User talk:Dbachmann/archiveA

The prodigal returns

No, you don't want to look at your watchlist. Welcome back! Zora 18:07, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

How am I? Pondering the nature of conflict and debate, and noticing that some of us make it, or gravitate towards it. Trying not to be one of those people. Wondering how Wikipedia can screen out paranoid schizophrenics who write nonsense and then when it's deleted, get to have fun being persecuted. It reminds me of a Green Party meeting many years ago, which was invaded by a nut from the street who was allowed to lecture us for half an hour on why he was the rightful emperor of China. Anyone who protested this waste of time (like me) was told that we were suppressing free speech. SNARL! <^^^^^> Well, that ought to drive you right back into wiki-vacation. I rewrote the Islamic conquest of Iran article and so far have had no feedback. See what you think. Article probably needs work. Zora 22:32, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Looking....

I did'nt know you're a Admin. I've been looking for one as a guide that I can turn to from time to time. Actually,I'm looking for 4 Admin.s as guides. How else will I will be able to stay out of trouble, report it, NOT end up in it unwittingly ? I hope this is'nt a stupid question.Martial Law 20:05, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Paris Riots

What the...?! You've just reverted a whole lot of different things, including several typofixes, in the 2005 French civil unrest article with the edit summary 'unnoted vandalism'. I'm undoing that right now since I see no way of telling what was valid and what was collateral damage, and you're welcome to re-rectify the mistakes but I ask you not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. --Kizor 09:40, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

well, if you had given me two minutes I would have re-inserted the material I had reverted. As it is, I trust you will take care to remove the edits by User:Swollib. I figured it would be easier to revert and then re-add the good edits, but you are free to do it your way. dab (ᛏ) 09:42, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Okay, okay. I jumped the gun. Sorry. Honestly. In my defense, there was nothing to indicate that you were going to restore content. Sheesh, I need a break from this article, but I'll get on with undoing the damage I caused now... --Kizor 09:45, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

There. Going through a list of changes, fact-checking them one by one and reinserting most into an article busily edited all the while is not something I want to do again. I was not able to verify the number of vehicles burned (5600/5700) and the times of the energy crisis (1970/1973) and unemployment increase (1960s/1980s). The latter versions of all three were left standing. --Kizor 10:32, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

dont you think the page is better as a whole now without the political quotes standing over it?--Whywhywhy 13:09, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Found a link that purports to explain the "real' cause of the riots. the link is http//:www.infowars.com/articles/world/french_riots_engineered_by_globalists.htm[http://www.infowars.com/

 articles/world/french_riots_engineered_by_globalists.htm]

I do NOT know what to make of this at all. This link claims that the riots are part of the comming NWO(New World Order).

Forgot to sign this properly. My user Talk page has been attacked. what is the Wikipedia version of 911. It looks like a paint truck had hit it, and the syntax is a LOT smaller as well.Martial Law 22:39, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Transfer pixes ?

How do I place a pix on my talk page, like a MP-5 or a M-16 w/ the grenade launcher attachment ?

Got a wireless keypad. Martial Law 10:42, 8 November 2005 (UTC) :)

Barnstar awarded

		An Award
		For your persistent and much needed contributions to 2005 civil unrest in France, holding back the vandals and ranters, actively taking part in disputes on the talk page and uploading very handy maps (one of which is now on the main page), I, Kizor of English Wikipedia, hereby grant you this barnstar. Now if you'll excuse me, the right-fringers are back again... --Kizor 17:51, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Just got in..................

Just got in when I heard about the State of Emergency that is now in effect in France. The reason that I had said things related to the imposition of a State of Emergency,Martial Law earlier is, (1) ease the shock, (2) The US has had a similar outbreak just after Katrina hit, and after Rita hit, and it took a State of Emergency to quell the looting, other trouble that started. I did NOT mean to be "alarmist",etc. at all, just stating what could be expected in these situations. I do apoligise for any inconviences this may have caused. I've been around police and other security personnel all of my life, and they often "talk shop", talk about work,etc. That's what happens when you have kin in the military, one was even a MP. He's now a corrections officer, and he tells the lower ranks what to do.

One other thing, how do I place the pix of the M-16, other matter on my talk page itself ? Appreciate the assisstance, honesty. I do NOT often see that.Martial Law 00:07, 9 November 2005 (UTC) :)

Don't they have a award for...................

