User talk:Illythr/Archive 1

Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3→Archive 5

Welcome!

Hello, Illythr, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  RJFJR 01:27, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm sure I'm not a bot (for one thing, bots don't go on wiki-sickleave). Welcome to the wikipedia. We're a friendly bunch here. RJFJR 01:58, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Romanian

Do you speak romanian? I see that you come from Chisinau. --Chisinau 16:20, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Erm, too late, I guess... On a very basic level. --Illythr 18:41, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: Creationism

(cross-posted from my talk page) Thanks for your support, MrMonkey! Yes, I agree that his behavior has been quite disappointing, especially his more recent ones. But I am still confident that he can continue as a productive editor. I'm not ready to brand him a troll, although of course his recent behavior crossed the line into trolling. But I don't recall him ever vandalizising articles, though he has certainly made edits with which I disagree. Of course, I could easily have missed them, but resorting to vandalism doesn't seem like something Scorpionman would do. If it's something recent, then as Illythr mentions I certainly would appreciate a link; if not, I think we can let it go. I think it is actually useful to have different viewpoints around. Unfortunately, Scorpionman's comments so far have been largely unhelpful, mainly criticizing various scientific theories using a web site whose purpose is to "[uphold] the authority of the Bible" and which states "The Bible is divinely inspired and inerrant throughout. Its assertions are factually true in all the original autographs." He may be correct and all appearances to the contrary, today's life forms may have been created separately ex nihilio, but such speculation hardly belongs in a science article as if it were somehow approaching the matter from a scientific perspective or as if there problems with science beyond its perceived conflict with some religious ideas. Perhaps he will understand this with time, perhaps not; my purpose is not to change his religious beliefs but to show that arguing them on article talk pages is not appropriate. — Knowledge Seeker দ 03:16, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, Illythr, for your kind words. I shall preserve them on my user page. I believe that we can accomplish most through courtesy, logic, and reason. Of course, I have no desire to change anyone's religious beliefs—reading a religious text is certainly a possible way of learning about the world—although science has been far more successful than any religion in explaining the mechanics of how the world works. — Knowledge Seeker দ 04:20, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Battle of Tali-Ihantala

Hi. Please don't do grammar checking for most of the contents of Battle of Tali-Ihantala as its content is currently totally out of touch with reality. Somebody had mixed Battle of Valkeasaari with Tali-Ihantala and edited things from there to the article. --Whiskey 11:36, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Meh, sorry. I'm just such a correction maniac... --Illythr 11:42, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Transnistria stubs

I've made a little over a hundred stubs for Transnistria, here: Category:Transnistria_stubs. If you have the time or the inclination then some of them could be expanded or moved into different languages, like German or Russian. - Mauco 00:52, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Transnistria

Thanks for pointing out that link. I actually did not intend to give that address, I think I was still learning how to use references and I copied one about the Moldovan census. In any case I corrected it now. The link opens an archive of documents, among which there is one entitled Implicarea Armatei a XIV-a, or the Participation of the 14th army prepared by the Altemedia Research Institute. The argument presented there is that the 14th Army was directly involved in the armed conflict and aided the separatists. I cannot assess the basis of that argument as I wasn't there, however it does present an important side of the debate upheld by many adherents. TSO1D 23:33, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I would be glad to look at your list. TSO1D 23:50, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
I satisfy both points D:. TSO1D 00:01, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Moldovans

Illythr, could you please do me a favor and look at the picture on Moldovans. I don't seem to recognize any of the people depicted, maybe you know some of them. TSO1D 00:47, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the info about the pictures. TSO1D 13:24, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Soviet movies

I thought so. If you have some more info, my e-mail is dpotop1 at the Yahoo mail server under the commercial superdomain. Dpotop 16:27, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

War of Transnistria

The Altermedia file was a pdf file part of the altermedia archive linked to. The article is only in Romanian though, and pretty biased from I could see, so I removed it. The political studies article is indeed vague as you pointed out, the sentence you found is the only direct mention of the 14th army's involvement, but it still backs the theory. The last one is the best I could find, and I saw that it was cited in various other books and articles on the subject and it is pretty comprehensive. TSO1D 00:13, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

The rar archive containing the file is here, and the name of the particular file is: Implicarea Amramtei a XIV-a în Conflictul Transnistrean. I also copied the text to User:TSO1D\tc. TSO1D 02:00, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

a simple request

Please read this: [1]. Thank you. Adriatikus 08:10, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Say what?

