User talk:JavierMC/Archives/2008/August

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, JavierMC/Archives/2008, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Happy editing! Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 18:35, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

POV

My misunderstanding of different spellings between American English and British English see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (spelling)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
I couldn't help notice your WP:POV edits. I saw this offensive remark made by you. FYI the words "recognise" and "recognize" are both used in the English language. However I wouldn't expect someone as ignorant/ dumb as you to know that. You should read WP:English and American and British English differences. Also it says on your profile that you have been editing wikipedia for 1 year, 8 months and 14 days, however you made your first edit on 9 August 2008. I believe you may have miscounted slightly as that was 4 days ago. If you need an help with maths please feel free to use a calculator. I promise I won't tell anyone. I suggest you revert your offensive edit. Also please read (if you can) WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF before editing again. Ijanderson977 (talk) 22:58, 13 August 2008 (UTC) How dare you? My WP:POV edits? I researched the interchange of --ize and --ise before I made any edits and all the sources I could find returned the spelling is --ize. Your non-WP:CIVIL remarks in your above message to me are supposed to chastise me into following appropriate Wiki behavior when you can not follow it yourself? It does not say that I have been editing for 1 year, 8 months and 14 day. It says I have been a wikipedian for that period of time, representing my membership of Wikipedia for that period of time. Do not in the future come to my talk page and leave such offensive statements concerning my intelligence. You do not know me, my background or my education and I will not even demean myself by enlightening you on the subject! Show me some references to where recognised and recognized are interchangeable. The fact that wikipedia even underlines recognise in red as being a misspelling should be some indication of it's validity. Jmedinacorona (talk) 23:36, 13 August 2008 (UTC) Your wrong --ise is also acceptable and is used in UK, Ireland, Malta, EU and some of the British Commonwealth. Just because it isn't used in American English doesn't mean it its not correct. Also for your information, it is not wikipedia which underlines it in red, it will be your internet browser spell checker, which will be set to American English. For example mine is set to British English, therefore underlines "recognize" red as incorrect. Ijanderson977 (talk) 23:57, 13 August 2008 (UTC) Also read this when referring to words ending in ize or ise, theres a whole section on it. Wikipedia:Manual of Style (spelling). Ijanderson977 (talk) 00:01, 14 August 2008 (UTC) I stand corrected and should have WP:AGF when editing. I was feeling a bit exasperated because of continued "misspelling" as I assumed it was on the part of our Russian Editors and made the statement in the edit summary so they would know that they could ask for an edit in discussion if they were not familiar with the English language. However, you took it as directed at you even though I did not even look at your userpage to determine whether the editor was a native English speaker or one of our Russian friends. I apologize if you construed it was meant as a slight directed at you.--Jmedinacorona (talk) 00:37, 14 August 2008 (UTC) Jmedinacorona (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Well I apologise for sending a rather aggressive message to you originally. You probably find European English irritating as you are used to American English and im the same, I find American English annoying in all fairness. Thats why i have been pushing on wikipedia for a consensus on differences on the English Language. For example on all American related articles, I believe that American English should be used and that on all European related articles, European English should be used. Same with Canadian and Australian related articles ect. Also on UN related article Oxford English Dictionary style of English should be used as this is used by the UN (they spell ize btw). Im sure you will agree with my proposal as it makes the most sense as there are many different variations of the English Language and they should all be used on the appropriate articles. Regards Ijanderson977 (talk) 09:51, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

exclusive english owner?