Do'nt they have a award for honesty in this format. How do I go about awarding this, if I find one ? Martial Law 00:11, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

Just a quick work of thanks for your support of my RfA, it finally passed today after a lot of mudslinging. I greatly appreciate it! Ramallite ^(talk) 03:56, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Hi

Dear Dab. You were really needed last week, when we were dealing with the most fanatic and blackest troll I have ever met. I have never met such a destructive mind before. Still, I am glad to see you around :-).--Wiglaf 20:58, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Possible Sock Puppeteer

I've found a possible report on another User's Talk page that a sockpuppeteer is, or was vandalising some material. The known account of this alleged sockpuppeteer is152.163.100.197. I'll get you the User names of the people involved in this.Martial Law 19:46, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

The person involved is HAJARS Martial Law 19:59, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Re.Images

Your commentary IS why I need a guide in this format to AVOID trouble, not get in it unwittingly.Martial Law 23:18, 11 November 2005 (UTC) :)

Up for the position ?Martial Law 23:19, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

From WP:AN/I

Re: Changing my username

I am editing using the name Samivel. I would like to block my previous names but also credit my previous edits to Samivel (there are too many to lose). I understand I need to ask the administrators to block the earlier names so I will not be accused of sockpuppetry. But I also see that the procedure for changing one's username seems to be disabled. Is it possible to do what I'm asking?

First I was anonymous: 66.114.86.135 Then I was Arnold_Perey Then I was Aperey Aperey Finally I am now Samivel so my username isn't too close to my real name.

Thank you for any assistance you can give. --Samivel 16:48, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

   Turned User:Aperey (and talk) and User:Arnold Perey (and talk) into protected redirects to your current user/talk page. This should be good enough for your purposes.  ALKIVAR™ 19:51, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
   shouldn't these requests be signed with the old account as a minimal security measure? dab (ᛏ) 11:27, 11 November 2005 (UTC) 

I checked article contribution histories, and the fact that the user 1) admitted these were his previous accounts... 2) that these previous users had already stated the move (and had not been vandalized) I found there was significant grounds to believe this user and as such made the redirections.  ALKIVAR™ 02:37, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Yo

Sorry, if I seemed at all offensive to you over Jean-Jacques Le Chenadec. I just felt strongly that the article desevered a chance to grow organically.Klonimus 09:01, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Else Christensen

I saw that you added material I removed back to the Else Christensen entry. The links are non-functional and that is why I removed them. Also, I stated that it was ironic that she herself ended up in prison, when she has been working with prisoners much of her life. I also think it is ironic that she is portrayed as a national socialist when she herself was in fact persecuted by the national socialists. Do you want to hunt down your sources to fix the links, or shall I remove them?-71.116.133.72 18:07, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Ancient Greek pronunciation

dab, User:Thrax is making it very difficult to progress on the article, as he continues to insert a marginal theory (that Ancient Greek was pronounced exactly like Modern) into it, claiming that this is the "Greek" theory (supported by Greek scholars) as opposed to the "Erasmian" theory (which for some reason he identifies with the English), but the only evidence he has is one article by a Greek theologian, Caragounis. Other editors have found good evidence that the leading linguists at the universities of Athens and Thessaloniki, each of them responsible for one of the two main dictionaries of Modern Greek, agree with the consensus international reconstruction of Ancient Greek phonology. Could you please help out? Thanks, --Macrakis 21:03, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

dab, thanks for your comments on my Talk page. I think we all agree on the substance here. The issue is how to deal with Thrax's persistent edits which contradict the other editors' clear consensus. --Macrakis 17:59, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Watchlist

May I ask what your watchlist looks like with 1000 pages on it? I have 65, and I already think it's too much. How do you use it? --HappyCamper 16:50, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your explanation! Maybe I'll try that one day too. I didn't even think of the possibility of watching obscure articles for vandalism. --HappyCamper 17:52, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

AfD

I rarely participate in AfDs, but this one has really saddened me: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Interchanges on Ontario provincial highway 401. Is there anything else I can do you think? --HappyCamper 17:47, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Quantum mechanics

Your question on the reference desk (science) has really intrigued me. Are you a researcher in quantum mechanics as well? What sort of simulations were you planning on doing? This "many body" problem can mean a lot of things, so I am wondering what subdiscipline of physics or chemistry you are referring to. --HappyCamper 17:52, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Schleicher's fable

Thank's for another version. However, I thought I had a very very good sets of fonts to handle utf8 but there are now boxes with numbers in them on that page for me. What fonts do you use? --Kaleissin 14:30, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

My talk page has been attacked !

Can you examine my talk page ? It looks like it got hit by a paint truck.

Your block of Nixer

You may want to check this user's edits on Moscow. IMHO he turned the article into a mess, removing all the historical images uploaded by me. He is quite uncooperative, pretty rude, and doesn't respect the others' work. You may also want to check my comments about Molobo on Wiglaf's talk page. Cheers, Ghirlandajo 10:32, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Award, Molobo and Tolkien

Hi Dab and thank you for the lovely award! Yes, Molobo is extremely dangerous to Wikipedia and has to be perma-banned. Unfortunately he receives support from some Polish users who appear to use him like a kind of pet troll. I would rather someone who has not been involved with him start the RfAr on him, since he will be accused of personal attacks and of bias. You would be perfect with your experience and your not being involved in any of his revert wars. We should contact everyone who has been involved and deal with this balrog once and for all. As for Tolkien, I will absolutely start helping you next week. Best,--Wiglaf 11:16, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

