-mail: bormalagurski 'at' hotmail.com

The original message was posted here. Regards, --Bolonium 23:52, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, Wiki's really gone fascist. Online dictatorship will become a term in my politics textbook in two editions from now. Well, I hope you can guess who this is Asterion. (And no, it's not Boris, admins).

P.S. Germany was great. 207.161.45.11 05:38, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Maybe this IP should be blocked: 65.220.126.190. for continual vandalising. See Special:Contributions/65.220.126.190. Some kind of idiot or what? Cheers. Zenanarh 20:40, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish time

From the talk page:

It is not syllable-timed. You have Agudas (Oxytone), Llanas (Paroxytone) and Esdrújulas (Proparoxytone) words indeed. --Asteriontalk 19:15, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I wish you'd come along before. Thanks for confirming my original thesis. I shall now remove that confusion from the article. Rothorpe 19:48, 30 September 2007 (UTC) Rothorpe 19:54, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Horse in stable.jpg

Good evening, Asterion. I am ja:User:Kurihaya, a Japanese Wikipedia user. I will appreciate you if you allow me to post your image file "Horse in stable.jpg" to Wikimedia Commons in your stead. I edit the article for "bandage (horse)" in ja:Wikipedia here and your image file will help us much. Regards and best wishes, --Kurihaya 17:59, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, of course. Feel free to do do. Thanks, Asterion^talk 00:01, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, Asterion. I posted your image file to Commons, here, categorizing in commons:Category:Horse_equipment and commons:Category:Horse. Please confirm the license is properly granted. Then I edited the article in ja:Wikipedia. Thank you again. --Kurihaya 08:50, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seat 127 with extra doors

File:Seat 127 four door Ribadasella E.jpg

Dear Asterion

I've just been working through my old colour slides. A habit which I had and which tended to be regatrded as barking mad by friends and (even more so) by the occasional girl friend acquired involved photographing cars: I say not barking mad but merely eccentric.

I should like to replace your picture (at least I think it's your picture) of a four door Seat 127 with one of my own. Would you mind if I did that, please?

Thanks for thinking on it.

Whether you reply here or on the Fiat 127 wiki-anglophone page is down to you: I'll get to it either way!

Regards

Charles01 14:38, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Charles,

Thanks for letting me know. In all honesty, there is no need to ask me about it. Your picture is indeed much better. By any chance, have you got one where the 127 is photographed in an angle (i.e. showing the front and the side of the car)? Best regards, Asterion^talk 19:11, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, any chance of working out some magic and finding any old shots of a 124? :) --Asterion^talk 19:17, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Asterion. Done that.

I do not think it is possible to insert coloured heckles to your text. Therefore:

Q: By any chance, have you got one where the 127 is photographed in an angle

A: No. That would be better wouldn't it.

Q: any chance of working out some magic and finding any old shots of a 124?

A: I have one or two, but (1) from brief inspection they are all of Fiats rather than of Seats and (2) they're all pretty indifferent one way or another. Both Fiat and Seat 124 sold well over many years: I can't help thinking there must be lost of better images out there waiting to be uploaded!

Regards Charles01 19:39, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Fiat 124 would be great too as in the current article, it is showing one of a Lada I took at Stamford Hall show a couple of years ago. There is also a Seat 124 photo in the article (maybe it is time I start its own separate entry).

When I was living in Spain, my next door neighboor used to own a 127. Funnily enough, I never thought about taking any pictures. I do regret it now. I now own a Zastava 311, which looks remarkably similar when look from the front (see Image:Zastava Yugo 311 1116cc.jpg). Cheers, Asterion^talk 19:51, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Understood: thanks for persisiting on this because I agree that you're right. I've added the best 124 photo I could muster. Actually I think it's perfectly ok (the photo) if not a particular stunner. Anyhow, it's not of a Lada. It's got 'Fiat' written on the front. As for photographing your neighbours' cars ... one can get some strange reactions! SaludatosCharles01 21:02, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is a beautiful shot. Thanks very much, Asterion^talk 21:05, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your Berlin Tram Pic

Hello,

I noticed youve put up a pic of Berlin 3006 at the NTM. Could you please also add this to the list of tramcars?

