User talk:Jhattara

Iraq Flag

The New York Times reports that the flag design recently imposed is designed to be temporary and mention that Iraqis have "expressed varying opinions about the new flag." [1] The Christian Science Monitor reports that a referendum on the flag is expected at the end of 2008. [2]. This issue is hotly contested, especially as Iraq remains under occupation and many Iraqis, including most of the ones I know, refuse to accept the legitimacy of the occupied government. Don't you think it's preferable to use the widely-accepted 'old' flag until a genuine solution is reached? Jamal (talk) 13:49, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is supposed to be neutral on different points of views. If the internationally recognized and de facto ruling government uses a flag as the official flag of Iraq, then that flag should also be used in Wikipedia in all contexts. I know very well that some think that the current Iraqi government is not legitimate and that the flag they use is not the real flag of Iraq, but in all the contexts that Wikipedia cares about it is de facto and de jure the official flag of Iraq until a new flag is chosen by a government in power. --Jhattara ^{(Talk · Contrib)} 13:58, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Library cardback

Hi! Can you try uploading another version of the Vampire library card back? It shows up really weird on my view of it. The 'Vampire' script is totally "white-blurry". I will try to fix it with different sizes, but if that doesn't work, you could try scanning it again, or maybe use another compression rate... Ingolfson 11:29, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

European fauna template

Thanks for adding the '|show UK countries=true' device. Am I right in thinking that for anyone to see it, other than visitors to Fauna of Scotland, that I'd have to go around putting this in the other transcluded templates? (Fortunately there are very few Fauna ones at present). Wouldn't it make more sense to have a {{#ifexist: type code as per the Vatican City? Ben MacDui (Talk) 20:46, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Red Dogs Tei Subject

The truth hurts... I hope none of you will experience this kind of non-senses...

Anyway, there is a God outhere... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.86.98.234 (talk) 11:15, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

No matter what is the truth beneath this the subject is not notable enough and doesn't have reliable enough sources for Wikipedia. --Jhattara ^{(Talk · Contrib)} 11:35, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Fact tag

Unless you provide a source for "the right of self-determination" of Gagauzia or that phrase will be deleted and accordingly, Gagauzia will be deleted from the list too.Sambure ^talk 05:13, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

We have provided a few documents there. --Jhattara ^{(Talk · Contrib)} 10:12, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Official documents are needed not "few documents" there.--Sambure ^talk 12:30, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Jhattara, this is a confirmed sock of banned user. `'Míkka>t 18:56, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

No wonder his opinions sounded so familiar. This isn't the first we've met. --Jhattara ^{(Talk · Contrib)} 19:05, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Gagauzia

Could you, please, explain this on the talk page of the article. I am afraid you have something technical in mind, and I fail to follow you. Dc76\^talk 17:37, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Template:European topic

Regarding your recent edit to Template:European topic, accompanied by this edit summary: fixed broken romania link, if you want to redirect disambiguations please do those very carefully): This is not a matter of "if" someone "wants" to redirect disambiguations. Disambiguation pages should almost never be linked to, and to the extent the template does so inappropriately (which it does, all over the place), the template is broken and needs to be fixed. Criticizing someone for trying to do this is out of place, not to mention rather uncivil. --Tkynerd (talk) 13:13, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm always trying to be civil when editing and making comments. Quite often the edit summary doesn't have enough space to fully express the reasons why I have done a certain edit. e.g. in this case a user who was not very familiar with the purpose of this template redirected the link Romanian to Romanians, thus effectively breaking all prefixed and/or suffixed links to [prefix]Romanian[suffix]. --Jhattara ^{(Talk · Contrib)} 13:45, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it was clear to me what happened. That doesn't change the fact that this template has been broken for months because it incorrectly links to disambiguation pages. Your edit summary didn't seem civil to me, but I can accept the fact that you didn't intend to be uncivil. But if those of us who are not "familiar with the purpose of this template" have to leave it alone, then it is incumbent on those who are familiar with its purpose (and its syntax) to fix all of its links to disambiguation pages ASAP, and those people should be very careful not to bite those of us who are trying in good faith to clean up their mess. Thanks, Tkynerd (talk) 17:38, 7 July 2008 (UTC)