The only reason why he has not already been perma-banned is because he is so extremely tiresome that he leaves people with no energy to file an RfAr with. You can contact my friend R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) who is in the know of several afflicted people, as well as NightBeAsT. It will be very very easy to find support for this.--Wiglaf 11:43, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Wilgaf why such attacks, I know that I have come in conflict with many users, but my edits are rarely wrong and I do engage in talk pages when the issue needs to be discussed. I will gladly give you sources and reference If you ask. I do understand that many German users as well as those with symphaties for German culture seem to be very emotional about inserting information about persecution of Poles in Germany or war crimes made by German units in WWII. However like I said, if you believe such information is false why don't we discuss it on talk pages. I may point out that i did enter correct information in articles such as : Wehrmacht

German_4th_Panzer_Division

German_1st_Panzer_Division

German_1st_Mountain_Division

German_8th_Panzer_Division

And others. If the information troubles you as incorrect, please addres the talk page. I may also point out that despite extensive information provided by contributors to many of such articles, information on war crimes was lacking, and I also changed the incorrect statement of Waffen SS Division Wiking lacking any mention of atrocities. While you opt for permabanning me is disturbing for me, since I know you only from your attempt to block me during my edits concerning German war atrocities and persecution of Polish people by Bismarck. I hope this is just a misunderstanding between you and me. --Molobo 13:35, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

You are most welcome.

It is just my way of writing about what I think is important and true.

maybe you can look this up: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=dugri+speak it is a very different style of communication from the one used in Europe or in Asia. Wish there was a wiki article about it. Zeq 09:58, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree with you. But (and I don't mean this in a personal way now - just as an academic discussion) there is a fine line between Dugri speak (which tell you what i think or feel about your actions/words) and insults ot threats. I wish I could explain more. my level of english is not that great for such subtelty.

In any case help me understand what you mean by "strawman" - The only explanation I know is somekind of a draft proposal for a vote.

Got to rush out so off for now. Zeq 10:16, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Molobo's RfAr

Dab, I want to thank you for your interest in helping solve the issue. As for arbitration, this procedure evidently requires skills in English wordsmithship which I do not possess. For the time being, Molobo is a secondary headache to me, as her/his main forces seem to be on warring with German editors. Also, she/he lately suspended attacks on Russian articles, and there are much more serious and mature trolls - user:AndriyK, user:Andrew Alexander - involved in the Eastern front, which I concentrate upon fighting today.

The favourite target of Molobo's revert wars has been Russophobia, where he/she resorts to wide-scale blanking. I even suspect Molobo of impersonating me but this may have been someone else.

No this was not me and admins have already told you this.As to Russophobia it consisted of several unsourced opinions as well as issues not involved with Russian nation-for example Serbs and opinion that western media led a propaganda campaign against them. I asked to confirm this on talk page. --82.139.13.231 15:48, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Even after the Gdansk/Danzig vote, she enthusiastically takes part in Schopenhauer revert wars [1] and, citing that decision, attempts to replace Koenigsberg with the Polish spelling Kroliewiec in the articles on 16th-century subjects, thus inducing tedious edit wars [2]. According to the Gdansk vote Krolewiec is correct as it was a Polish fief. --82.139.13.231 15:48, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

She/he also instigated a wide-scale, albeit ultimately pointless, revert conflict between Polish and Russian editors on Smolensk War (history).

The issue was about explaining that the city was Lithuanian before. --82.139.13.231 15:48, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

In the article on Białowieża Forest she spawned a revert war by declaring that Eltsin, Kravchuk, and Shushkevich were not "the leaders of the three East Slavic nations", because "East Slavic nations" is not a "legitimate" term but a Russian imperialistic concept. [3] After intermittent reverting, the article was left in Molobo's hands, because there are serious concerns that it should be rewritten and moved to the proper English name.

I never before experienced naming leaders of Soviet Republics with 'Eastern Slav' name. East Slavs is used in linguistitcs to name a history of language development in the past, it isn't used in modern poltics. And from what I know the name commonly used towards this events is Soviet leaders. --82.139.13.231 15:48, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

As you may see, most of Molobo's attacks in the Eastern front happened from November 8 to November 11, but meeting strong resistance from East Slavic editors, her interest in trolling there seemed to wane, apparently in the well-founded hope that user:AndriyK and his cronies have a much greater potential of disrupting Russia- and Ukraine-related articles [4]. --Ghirlandajo 10:56, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

East Slavic editors  ? Shouldn't that be Ukrainian, Russian, Belarusian editors ? Anyway you aren't only in conflict with me it seems, additionally I get the impression that you are pushing some ideology here with this constant references to East Slavic terms instead of established political names. --82.139.13.231 15:48, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Intelligent trolls

Dab, you are certainly right that there evolves a new variety of nationalist trolls who not only disrupt the normal functioning of wikipedia but pretend to discuss their edits without contributing anything of value. You may want to check Talk:Russian architecture, the article written by me and protected from further attacks of Ukrainian nationalists after their repeated attempts to delete some sections. User:AndriyK and User:Andrew Alexander, in particular, resorted to libelling Wikipedians on external forums, copyright violations, fraudulent move votes, nightmarish revert wars, and abuse of wiki software to further their nationalist agenda. It's not for nothing that *every* of their edits - and there are dozens each day - end in being reversed by one user or another. You may read two summaries of their offenses at this page. We are poised to request for arbitration and hope you will comment on the issue at RfC.