Plus, I would be interested in any other pictures you may have fore my website, www.transportcentre.co.uk, in the Tram Centre, then British Trams, then Preserved Trams, then national Tramway Museum section. Please let me know if you wish to go ahead with this!

Cheers,

Bluegoblin7 19:06, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bluegoblin,

I am not really the best person to write about the tramcar. I rally have no idea about trams, I just happened to be Crich recently. Feel free to use my picture elsewhere as long as you comply with its Creative Commons ShareAlike licence terms. Regards, Asterion^talk 21:13, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re. Can you have a look at this, please?

Thanks for telling me about that thread, Asterion. I've just added my comment. Best regards, Húsönd 01:29, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PCE

Hi Asterion. I found that Spanish Communist Party and Communist Party of Spain are different articles. I was a bit shocked of finding the former's article as a stub, and I edited a bit there only to find out immediately after, that Communist Party of Spain is the right place for this, unless I am terribly mistaken and both are different organizations, such as the Partido Comunista de los Pueblos de España, but I think these articles are covering the same organization.

I don't know how to initiate that process of merging (actually I think deleting Spanish Communist Party is a much better idea, since all the info there is contained in the larger Communist Party of Spain). Yourself being and administrator, I thought you could manage this if you have some time.

Did you see my post in the infamous Nationalities of Spain? If you have comments, please, do not hesitate to let me know.

Thanks. Mountolive | Talk 21:45, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mountolive,

It seems that the Partido Comunista Español was one of the two entities that then merged to form the Partido Comunista de España. In all honesty, it would make sense to delete the former and redirect the entry to the latter. Nonetheless, I will play safe and add a {{mergeto}} tag and wait a few days. I am going to be away until Sunday evening. We could then see if no one opposes to the merge procedure.

I just read your post. Thanks very much for the offer. I cannot promise anything but will give it a try. The best thing to do is to start it from scratch, I reckon. I will create a "sandbox" page with some kind skeleton draft and take it from there. Personally, I would rather heard from some other editors too but we shall wait and see.

Best wishes, Asterion^talk 23:08, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Happy 2008 for you, too. Asterion, we soon forgot about this PCE thing (and, actually, I may have been wrong anyways, I just reminded of it today when I started writing this message here, I just made a small edit there to clear it up and I think I'm actually fine with it now).

However, I rise to the occasion to remind you of the infamous Nationalities of Spain (whatever its name is). It is a dreadful article and really deserves euthanasia...after dozen of anon unsourced additions and no one really giving a f@#k about this article, it has come to its current misery state. It has been like that for years, thus it can remain so for some more extra weeks, but, if you ever find yourself in the mood to work on that from scratch, drop me a line and I'll try help if I can. Its doom (the fact that no one seems to care about this article) could reversely turn out in its means of salvation all the same.

All the best Mountolive _{our unsleepable friend gets the message on an ill wind} 08:11, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to Participate in a Survey

dear Wikipedia Administrator ,

thank you for your kind attention to this message.

My name is Zhan Li and I am a PhD student at the University of Southern California's Annenberg School for Communication. ( You can view my bio (scroll down) for verification here: http://annenberg.usc.edu/Faculty/Doctoral/1.aspx )

I am asking approx. 200 randomly selected Wikipedia administrators if they would like to participate in a brief (it might take you about 10 minutes) online survey about their use of open content online encyclopedias. I am conducting this research for an introductory research methods class under Professor Peter Monge ( http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~monge/ ).

I hope that, if possible, you will participate in this survey. Please note that you must be 18 years older or over to participate.