I'm afraid you did not get me. First of all, I don't have to mind any grammatical changes whatsoever: on the principle advocated by Node, different spelling=different language (so it shall be not "this" or "that Russian", but "some kind of Russian" - it'll do just fine); judging by Node's standards, all I'll have to do is this, the rest being entirely up to me (whether I may want to invent verbs, whether I may want to consider three words in a row "an article" etc.).

Now, moving beyond such plans. I think you are a reasonable and highly intelligent person, Illythr, and I'm glad that you contribute on these articles with a balanced perspective. I originally edited on pages dealing with Moldova only because the Romanian POV was not straying away from the most annoying themes that I have come to detest in our nationalism (and, thus, it seemed to go nowhere); on the whole, I'd rather edit something else, but when I saw the standard of quality tolerated on debated pages, I feel my blood boil. I need to express this very clearly (as I have had before): I do not support Moldo-Romanian unification. However, when editing here I bumped into the other side, and into tantrum-like reactions - as exemplified by Node_ue and occasionaly by Mikkalai on Talk:Moldovans, as seen in the repetitive "Romanian=fascist". I can even accept a large part of that from a certain perspective: as I have said before, my country's climate has almost always been oscillating between blatant indifference for the other and all-out banditry (just look at what we did to Bender-Zadunaysky!); as I have said before, a sizeable portion of Ro contributors still advocate morally bankrupt principles. Fine - I can live within that internal ideological chasm.

However (and I believe we can reach an agreement here): if an ethnicity, as I have said before, is always subjective (which makes it exist the moment it is stated), a language is not. A language is not: that is a fact which is void of consequences (I, for one, am not going to build any politicial scheme based on that). A language is not, not only because that would be nonsensical, but because pretending this is not the case would also be without consequence (political identity relies on it only in a Volkgeist-infused society - not in Belgium, not even in France, but in Romania: it is especially ironic that a Moldovan identity needs to use the same crapola my indifferent-to-bandit-like society has been using...). Hoping we see eye to eye. Dahn 17:56, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I didn't sign in with an email. Do you have one made public where I can send you mine? If not, we could carry on here. Dahn 18:18, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
I did. That "email this user" link to the left should work. --Illythr 18:27, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
See... I have never used that before... didn't even know it was there, to tell you. Anyway, I'm on it. Dahn 18:31, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Sent. Dahn 18:36, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for the huge delay. Did you get my reply? Dahn 23:29, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

"...but don't understand the Latin script having never learned a Latin-based language before."

This is you here: [2].
I don't want to start a flame/off-topic war, neither here, nor on meta.wiki (that's why I didn't write it there), but can you tell me what script were you using in the sentence above ? Do you think it's logical what you claim ? -- Adriatikus 00:12, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Please read it again. ...having never learned a Latin-based language before.. I learned English as a second language and German as the third (as can be clearly seen on my user page). Besides, I live in Chisinau, so when I went to school back in 1989, we already were taught Moldovan/Romanian based on the Latin script. That whole passage in Cyrillic was me playing by your rules, a pointless effort, its only positive consequence being the respect of DPotop, that is all. --Illythr 01:07, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
I hope I won't have to clarify this there, as at least one user appears to understand what I was saying.
Hmm, that before is rather superfluous there, too, by the way. --Illythr 01:10, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Foolish child, if you still think playing stands for arguments... I just wanted you to say you did it on purpose. So I can say you're closer to Node's behavior than I thought. Adriatikus 01:46, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
See my responce there. For the last time, I'm NOT DISCUSSING THE VALIDITY OF THE LANGUAGE! Neither did I ever intend to provide any arguments for your silly campaign. Because, actually, I believe that you're right and Moldovan is no more than a dialect of Romanian. However, I also believe that you can't just forget about all the people who were taught it all these years and those that still are. --Illythr 02:08, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
And mine. (briefly: I agree) Adriatikus 02:17, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
I uh, seem to have misjudged you for a cold, calculating and ruthless professional lobbyist. My apologies. --Illythr 02:33, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Igor Smirnov