J. R. R. Tolkien on FAC

Er, dab, did you notice my "Conditional support" of J. R. R. Tolkien on FAC? I really want to support, and assumed that the lead section would be a pretty easy thing to fix, even though I wouldn't undertake to do it myself. (I don't reckon I know the article well enough to be sure what the most salient points are.) I'm sorry if you've abandoned the nomination in disgust, it's a great article. Best, Bishonen|talk 17:47, 18 November 2005 (UTC).

Scythian languages

I don't know if you're interested in the Scythian languages, but I want to draw your attention to this article, maybe you want to check it out in the future. It mentions something about Scythian writing found on an axe or something. Alexander 007 18:52, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Re:PIE and all that

Well, Albanian is very poor on sources. This report and a phonetics table from University College London is all we have online. Of course Encyclopædia Britannica always helps, but apart from that, everything else is what I or someone else knows, for example how nouns decline. That cognate table was initially much smaller than it is now. I intended it to compare branches of the IE language family, one Baltic language, one Celtic language, one Slavic language etc and a few non-IE languages for comparison. From the moment I added it, it became an instant hit: other users started ading more languages and it has swollen up considerably. Bosnian is one example; who cares about Bosnian? Anyway, as you can see from the table, most cognates in other IE languages match except Albanian, I mean 'i ri' (new) and 'nënë' (mother) stand out from most other ones, even Sanskrit. Another example it 'Ati' (father); I suspect that this may be a cognate, as in πατήρ, pater or pitar (ie the t). I'm just guessing of course, but there aren't many sources on the subject. They all repeat the same old things about Germanic, Romance and Sanskrit as if they are the most important languages. Anyway, I have been called a troll before, so it's a common mistake. Rex^(talk) 22:59, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

The incidents on AN/I and PIE are the direct result of my tendency of jumping to conclusions. As for the original PIE etymologies, they would be very difficult to locate. I suppose I may be able to find something in the University library, but I'm not a linguistics student, so if I found the title of an appropriate book, I wouldn't be able to reserve it. I doubt I would be able to find much online. Rex^(talk) 23:20, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Halibutt

Thank you for your vote and comments. Since you stated in your vote that user Radiant's opinons matters highly to you, and in case you are not monitoring the vote as closely as I am (being the nomiantor and all), I thought I'd let you know that Radiant has changed his vote to neutral.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 23:25, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

As Piotr continues to spam talk pages of other editors blatantly advertizing Halibutt's vote I dare say that I regret not having reviewed Halibutt's contributions earlier. I finally started this by reading Talk:Kiev Offensive (1920), in which I was amazed to learn about copyright violations on his part, and Talk:Battle of Wołodarka, in which Halibutt indulged in regularly deleting his opponent's comments, despite the latter's vocal remonstrances to the contrary. As these issues are hardly a month old, I believe further scanning of his contributions would have been instructive, although I don't have enough time for this at the moment. --Ghirlandajo 00:45, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

In case you wondered what copyright violation Ghirlandajo means, check my reply to his accusations at Enochlau's page. Halibutt 02:50, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. WikiThanks.

I would like to express my thanks to all the people who took part in my (failed) RfA voting. I was both surprised and delighted about the amount of support votes and all the kind words! I was also surprised by the amount of people who stated clearly that they do care, be it by voting in for or against my candidacy. That's what Wiki community is about and I'm really pleased to see that it works.
As my RfA voting failed with 71% support, I don't plan to reapply for adminship any more. However, I hope I might still be of some help to the community. Cheers! Halibutt 05:10, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Naming convention for Norse mythology

A new naming convention for Norse mythology articles is now up for a vote. Your opinion would be valued. I'm contacting you because you've commented on the issue in the past. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 12:21, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Recent controversies

Hello. I'm a rather old Wikipedian, even on en:, although mostly from various IPs and not particularly interested in Wikipolitics so far. Unfortunately Halibutt's case made me to show some interest in this matter.

My biggest concern is Ghirlandajo and his strange crusade. I'm certainly new in this topic but I have read his numerous accusations and responds for them - and I don't get his point. Not to mention his accusations (calling me a sock-puppet) without a substantial checking who am I (what is pretty simple, I guess) and some Molobo (who is he?) paranoia. that proves also that he is often fast - and wrong. Maybe it's that I don't trust users who delete not favourable edits from their discussion pages - but I consider it not only as rude and against NetEtiquette but as a nothing more than whitening and sweeping trashes under the rug.