Here is the link for the online survey, which begins with information pages detailing survey conditions and participant rights as well as my contact details for any questions:

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=a73oeHUjW9QKvYB7fmIb0A_3d_3d

The survey will close at Pacific Standard Time 12:15 AM on Wednesday 14th November. If you have any problems accessing this link, please let me know.

I appreciate your consideration of this request.

Thank you very much Zhan Li ( email: zhanli at usc dot edu ) Zhanliusc 06:11, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Facebook about to be deleted

Hi, as one of the people with a picture on Wikipedia:Facebook, figured you might be interested in knowing that it is up for deletion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Images of Wikipedians (2nd nomination). - Ta bu shi da yu 02:42, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jarama

Hi. You marked the Jarama article as contradictory, but I don't understand what you mean exactly. I see the article is not a very good one, as it talks more about the bloodsheds near the river than about the river per se, but I don't see the contradiction. Maybe you could explain a bit more, and I could see if I can get it fixed. Thank you. Wafry (talk) 15:18, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish politics

Hello Asterion and thanks for the message. I've replied to you on my talkpage. Valenciano (talk) 22:46, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello :-)

I see you were worried about me, you posted a note on my talk page back in February. Well, I'm alive, I was on self-imposed exile from Wikipedia until I graduate. Now that that's done, I'm back :-) I'm glad to see that people wondered where I've been. Anyway, I hope we'll collaborate just as we did a year ago!

BTW, I see you have become an admin! Congratulations! I planed to nominate you myself before I went hiding, and I'm very glad to see that that thing didn't have to wait until I returned :-) --Dijxtra (talk) 19:43, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Repeated, unmotivated deletion of article Bosnian Mujahideen

Asterion, I'm having a problem with a The Dragon of Bosnia who has repeatedly deleted an article which I edit called Bosnian Mujahideen (see edit history here [18]). He has also deleted links to the article on other articles. [19][20][21][22] He seems to be basing his deletion of the article on two sets of arguments:

1. that the term Bosnian Mujahideen does not exist. In fact the term is used by published (research and books) experts.[23]. I admit though that there are other terms often used, such as El Mujahid, El Mujaheed or just Mujahideen (spelled in various forms).
2. claims the article is based on "false info/original research"[24] or "propaganda attempt or original research if you wish, based on unverified sources per WP:RS"[25]. As you will see from the references used in the article it is quite thoroughly sourced from what must be judged to be neutral and/or reliable sources.
3. states that "there is already particular article"[26] This refers to an article called 7th Muslim Brigade, which The Dragon of Bosnia is an editor of. Not only do I find this article to be blatantly POV and lacking in verifiable sources it also does not cover the Bosnian Mujahideen.

In the interest of avoiding an edit war I would like some assistance from you as an adminstrator.Osli73 11:27, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree. There were no Bosnian Mujahideen, just particular units such as El-Mujahid, so I redirected that made-up term to the article about the unit (redundancy). According to ICTY, Serb propaganda fabricated much of these stories so this is not a right place for that. For example there is the whole article about Serb propaganda in the Stakić verdict:The media

One example of such propaganda was the derogatory language used for referring to non-Serbs such as mujahedin, Ustasa or Green Berets, although at the time there were no foreign volunteers in Bosnia.

Read: Wikipedia:No original research:

1. Wikipedia is not a venue for publishing, publicizing or promoting original research in any way. No original research, or NOR, is a corollary to two other policies:
2. Our original major content policy, neutral point of view (NPOV) encourages editors to add undisputed facts, including unbiased accounts of various people's views. It has traditionally forbidden editors from inserting their own views into articles, and demands that Wikipedia balance the relative prominence of differing viewpoints based on their prominence in the relevant field.
3. Our verifiability policy (V) demands that information and notable views presented in articles be drawn from appropriate, reliable sources.

Osli73, you were earlier blocked many times because of your behaviour: [27] so I advice you to stop propagating false info/original research.