Hi Illythr,

Sorry for the delay of the reply. I've written the nationality of Igor Smirnov in that manner in the article because I would like to emphasize the fact that he's not from Moldova or Transnistria, and the fact that the Transnistria administration is closely linked to the Kremlin, basically.--MaGioZal 04:13, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Moldovan, again

I am sorry, I don't really have the time to re-read the entire thread at "Deletion of Moldovan wiki", to see whether you would agree with the following proposal. I am therefore asking directly. Would you support a moldovan wikipedia that is simply a gateway to the transliteration tool of Bogdan Giusca?

That is:

  • The http://mo.wikipedia.org still existing (maybe moved to mo-cyr, as Dmitriid proposed), but with no pages inside. When accessed, this site simply translates the main page of ro.wikipedia. Then, doing navigation on ro.wikipedia using cyrillic script is easy. And I presume that at least about half the pages will have no problems for searching (but the searching problem is more difficult, it assumes someone maintains and refines the transliteration tool until it's near-perfect).

What do you think about it? Dpotop 06:04, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure I'll be able to convince them. I can try, though... --Illythr 00:59, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
I want to raise an issue here. Let's say the engine transliterates the Romanian version of an article on the Turkish alphabet: would it not attempt to transliterate the letters of the alphabet itself? Could it be prevented from doing that? Dahn 23:28, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Well, I'm not the creator of this tool, but I see that that does indeed present an intriguing compication. Hmm... --Illythr 00:59, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

History of Moldova

The article had a few sections with some obvious bias, and I trimmed that down a little, but the content is not different from the agreed-upond version found on other articles. I am confident I can avoid the Neo-Stalinist label, at least for now. TSO1D 19:21, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Did you receive....

...my e-mail? Adriatikus 23:20, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Unless you're Dahn, no, I didn't. --Illythr 01:03, 9 July 2006 (UTC)


Smirnov

Lol, I didn't know you had an entire conversation about this. Yea, definitely be bold in such cases. Having the nationality of a person in the very first sentence of a head of state is not common usage, and not proper. TSO1D 02:01, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Invitation to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy

Hi there! I've noticed that you've edited articles pertaining to the Eastern Orthodox Church. I wanted to extend an invitation to you to join the WikiProject dedicated to organizing and improving articles on the subject, which can be found at: WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy. This WikiProject was begun because a need was perceived to raise the level of quality of articles on Wikipedia which deal with the Eastern Orthodox Church.

You can find information on the project page about the WikiProject, as well as how to join and how to indicate that you are a member of the project. Additionally, you may be interested in helping out with our collaboration of the month. I hope you'll consider joining and thank you for your contributions thus far! —A.S. Damick talk contribs 12:56, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Loganos

Don't know who Loganos is, I never sent or received any e-mail from him.--MariusM 07:19, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Loganos (now banned) was another one of the socks of permabanned Bonaparte. As the pagelogs show, he and MariusM had a good thing going on their respective Talk pages for a while, trying to establish a partnership of sorts. - Mauco 17:55, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Just to say hi

Hi, dude. I guess you are busy now with the Transnistria issue (I never want to look into it, but I guess that it's well-managed with you and TSOD over there), and I have been moving away to other subjects. Btw, did you receive my email back then? Dahn 23:48, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

S'ok, man. Thanks for the edits on Mircea Eliade, btw. And for teaching me magic (although, I admit I still don't know what you did...). Dahn 00:02, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Dude! 畂桳栠摩琠敨映捡獴... I'm a believer.;) Dahn 18:28, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Tiraspol Times

I think that you still should ask your friend from Dubossary to check the existence of Tiraspol Times, now you can give him more details about where to look. Their answer didn't convince me.--MariusM 09:27, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I will ask him, but don't hold your breath - he's still in Dubossary. The main office of their firma (a local DSL distributor) is in Tiraspol, but he rarely ventures there. --Illythr 21:15, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
O.K. I understand that in Dubossary nobody heard about "Tiraspol Times". By the way, I found an information that Moldovan school in Dubossary was forced to move in Corjova after they try to use latin script. Can you check this info with your friend of Dubossary? Actually, in this town exist any Moldovan school, and if yes, what script is using? I would need this information for the article Moldovan schools in Transnistria.--MariusM 12:50, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