For me this user is obviously biased. That's why your support is pretty interesting for me. If I have some time (I'm pretty busy and pretty in L.A.=) recently) I will try to check this according to talks controversial user's edits and make some overall opinion about him. Nevertheless I seem your support for G's action as a fight with suspected for vandalism users by letting them fight each other. It may be to some point effective but the effect will not be NPOV but POV of the toughest and most numerous ones.

I don't have to mention that it will only support biased, written by winners popular history reception in both Western and Eastern World, superstitions, false political correctness and other wrongdoings. In such cases I really regret that Wikipedia is not more expert-driven.

Best regards, aegis maelstrom δ 20:48, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm awfully sorry - I don't have much time right now as I have a "real" work to do. But just take a look on fresh Ghirlandajo's POV redirect - Polish invasion of Russia - used in Halibutt's RfA discussion. Cheeky but misleading and eventually violating Wikipedia's spirit and untrue. I have just found it and inform about it on proper pages. Best, aegis maelstrom δ 23:40, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Aegis, your new outburst of hysterics seems to confirm my original suspicions as to your sockpuppetry. Why do you spam talk pages of other users instead of discussing the matter of Polish agression on Talk:Polish invasion of Russia? Your recent anti-Ghrilandajo crusade is as trollish as that of your friend Molobo, who you constantly defend. --Ghirlandajo 02:06, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

I am discussing it there. In fact I have started this talk page. So far it is you Ghrilandajo who is spamming other users' pages like here or above, trying to bully other users like on Halibutt's RfA or mentioned pages etc. You are notified by other users but just can't stop. For me EOT. Sorry Dab for the mess you must see on your talk page - then I thought I should inform you, now I think I should reply for the insults but I hope it's EOT. If not, I expect admin's action to protect other users from being bullied. aegis maelstrom δ 07:04, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

3RR

Just wanted to let you know that a 3RR complaint has been filed about you on WP:AN/3RR after investigating the article history it appears that there have only been 3 reverts so I am not going to block and replied as such on the listing, however please remember that one more revert and you will be in violation of WP:3RR and that talk page discussion works much better than revert warring. Thanks. Jtkiefer^{T | C | @} ---- 06:57, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Ancient Greek phonology

You may not be aware that this article was moved.... I think it would be useful for you to contribute your point of view, as there is an attempt at mediation with Thrax. --Macrakis 20:31, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Questions

I will encourage other editors to do so, since it seems clear to me that there are serious issues here that are detrimental to the proper functioning of the community. dab (ᛏ) 1. Hallo, Dab, I would like to know what issues do you believe are detrimental and what problems do you believe they are. 2. Is there a possibility to email you ? --Molobo 00:27, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Issues

Welcome. I would like to be more specific before we engage in further discussion. Right now you have complained in general, but I do not know what issues you are talking about. 'As for your repeated comment that you are not aware of the nature of the problem, I find this difficult to believe' I do not know what issue you are refering to, what particular edit do you want to discuss that you see as problematic ? It would be nice if you would point to specific article so that I may know the origin of your worries. 'but you cannot be unaware of the amount of controversy you have stirred up.' I am sure certain knowledge that is correct may cause controversy to those that have a well established image of certain things-but this has already been explained by Halibutt on talk page of 4th German Panzer Division towards the interested parties (I am refering to this, as this is the origin of Wiglaf's reaction towards me as far as I can see). 'You have driven off editors in frustration, and shown no sign of introspection or consideration that some minor thing may be wrong on your side' I must disagree, I took part in discussions on talk pages and provided resources to show the source of the information. If you know of controversial edit that that needs this I would be happy to oblige and provide neccessary material. 'Good faith editors as a rule are amenable to criticism, and prepared to recognize their weaknesses' Of course, In cases were I were wrong I would be happy to delete information that is incorrect. If you know of such edits, I am ready to do so. 'you blandly presume that there is nothing wrong at all' Db-It would help me greatly if could provide a demonstration of such a behaviour. ' with rather simplistic and nationalistic emphasis, ' Wikipedia has been able to cope with nationalistic one-trick-ponies ' Please don't use such negative terms. I am not an nationalists, my recent edits regarding Wehrmacht atrocities in Poland during World War II, were based on research made by Polish IPN and Szymon_Datner the later being a Jewish historian whose work is respected and used as reference to this day. What makes you call those edits about World War II nationalistic ? If you believe there is a bias in them please point to such fragments. 'not much more can be said or done I suppose.' Db I don't undestand such attitude. I am open to discussion and ready to engage in dialog, and such measures are the last resort if dialog fails. Also like you see the edit on 4th Panzer Division has been completed succesfully, and nobody objects it, nor is it the point of any controversy. If they are any other controversial issues, please notify them to me. --Molobo 16:15, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