You shouldn't misuse Wikipedia by uploading unverified photos, too. The war is over, propaganda should be over too. The Dragon of Bosnia 11:29, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to Dragon of Bosnia,

1. the sources I cite (which you do not contest or mention) do specifically refer to the "Bosnian Mujahideen"
2. yes, the Bosnian Mujahideen were often referred to as El Mujahid or El Mujaheed, as I state in the article.
3. 'your' article on the 7th Muslim Brigade is, in my opinion, (a) considerably less NPOV, (b) less well sourced (and not verifiable sources either) and (3) deals more with the Mujahideen as they were used in Serb propaganda rather than discussing the actual unit.
4. the article is based on verifiable and reliable sources (pls note the list of references). I have exclusively used American and British media and government sources as well as ICTY documents precisely to avoid the type of knee-jerk accusation of "Serb propaganda" which you claim.
5. I agree that Bosnian Mujahideen was a part of Bosnian Serb propaganda during the war. That doesn't mean they did not exist.

Given the above, I can't see what the basis of your opposition to this article is really based on.Osli73 11:51, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are already articles called 7th Muslim Brigade, and The role of foreign volunteers. This is just redundant WP:OR article, based on unrelaible sources per WP:RS. On the other hand my sources are International court findings. The sources should be relaible, such as verdicts, verified documents, not blog, websites or unverified pictures/photo montague. You also tried to delete the cause of foreign volunteers arrival, and the cause were mass war crimes committed by Serb forces. This is the ICTY conclusion. So when you talk about NPOV, I just can't understand your earlier actions. The Dragon of Bosnia 12:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Osli/Dragon, it is not really up to admins to rule on content disputes. Hence, do not take my words as some kind of "official advice". I am not very familiar with the articles you are mentioning. However, I took the effort of checking for news in Lexis-Nexis and articles on JSTOR containing the sentence "Bosnian Mujahideen" and found only a few results, mostly meaning "Mujahideen in Bosnia". To that effect, I maybe could see the point of creating a separate article under that name (i.e. Mujahideen in Bosnia), which would contain generic details on the subject and would link to more specific articles: 7th Brigade, 17th Brigade, etc. In any case, this is just an idea and I would encourage you both to try to get a second opinion? Regards, Asterion^talk 23:14, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the term Bosnian Mujahideen is not very common, however, it is used by some reputable sources. Also, other version of the name are used (El Mujahid, El Mujahed, Bosnian Mujahedeen, Bosnian Mujahedin, etc.). I think the problem here is that Dragon has constructed a POV article which brushes over and exonerates the Bosnian Mujahideen rather than describing them and is now upset by this article.Osli73 (talk) 00:49, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The sources are not relaible per WP:RS (political forum site, broken links and mailing lists are not relaible sources).

Let's go from the beginning:

• Nettime mailing list - Post by Drazen Pantic on Tue, 9 Oct 2001 couldn't be verified as the link to the article is broken - Page Not Found. And it doesn't contain the term Bosnian Mujahideen. According to WP:Verifiability: "Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." which isn't the case here, to quote: "Propaganda, advocacy, or recruitment of any kind, commercial, political, religious, or otherwise. Of course, an article can report objectively about such things, as long as an attempt is made to approach a neutral point of view. You might wish to go to Usenet or start a blog if you want to convince people of the merits of your favorite views."

• [www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1164071/posts This is an example of WP:NOT content] as it is a political forum, actually The Premier Conservative News Forum. On their site you can find what it is about: "Free Republic is the premier online gathering place for independent, grass-roots conservatism on the web. We're working to roll back decades of governmental largesse, to root out political fraud and corruption, and to champion causes which further conservatism in America. And we always have fun doing it. Hoo-yah!". According to WP:NOT this shouldn't be here.

• This report doesn't contain the term Osli73 is using. It just contains: "foreign mujahideen fighters", and there is already article about foreign soldiers: The role of foreign fighters in the Bosnian war.