You should look at User:MarkStreet talk page, he claim he is the editor of "Tiraspol Times". You can find interesting info about "Tiraspol Times". Quote: "We don't publicise our address and phone numbers because we operate online and to be frank we simply are not there a lot of the time. Tiraspol Times is a very small part of what we do internationally, but it is independent and its best to keep it like that given the nonsense some people claim about it. Our reporters have been very seriously threatened and for that reason we like to keep safe given we are not native to your region". [3]

How is this compared with "Tiraspol Times reports from Tiraspol: Not from Chisinau, Moscow, Brussels, Kiev, Washington or Cairo. So you get the news about Tiraspol fresh, first-hand and unfiltered: Straight from Tiraspol itself"? [4] —Preceding unsigned comment added by MariusM (talk • contribs)

Quite simple, actually. "Native to" means "born in" [5]. The staff wasn't born in Transnistria, so they are not native to the region. Why, some of them may be operating outside the region as well. Aw, come on, if they are indeed trying to deceive everyone, they wouldn't spill it in such an "obvious" way! ;-) --Illythr 11:37, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Moldovans

To answer to your message about the Moldovans article, the reason why I inserted those notes, is because I wanted to emphasized that "only according to the censa" do Moldovans really represent 76.1% in RM and 1% in Ukraine. But I do see how words like "supposed" do not really have their place in there so that is why I went back on my initial change.Dapiks 22:11, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I have to admit that some of the stuff you said on the Md. talkpage is true. Where do you live exactly?Dapiks 16:43, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
In Chisinau, per my userpage. :-) --Illythr 20:30, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
You can't use the expression: "per my userpage", in this context :) The reason I asked you where you were from is because I wanted to talk to someone from the other side (as well) about everything that is going on in there. Hearing the same Bassarabian pro-Romanian unionists all the time(which I am aware that they are very few) can broaden your view only up to a point.Dapiks 21:34, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Well, I meant "As I previously stated on my user page" :-P. As for the nationality question, I'm kinda interested in that myself. The census/constitution may not reflect the real picture, which appears to be, in fact, general confusion, apathy and even indifference - people are more interested in physical aspects of survival, than in the question of ethnicity. This is a potentially dangerous situation, I suspect that someone might eventually capitalize on that issue. But currently everything appears suspended in Limbo.
As for my personal opinion - I'm kind of uncomfortable with the apparent necessity of international recognition of a nation as well as with outside pressure on what I believe should be purely a internal affair. The most important source here should be the "citizens of Moldova of Romanian origin" themselves (as long as they're not claiming to be Romans or Hobbits or somesuch). --Illythr 22:38, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

forum.tiraspol.net

Not all non-Russian messages are removed (even some of mine survived) in this forum, only the most relevant ones. The example I gave was also in Russian language, and it was still removed. Regarding "pedofil", I believe it was also removed. I don't know exactly if Mauco is an independent person or an employee of PMR (I believe Edward Lucas from Economist is making some research on this subject - see Mauco's talk page), this is why I don't like Mauco to know my real identity. Maybe I'm paranoic.--MariusM 12:15, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it would qualify as paranoia to consider me a government agent who is out to get you. Certifiably. ;-) - Mauco 15:07, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Really, guys, I think you both should make an effort at reconciliation. I know I'm being idealistic here, but I think you both can do it if you try together for the sake of Wikipedia. "Ребята, давайте жить дружно!"(с: Kot Leopold) :-) --Illythr 17:10, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

My tone

You know how much I apreciate your opinion. It hurted me seeing that you didn't like my tone. I answered at your comment in Transnistria's talk page [6]--MariusM 07:10, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I didn't know that you do. It was a pleasant surprise. :-) --Illythr 14:06, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Your concern