I am getting the gist of the problem. You are an extremely confrontational editor who is very quick to insinuate that anybody questioning your edits must evidently be a Nazi, yet you refuse to discuss you behaviour [5] . These are disturbing symptoms of paranoia. The statement I am sure certain knowledge that is correct may cause controversy to those that have a well established image of certain things -- I am inadvernently reminded of George W. Bush, with his pathological inability of self-criticism. I have no interest in the articles you have edited, so I won't begin to discuss them, but I am reinforced in my opinion that there will have to be a thorough rfc. I am under some wikistress myself at the moment, and I will not further pursue this matter until an rfc comes together. dab (ᛏ) 19:50, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

'You are an extremely confrontational editor who is very quick to insinuate that anybody questioning your edits must evidently be a Nazi' What are you talking about ? I don't recall calling anybody a Nazi. 'yet you refuse to discuss you behaviour ' I agree on any discussion related to the topic, I erased personal attacks such as : 'Of course, this may mean that you'll have to pick up a book instead of having Google do your "work" for you, which probably isn't quite up your street. Worse, you might even need to visit an archive. N No pain, no gain!' Is that the issue you wanted to talk about ? As I said I deleted the content because it contained personal attacks as shown above. And it was resolved as of now in the talk section. 'These are disturbing symptoms of paranoia' I am sorry, but I hoped we could engage in well meaning discussion, why do use personall attacks and insults against me ? 'The statement I am sure certain knowledge that is correct may cause controversy to those that have a well established image of certain things -- I am inadvernently reminded of George W. Bush, with his pathological inability of self-criticism' The opinions on George W. Bush my differ and I don't undestand why do you chose to engage in political commentary while engaging in discussion on me. As to my statement I was refering to some users emotional discussions for example in Wehrmacht section and articles-where some users were unaware of atrocities it comitted and responded very actively in such articles.However those issues are also resolved as of now it seems. I hope you get well with the stress. Good day to you. I also hope you will avoid personal remarks towards me or descriptions of my persona in the future-it isn't needed. Cheers. --Molobo 22:37, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

The nature of encyclopaedias as open-edit mediums

Quote: "Anti-elitism on Wikipedia: Sanger has a point. To a certain amount, an encyclopedia is inherently elitist. The time spent unproductively in arguing over things that would be dismissed at first glance by any expert is crippling Wikipedia."

This is something I have to tell myself each and every time I edit anything at Wikipedia. It is in my top three list of 'most frustrating aspects of Wikipedia as a whole'.

In sum: yeah, I agree. :)

P.MacUidhir (t) (c) 18:53, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Nixer's block

Hello, I see you blocked Nixer (talk · contribs) for 48 hours for a WP:3RR violation. Don't you think that's a bit excessive? Also, you are involved in the article which he violated the 3RR on, so I think that you blocking him is quite inappropriate. According to the rule which was passed at Wikipedia:Three revert rule enforcement:

If you violate the three-revert rule, after your fourth revert in 24 hours, sysops may block you for up to 24 hours. In the cases where multiple parties violate the rule, administrators should treat all sides equally.

As you can see, 24 hours is the absolute maximum you can block someone for under this rule. I think that you should consider reducing his block to 12 hours, or at least you should leave a notice on WP:AN/I. If you are having problems with this user, you should file a WP:RFC against him. Izehar 13:21, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

I don't know if you subscribe to the mailing list, so I thought it best that I point out this message, in which a user, who I assume is Nixer, disputes the block. Canderson7 13:54, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Hi dab, I don't wan't you to think that I was picking on you with all this Nixer block stuff. I just felt somehow responsible for him being blocked as I had reverted him and, as a result, pushed him over the revert limit. I reverted him, because let's face it, his edits were in bad English and given that you, a well-known and respected user, were reverting him, I thought that he was vandalising. After he was blocked, he sent me an e-mail complaining about me reverting him and your 48 hour block - I tried to put things right, as I thought I had caused everything. I agree, those edits of his needed to be reverted, but I shouldn't have done it blindly without a word on the talk page. Izehar 18:51, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Blutgericht

Some pointers (but no answer, alas!) at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language#Blutgericht. Lupo 08:56, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

We have high, middle and low justice (unsourced and in need of much work, though). Lupo 09:22, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

ancient greek etc

Hello Dab! I am asking people to add info at the list Talk:Ancient_Greek_phonetics#articles_that_we_need_to_check. For example Vox Graeca is good, do we know if there's a better book about the reconstructed system? So far only Andreas and I have added some bits there. Thanks! +MATIA ☎ 13:23, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Níðhöggr > Nidhogg?