• The Hadzihasanovic verdict Osli73 quoted actually discards all his claims about foreign fighters (that they were controlled by Bosnian army, but he didn't include the rest of the quote in the article.) I will quote it here: "However, the Trial Chamber could not establish that the Accused Hadzihasanovic or the Accused Kubura gave any orders to the Mujahedin and that those orders were implemented. Moreover, in the 3000 or so documents the Trial Chamber has analyzed, there is no combat report from the Mujahedin to the Accused, nor any other document which indicates that the Mujahedin were answerable to the Accused. However, in their combat reports, the commanders of the 3rd Corps units often complained of the undisciplined behaviour of the Mujahedin during joint combat operations. The Trial Chamber also notes that prior to 13 August 1993, the 3rd Corps war diaries hardly mention the Mujahedin."

Regards. The Dragon of Bosnia (talk) 07:18, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wb!

Happy New Year and glad to see ya back! ;) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:01, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback?

What is this Rollback I hear they adopted recently? --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 14:06, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Hi Asterion.

Mhh...I have lots of doubts with images here and, what is worse, I dont want to really study their usage in wikipedia ;) as I dont really work with them (they can be sooo bothering!).

But I have this problem with Radio Futura and I will really-really like to get those images used. And it looks like it is a fair usage, too. If you please paid a look here and hereI would really appreciate it. Maybe you being an admin. who knows about it can help me out with this? (ESkog doesnt look like willing to)...

Just if/when you happened to have some time, of course.

Thanks. Mountolive _{all over Battersea, some hope and some dispair} 16:37, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Kosovo

Hey Asterion,

I heard you have been active within the Kosovo subject and would thus like to personally invite you to join the Kosovar WikiProject. Cheers. --Prevalis (talk) 21:13, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed images and Wikipedia:No original research

Hi Asterion,

I've proposed an amendment to Wikipedia:No original research that would strengthen (or more accurately, reiterate) the requirement of editors to reliably source interpretations of images in articles. This would particularly apply to depictions of allegorical or symbolic artworks or artifacts, where the meaning was not immediately clear or was subject to differing interpretations. You can see the text of the proposed amendment at Wikipedia talk:No original research#Interpretation of images.

Another editor involved in the discussion has suggested providing an example of "an actual ongoing dispute to illustrate the problem". I know you're active in editing or monitoring articles in controversial subject areas, and I was wondering if you were aware of any such ongoing disputes. It would specifically have to concern something like an illustration of unclear meaning which editors were disputing what it represented, maybe because of a lack of reliable sourcing about the image itself or about its meaning. If you've come across anything like this scenario, could you please chip in at Wikipedia talk:No original research#Interpretation of images? -- ChrisO (talk) 23:03, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Rfa

I wish to thank you for being supportive of my effort to regain my adminship. Though it was not successful, your support was still very much appreciated. Let me know if there is anything I can do for you. Thank you!--MONGO 17:54, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:UNMIK

A tag has been placed on Template:UNMIK requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 20:51, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Admin Coaching Re-confirmation

Hello, previously you expressed interest in participating in the Wikipedia:Admin coaching project. We are currently conducting a reconfirmation drive to give coaches the opportunity to update their information and capacity to participate in the project. Please visit Wikipedia:Admin coaching/Status to update your status. Also, please remember to update your capacity (5th table variable) in the form of a fraction (eg. 2/3 means you are currently coaching 2 students, and could accept 1 more student). Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 08:57, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Canal Sur

Hi Asterion. I replied to your comment on my talk page 2 months ago and never heard back from you. I was just wondering if you still want to go ahead with your proposal to use a footnote for the availability of Canal Sur? Saludos. --Gibmetal 77^talk 18:28, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Gibmetal77 (any relation to Breed 7 7 ? I love their Zombie cover). I have been off wikipedia since before xmas. I'll get back to you asap. Cheers, Asterion^talk 02:08, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I've taken it from Breed 77 (my favourite band), it's nice to see you like them too :o). No problem, I just thought I'd drop you a line... --Gibmetal 77^talk 08:22, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