I already explained the request I made to EvilAlex in 3 other places in Wikipedia, including administrator's 3RR noticeboard [7], where I submited a report about Mauco, who broke the rule (is the 3rd time he broked the 3RR rule and is reported, but he was not blocked; one of problems in Wiki is the double standards that applied). The request to EvilAlex was done after Mauco broke the 3RR rule, in order to repair the damage he did (I was not able to repair as I would be myself in 3RR violation). Soliciting help from others is something Mauco teached me at Wikipedia. I don't understand what are your problems with using other languages and editing other users talk page. An user's talk page is a space where that user is the master, only the master is entitled to complained about the edits done in his space. EvilAlex didn't complain. You can complain only about your own page. For example, Mauco deleted some relevant information in his talk page [8], [9], [10] (he didn't make an archive), but this is his right, I will not complain that this is against Wikipedia practices.--MariusM 09:07, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

A comparison is valid, but there is a bit of a difference between normal housecleaning (which is what I did) and then this cover-up of a coordinated act of meatpuppetry in order to circumvent 3RR. - Mauco 15:51, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Anyway, if we all just try to assume good faith and be more civil to each other, I think that we can all enjoy our time here and get more good work done. All these little pointless 'wars' and counter-accusations are really getting us nowhere. Personally, I would love to see them left behind, if possible. - Mauco 15:53, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Me

Thanks for the observation, I will do my best to keep it toned down, just really want to see an excellent informative page and get it as accurate as we can as a team. I dislike areas where we disagree but want to find compromise.

All future advice welcome.

agreed nobody is nuetral in areas of contention. I like the precise approach with clinical accuracy. Once its agreed we can move on

MarkStreet Oct 23rd

History of Transnistria

Yes/no: The discussion is now continuing in History of Transnistria, to avoid content forking. Then we will move a summary of that article into main Transnistria when done. The other guy and myself are already talking over there, and you are of course welcome, too! There is some really good and productive input. - Mauco 13:56, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

May I ask a favor? Illythr, when you have some spare time I would like for you to please check Chronicles to see if you confirm that there is a mention that in 1261 Cossacks lived in the area between the Dniester river and the Volga river. - Mauco 06:57, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Crimean parallels

Response posted on User talk:Vecrumba  —  Pēters J. Vecrumba 16:44, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey, man

Hi. Sorry, my email has a problem with sending messages, and I didn't know if you wanted me to reply on your talk page. I meant to get it fixed, but I got caught up in all sorts of matters (and I saw you kept busy yourself).

You may be right about my warning sign, but then again I've not seen this habit so expanded among Scottish et al users... add to that the number of British people who also think that the adjective for UK is "English" (I've met about a dozen...). Dahn 21:40, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Sage words, dude. Except... I emphasize the diff between "English" and "English language". Granted, in a way that people may no longer do... Cheers. (Keep in touch, man) Dahn 21:57, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
I must stop editing Wikipedia and go to sleep. NOW! Aww, just a leedle teensy edit... NO, I said NOW!!! --Illythr 22:12, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Moldovan schools, WW2

You know very well the truth, is not only in Grigoriopol. Ask your friends from Transnistria if you have doubts, don't deny the obvious, is like Holocaust denial. BTW, what do you think about the comparison "Romanians were worse than Nazi Germany" added by Mauco in Transnistria (WWII)?--MariusM 00:07, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Ahem. This charge deserves some context. It is of course not a blanket statement. The full comment centers on a very specific area (Transnistria) and a very specific point in time (1941-1944). The full statement is: "In comparison with the Holocaust of Nazi Germany, survivors say that the Romanian treatment in Transnistria was much worse. Unlike the carefully planned deportations in Germany, the Romanian government did not prepare to house thousands of people in Transnistria, where the deportees stayed. The Romanians instead placed people in crude barracks without running water, electricity or latrines. Those who could not walk were simply left to die."
It is not my statement, either. It is based on published sources (including accounts of survivors) and the sources are given for the edit. I am sorry that this ever happened. I am not Romanian, and I do not know if the Romanians ever apologized to the people of Transnistria. But I can still be sorry for this, even if I was never involved and even if they are not. - Mauco 00:29, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Mauco, Illythr can read himself the edit you made. He is more clever than you believe. Thanks again for wikistalking me.--MariusM 00:57, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

My opinion stays the same in both cases: Strong statements must be supported by strong sources. --Illythr 09:36, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Moldovan schools in Transnistria