There is currently a vote underway at Talk:Níðhöggr to move the page to "Nidhogg". Your opinion would be appreciated. I'm sorry I keep bothering you with this. I wish there was some way to settle this once and for all :( - Haukur Þorgeirsson 19:21, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Thoughtful comment on Talk:Níðhöggr

I appreciated your comment that we should be careful about transliterations vs English. A point that hadn't really occured to most, I think. —Matthew Brown (T:C) 20:37, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Galðr

Sorry, that was my fault. I should have known they would stuff that bean right up their nose. [6] [7] - Haukur Þorgeirsson 09:26, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thankyou Dbachmann for the welcome. Unfortunately, I shall not be quick. I believe I will finish the article before Epiphany. Guparra 16:19, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Unsourced

Just because something is done in large volumes (such as putting {{unsourced}} on several pages) doesn't mean it is wrong. External links are not sources. Many articles simply have links to maps or "official sites". We are not a link farm, so we should be responsible for explaining where our content came from, rather than simply telling people where they can go to find trusted information. Also, this isn't just my opinion. I'm doing this as a result of lengthy discussions I've had over the past couple days with Jimbo and Danny on #wikimedia. While you don't have to agree with them, I do. I've explained to them what I am doing and they are fine with it (Danny, at least, has specifically stated an opinion on the matter). Also, I am only one person. It is much easier for one person to coordinate the efforts of several people, the people who wrote their respective articles, and thus know where their writing came from. One person shouldn't be expected to cover a broad array of topics that he might know nothing about. For examples of my sourcing, see Norman Borlaug and Great Lakes Storm of 1913. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-12-1 15:03

There has been a long running discussion/poll at Template talk:Unreferenced over these issues, perhaps this discussion should be moved there. - SimonP 16:05, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Gordon

I must alert you of a new User (User:Glengordon01; he just logged in; was previously contributing under an anon IP) who is not all-out cranky, but rather POV and is probably engaging in original research in Lemnian language. The research looks basically alright, but he doesn't seem to know or acknowledge policy. He's also made a few factual errors, such as that the Greeks used Pelasgoi to refer to all non-Greek peoples (see Lemnian language edit history). Alexander 007 08:02, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Anglicizations

Haukur, don't let yourself get too frustrated over this. I am glad that you speak up for what is essentially my position too, but remember that questions of article titles are, after all, not a big deal. We could easily have a good encyclopedia with all-ASCII titles, too. That said, if you like, I invite you to take a look at Nebuchadrezzar II, a rather complicated case of Akkadian transliteration, Hebrew variants and their anglicizations. dab (ᛏ) 09:21, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

You're quite right. I would even be willing to discuss an ASCII-only standard for Norse mythology names as long as we had consistency - but even that seems to be impossible. As soon as I mention any idea of standardized representation I get protests from those who want to use the most common Google-form no matter what.

Akkadian names are far beyond my area of expertise. I'm personally content with the traditional ASCII-versions of Biblical names (see Talk:Salomé for another example). In this case the 'r' variant is only marginally closer to the original anyhow. But I feel disinclined to comment on either case for two reasons. a) I'm not an expert there and I think people running their mouth off about things they know nothing about is one of the biggest problems Wikipedia faces and b) I'm trying to disengage from Wikipedia debates for the time being.

I have a lot of respect and appreciation for what you've been doing here. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 09:47, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Macedonian Slavs

For the sake of any neutrality that's left in wikipedia, can you please supervise the article Macedonian Slavs? Slavic and Albanian editors are having their way with the article by pushing the most ridiculous POV that one can imagine. So far they have managed to force the article's title to be moved to 'Macedonians (ethnic group)', remove any disambiguation between Macedon and FYROM and now they almost saying that they are the ancient Macedonians themselves. And of course no administrator can be bothered with such a mass of fanatics, hence the article ends up in a mess. Regards. Miskin 22:18, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Alexander for Admin

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Alexander_007 ,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship#Alexander_007 . I've nominated User:Alexander_007 as admin. Let's vote for him! -- Bonaparte talk & contribs 14:00, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

I am not seeking adminship. Alexander 007 14:15, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

He will accept it. Don't worry. -- Bonaparte talk & contribs 14:49, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

He did told me "I might accept just to show you that I was right." So, don't worry he will accept it. If you are a friend of him as he told me, then I wouldn't make any worry. -- Bonaparte talk & contribs 19:21, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

To be accurate, I said that I trust Dbachmann. A Wiki-friend in need (when I've gotten in "Wiki-trouble" ;) ... something that should not happen again) is a Wiki-friend indeed, but the word friend may be imposing, and I have not used that word. Wikipedia editors can be friends, but it's a "weird" friendship. By the way, I've made it clear that I am not accepting the RfA on the project page. This was not the time for it. I know something about politics, you know (if we can call it that). Alexander 007 09:09, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Tolkein

I dont think that you should remove "misspelling" redirects. [8] People often spell words incorrectly and it makes it more convenient that they be directed to the article which they meant to go to in the first place. Some words are difficult to spell and it just makes it harder for people if you remove redirects. Astrokey44 23:33, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Vishnu

Dab, I respect your opinion. Don't you think it would better to include the Devanagri script as well just that people can see the name "Vishnu" in Devanagri script as Sanskrit is written in that script. It would be nice to include both as I recommended. Vishnu is Vishnu whether in IAST or devanagri but it would be nice for readers to view both.

I don't think it would neccessary to include Sharada, Kharosthi, as these are minor scripts. Thanks.