University of Prishtina

Greetings! I would like you to reconsider the changes in the article University of Prishtina. The page is now a redirect to a disputed and biased article, which does not offer a true representation of the university as the version you removed. It is offensive for an education establishment of over 30,000 students.--Getoar (talk) 05:26, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your reasoning but the way to solve a content dispute is not by creating a content fork page. Regards, Asterion^talk 05:28, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re. University of...

Hello Asterion. I see that you've resolved your request before I could take any action hehe. :-) Yeah, removing the POV fork was the right thing to do. I'm rather sick of Kosovo articles these days. Quite turbulent waters, with users fighting even over the smallest and most unimportant details. Regards, Húsönd 12:48, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Forage

I saw that you edited the forage page once. I recently made some substantial edits to it and I am a new user, so I am looking for some feedback. Gabacho2 (talk) 21:19, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Air Nostrum logo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Air Nostrum logo.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 10:49, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marsupial lion

Hi, I'm sorry to bother you, but could you please tell UtherSRG to stop edit warring and actually reply to me. I have asked him more than once but he does not seem to want to listen. Thanks Cazique (talk) 17:34, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good to see you back

Cheers, Asterion. :) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:50, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have been -still am indeed- quite busy in real life. Nice to see I have been missed. Regards,--Asterion^talk 23:13, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

:). Same. Prodego ^talk 23:17, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both. Asterion^talk 17:01, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Smile!

Here's Windows Vista for you! Windows Vista somehow promotes WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving something friendly to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Make your own message to spread WikiLove to others! Happy editing! Húsönd 01:47, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Saragossa v. Zaragoza

Please see Talk:Zaragoza#Requested move. Xn4 (talk) 16:18, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Immigrant deaths

The renaming of Immigrant deaths along the U.S.-Mexico border is up for a new vote. Terjen (talk) 02:59, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

help

Hi Asterion. I have a question for you, maybe you can help me. There is a template which I'd suggest for deletion. Still, I know this move is going to be controversial and start lots of wikidrama and brauhaha.

What would you recommend? I am tempted to start debate at the templates for deletion, but I guess the template can be worked out to be less hard to swallow. However, if your suggestion was going to be discussing at the template's talk, that, unfortunately, is not going to work, because it is going to be all the usual suspects (including myself) echoing the same things...all in all, a not nice -and fruitless- experience.

That is why I'd like to hear from someone reviewing it who has little idea about the thing in question, to get the most impartial view possible at this point. I am not asking for, say, "executive action" at this point, but I'd like to hear opinions from people who do not know (and, most important, do not really care) about this topic. Is there any wikipedia corner that you know where I could ask for this? Mountolive _{please, behave} 16:33, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mountolive. What is your reasoning behind deleting the template? Is it a just a controversial one or is it clearly in breach of some policy? I am not sure of the right wikilink but if you look for templates for deletion and have a look at the way these are dealt with, you may realise that there are usually other editors who get involved on most discussions. At the end of the day, these are not polls and it does not matter how many "votes" it gets. Hope it helps. Regards, Asterion^talk 17:01, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

more help

Asterion, I am very sorry to keep bothering you, but, honestly, I dont know who to resort to and things get worse. Now there is user:benimerin (which used to be known as user:joanot until he changed his nick without previous notice) who is pushing all his fringe theories in a number of articles.

The situation gets rather grim, because he is absolutely deaf to whatever he can be told (if he doesnt like it, that is), is like talking to the wall. He's making sudden changes in articles which are submitted to much heat without bothering to comment (or maybe he considers summary edits like this one [28] as "comment"?...).

Now, for example, he is changing all the toponyms to its Valencian form, regardless of its well documented usage in English being the Spanish form (English people talk about Alicante airport, not about Alacant airport and so on).