Marius, if you check out the article's edit history [11], you will notice that I didn't try to deny or delete anything. The source you provided covers only Grigoriopol and it mentions only manuals in libraries. Potrivit [Svetlana Jitariuc], in librariile din oras nu mai pot fi gasite manuale editate in limba romana, nici chiar cu grafie ruseasca. That source allows us to write: According to Svetlana Jitariuc,director of the Stefan cel Mare lyceum of Grigoriopol, there are no Romanian language books, even in the Cyrillic script in the city libraries. Compare that to the far broader statement it supports. --Illythr 09:36, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Finally you realized that the quotation don't stop there. It continues with "Doar carti in limba rusa" ("Only books in Russian language"). Not only manuals are missing, but ANY book in Romanian language, not only in Latin script but also in Cyrillic script. This is in a Romanian-speaking region like Grigoriopol.--MariusM 10:16, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
This is in Grigoripol. :-) It's probably the same in other regions, that's why I'm not removing the sentence. But it does warrant a more fitting source. Actually, one could argue the "cãrṭi" there refers to the manuals of the previous sentence, but that would be nitpicking... --Illythr 10:33, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Transnistria (World War II)

The statement is fully sourced and the source does not appear to have some kind of partisan agenda ([12],[13]). I will slightly change the passage to make it closer to what the survivors said. --Illythr 09:36, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Continuation War

I have requested semi-protection to the article.--Whiskey 15:28, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

It's probably for the best... If only that guy was willing to talk before acting... --Illythr 15:34, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm... I have a peculiar feeling... maybe we are the same person, only just living in different bodies and couple of thousand miles between... ;-) --Whiskey 23:31, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
It is no use to start arguing with our friend with many names, as he only moves discussion away from the disputed text. I recommend we should concentrate to demanding his sources and countering his claims in the text with sourced counterclaims. That way we can keep the focus in the text and not let his ramblings distract us and other readers.
I've made a concession to him by allowing the chapter to exist, but I demanded that he follows Wikipedia policies when it comes with NPOV, verifiability and citing of sources. I also have an intent to start RfC process if he fails to work according the guidelines. The current situation is untenable! He pollutes the whole talk page with his ramblings! --Whiskey 00:17, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Re. Your protection of the Continuation War article

Hello. Actually, I don't know what's the exact disputed content, so I suggest that you copy+paste it to the article's talk page, if you're familiar with the ongoing dispute. There you can discuss it better. Regards.--Húsönd 22:23, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

My censorship

This user is evil, and frequently says mwhahaha!

Happy holidays. ;-) Khoikhoi 06:50, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Talk page protected

Please let me know if you want it unprotected. Khoikhoi 19:19, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Transnistria

I understand that you don't like "break-away" and "self-declared", introduced by Diana. But why you removed "Border issues" section, which was stable in the article from 4 September until 23 December when Pernambuco decided to remove it, the opinions of Vasili Yakovlev which were agreed by everybody in November, travel warnings and U.S. Department of State position about Human Rights?--MariusM 21:28, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

I did also some wholesale reverts. What I think should be restored are those 4 paragraphs, also the removal of word "isolated" regarding violent incidents (we should let the reader to decide - see talk page) and the usage of expresion "separatist" or "Transnistrian separatist" instead of "Transnistrian" in the external links section. I also think we should remove unreliable "Tiraspol Times" link. Fact tag about baning of oposition parties is not needed as it is sourced few sentences bellow.--MariusM 22:00, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
TSO1D 27 December? While I was in wikibreak and Mauco imposed his will? No border issues, no Yakovlev, no US Department of State position? I don't think so.--MariusM 22:05, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
LOL. "Impose my will" ?! Buddy, if I ever get to impose my will, I can guarantee you one thing: that page will NOT look like it does today. Maybe it is good that there's a bit of give and take. Just please don't take too much, MariusM. If you plan on sticking around, you need to be reasonable and not be a cheerleader for every Tom, Dick and Bonny that comes along. - Mauco 04:16, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

First, Happy New Year!
I've noticed your interest in Transnistria, and maybe you would like to vote in the survey on the inclusion in Tiraspol article of the images with the Soviet tank monument in Tiraspol and Transnistrian Government building in Tiraspol with statue of Lenin in front. The survey is here. Thank you, Dl.goe