Raj2004 00:37, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Dab, I know. Devanagri is just a script in which Sanskrit is written and does not mean Sanskrit =Devanagri. I will add your points. As for pronouncination hints, I didn't write that either and so I don't know what the writer meant.

Thanks.

Raj2004 10:42, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, Dab for the cleanup. It's fine now.

Raj2004 00:16, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

No problem.

Raj2004 11:33, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Odin

Sorry, I'd love to help but I'm woefully out of my depth there. --Angr (t·c) 10:26, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, but I don't know anything about the etymology of Odin or what's already been said about it, nor do I own any of the references. I've cleaned it up a little bit (using w in reconstructions instead of v, which hasn't been used in reconstructions in a hundred years, and replacing "Gallic" with "Gaulish"), but otherwise I just don't know what else needs to be said. --Angr (t·c) 11:19, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Flying machines and Roylee

I saw here that you and Tomer have interacted with Roylee, a user notorious for editing a web of fringe theories into Wikipedia. I vaguely remember telling you about him before. Anyway, a request for comments has recently been opened concerning this user: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Roylee. You might want to weigh in at its talk or maybe add a vote of endorsement or otherwise. Kind regards, — mark ✎ 13:07, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

References

That other editors have been lax about citing sources is not an excuse for not citing sources. If you think that other articles lack references as much as yours does, add references to them, or tag them too. Uncle G 20:26, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Odin

Hi Dab, I am sorry I haven't been much paying attention to Wikipedia during the last days. I will have a look at Odin tonight. See you around.--Wiglaf 09:41, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Ahem...

You missed me? I'm afraid I don't quite qualify as a Wikipedist. The articles I write are of the variety which would never appear in l' Encyclopédie. Articles such as R. v. Constanza and Aleinu stand right outside l' Encyclopédie.

Your "gem" ought to be hidden, lest someone surfing the Net sees it and thinks "can I trust Wikipedia?" While I appreciate the fact that there is a substantial Black Hole of ignorance on Wikipedia, that is nothing compared to the latest "Grand Design". I recently received this little note, which reflects what Wikipedians worry about. While they could protect that page and do some article writing, maybe respond to my enquiry, they choose to squabble over which colour the template to mark "semi-protected" pages should be. What a way to sort your priorities, huh?

If it makes you feel any better, we are fortunate to have contributors such as CDThieme ahem who most certainly have not been trolling Macedonia related articles for the past few months, but have made substantial contributions to Wikipedia by starting and expanding articles.

I'm afraid Wikipedia cannot be taken seriously as long as it is "the free encyclopaedia". Don't let the apparent difference we have with Encyclopædia Dramatica fool you. The mere fact that the question should we use BC, BCE, BC/BCE or BCE/BC in dates? has been asked shows how serious certain "encyclopaedia" writers are. While I am prepared to say that since the Christians have not required non Christians to change their calendars, there is no reason for non Christians to insist on "theologically neutral" changes being made to the Christian calendars, other people like quibbling over issues like that, while ignoring the issues which ought to be addressed.

Anyway, I wish you luck with your association of Wikipedists ;-) may it flourish and grow to a membership larger than the so-called " Catholic Church of Wikipedia" (sic). Izehar (talk) 22:56, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

French Intifada

You might like to have a look at Intifada, where certain persons are insisting that the term "French Intifada" should be cited without reference to the fact that it is the creation of lunatics. Palmiro | Talk 15:31, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Ethos

Ethos 16:14, 8 December 2005 Dbachmann (very questionable translations.) >>> In fact the material you added is questionable in my opinion. If you can provide good citations for this statement (and your additions), then I'm ready to leave the corrections as you provided. Otherwise I suggest reverting the edits. For etymological meaning of ‘ethos’ you can have a look in print.google.com and search 'ethos dwelling place'. Regards -- Aethralis 16:14, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

In modern greek we say "ήθη και έθιμα". Ήθος and έθος have the common root, in ancient greek ἔθω that means συνηθίζω. See also 1, 2, 3. Probably Dab will won't to move these along with his answer at Talk:Ethos. +MATIA ☎ 16:35, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

linguistics glossary in wp

Either we don't have something like that yet, or I haven't found it. What do you think about an article (a list actually) that will have the definitions of various linguistics terms that currently don't have an article (like africative for example) along with terms that do have an article (like the stub language shift). How does it sound as an idea? +MATIA ☎ 16:46, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

your comment

What was wrong with what Digvijay said on Rajput talk page? If you read the talk page u will realize in last many months no progress has been made. There are two sides : one who are providing references of books in support of there edits and on the other we have some bigots who operate without citations. Reverting is easy so every body is thinking of themselves as a historian. If you are really interested you should see the editing history of the usual suspects on the rajput page.

Shivraj Singh 18:15, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

You are missing the point still. Read what Digvijay posted a few days back. Direct Quotations from books. This is being refuted by arguments without citations. As an admin do you have a system in place to force these muslims etc to cough up some written history to support there reverts?

Shivraj Singh 19:40, 13 December 2005 (UTC)