Whatever progress we could have made in a number of highly controversial articles, he gets it back to the starting point or further back. Those users who are sympathetic to his point of view, but agreeable to discuss (and they have proven their willingness to cooperate and compromise), they kinda look the other way when Benimerin does the "dirty job" and I'm reaching the point of finding myself overwhelmed.

I dont have the time nor the will to waste energies reverting this guy and his fringe theories, but still it is not fair to let him getting away with it.

Asterion, what can I do in this regard? who could I talk to? Thanks a lot. Mountolive _{spare me the suspense} 17:16, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, Asterion. Yes, the page has come back to the original, but that is nothing but the beginning of an edit war. I beg your excuses because I bother you with this and you might not be interested at all, but I hope that you can tell a fellow administrator to involve with it, because the actions of Benimerin are quite disruptive.

As for moving pages, good to hear that it is meant for administrators. Benimerin has been, apparently, in a moving spree: besides the one you know already, he's been here [29] and I think I saw also the same for Alicante (I dont even want to check). Whatever officiality these names have in Spain (by the way both names are equally official) English has adopted the Spanish spelling, but he won't care.

This one reminds me of another user user:independència who recently made this move: [30]. That looks like another move "by any means" which I very much doubt is correct.

So, all in all, the question goes beyond particular edits and is more about users like benimerin or independència who are obviously editting here with an agenda, but then it is tedious to edit warring and else with them, so they may get away with it...

This is really disturbing to me. What tools do we have to stop this kind of editting? is it necessary to bother in long, frustrating and uncertain edit warring to stop these obvious less-than-perfect editors?

Again, I hate to bother you, but, since I am not really acquainted with wikipedia's manor corridors (nor, to be honest, I am really interested in those) I was just hoping you can direct me to somewhere/someone who is able, willing and with the ability to address this kind of problems...Mountolive _{spare me the suspense} 21:01, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, page moves are not always admin-only by default. I just think this was the best way to stop continuous edit wars until a proper move request is done and the matter is settled once and for all.

I understand your frustration with editors who seem to be "on a mission" and, in my opinion, this is one of the worst aspect of wikipedia. It drains you badly indeed. I will keep an eye open over the weekend.

PS: I cannot comment on the article above as I am not familiar with the composer, though it gives me the impression that it may be one of those "a posteriori" name changes, ie he was born in Barcelona ergo his name should be in Catalan... If you can show that he is more known as Miguel than Miquel, a move request should be fine (ie as for José Carreras).

PPS: I noticed the Elche / Elx article too but this one really needs to be put forward for WP:RM. For a start the talk page is under a different name than the article. I cannot just pick one of the two names as the article was renamed to the dual language version in 2006 without no one opposing. So it is a matter of finding out which one is more commonly used in English language, I suppose. Regards, Asterion^talk 21:28, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish people

mtDNA contribution of NW Africa to Iberia is not 10% but 18 %.

Excerpt from "mtDNA Sequences Show Multidirectional Gene Flow in the Western Mediterranean (S. Plaza, 2003)"

"Haplogroup U6 is present at frequencies ranging from 0 to 7% in the various Iberian populations, with an average of 1.8%. Given that the frequency of U6 in NW Africa is 10%, the mtDNA contribution of NW Africa to Iberia can be estimated at 18%, with a 95% confidence interval of 8%-26%"

Vandalism was made by 200.121.244.181 on 4 March 2008 (Revision as of 04:05, 4 March 2008)[31] who replace the right figure of 18% with a wrong value.

So please dont change the figures as the ones specified now are absolutely correct.--90.14.105.62 (talk) 12:20, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the misunderstanding. The fact that you used a potentially misleading edit summary (ie "typo") to amend a paragraph that you had not edited in the first place looked certainly suspicious to me at the time. Regards, Asterion^talk 13:17, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 07:31, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]