Further discussion on American/British English usage by another editor which ends in his attempt to take it engage in harassment
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
reg: your edit in south ossetia war abt. removing 's' and replacing with 'z'.. your edit summary is, at the bare minimum, myopic in the understanding of english usage in the world..(includes not just u.k. and u.s.) you dont have exclusive ownership to english usage to write a edit summary like that in wiki.. recognised / recognized is like color / colour..whats the big deal?? you have a right to edit what you consider is correct..but others too have the same right...so, wikipedians ought to stop being dismissive and intolerant and that might include you too!! i am writing this not bcoz i made that edit (i didnt), but bcoz i believe english is flexible enough in wikipedia as long as grave grammatical errors dont occur! so, showing tolerance, i m not reverting your edit since i have made my point here Cityvalyu (talk) 23:11, 13 August 2008 (UTC) I second that Ijanderson977 (talk) 23:12, 13 August 2008 (UTC) I did not mean to be uncivil in anyway. Before I made the edit I checked many online dictionaries as well as did a search in Wikipedia and a general search on recognise, recognize and all sources returned recognize(d) as the correct spelling. I did this search before even making the first edit on spelling where the --ize and --ise were interchanged. The statement I made in my edit summary spawned from my previous edits of this interchange and having to repeat them over again. However, I did not expect to see the most civil Ijanderson977 come onto my talk page and leave such a verbally abusive entry calling me uncivil names and generally berating me. Maybe if you can supply me with sources, as in published dictionaries or other reference material where in the english language --ize and --ise are synonymous in their usage, it would have been a more constructive lesson. --Jmedinacorona (talk) 23:26, 13 August 2008 (UTC) read this Wikipedia:Manual of Style (spelling) and this [1]Ijanderson977 (talk) 00:03, 14 August 2008 (UTC) So my new friend, why didn't you provide these to correct my understanding instead of coming to my talk page and verbally abusing me in your POV entry AND berating my intelligence and stating that I was misrepresenting my edit history? Was this your non-civil way of introducing me to wiki by baptism in fire? --Jmedinacorona (talk) 00:24, 14 August 2008 (UTC) dear friend , stating facts is not abuse!!! what abuse did you discover in the four words "READ THIS AND THIS"...i suggest wikipedians consult doctors (instead of dictionaries) when mentally upset or disturbed?!!...please don't vent your feelings on fellow users..although you wrote that you are trying not mean anything uncivil in your writings (assuming you wrote the truth), your second reply is also uncivil to say the least..since Ijanderson977 has acceded to your request for "sources", you ought to thank him/her rather than be so dismissive/ intolerant to a mere 4 word innocuous comment to help you out (based on your own request) on this talk page (which is not owned by any user)Cityvalyu (talk) 01:17, 14 August 2008 (UTC) Cityvalyu I was asking Ijanderson977 about his POV section in my talk page. How is saying "... I wouldn't expect someone as ignorant/ dumb as you ..." or "If you need an help with maths please feel free to use a calculator." ? And then YOU allude to me not telling the truth by writing "... (assuming you wrote the truth) ..." in reference to my statements after? Who the hell are you? Maybe I should request help from an admin or someone in a higher echelon to review your postings on my talk page because all I can see is your attempt to inflame a situation that by your posting totally disregards the replies I made to him. Did you even read any of it? It appears you are talking out of your ass in your above reply. Go badger someone else or is it your mission as a wikipedian to cause dissent? Jmedinacorona (talk) 01:47, 14 August 2008 (UTC) dear "?",cool down...please post your "frustrations" in relevant sections..now, please notice that your discussion is veering out of focus...i dont understand "talking out of your ass" as humans and even monkeys (i hope u don't consider me 'an exceptionally talented chimpanzee that types in wiki') use mouth to talk and i wrote(didnt talk).,puzzled! may be admin can help me understand your sense of humour or you can explain how you could do that miracle!! i consider your vitriolic attacks as bait for a similar response from me..i wont take the bait..you can rant on your own with any number of phrases like "Who the hell are you?", "talking out of your ass", "Go badger "...though it is easy for me to say WISH YOU THE SAME, i dont have to stoop as low as you ..i would rather like to forgive a depraved mind and keep away from a 'unworthy-of-further-replies' category user...no one else too will bother to chide another editor unless abused!! ...take careCityvalyu (talk) 02:34, 14 August 2008 (UTC) Once again i appologise for my earlier remarks Ijanderson977 (talk) 09:54, 14 August 2008 (UTC) disappointed to know that you(jmedinacorona) have still not apologised for your cheap, uncivil and abusive words ..i am thinking of removing the strike out lines in my previous edit..Cityvalyu (talk) 13:47, 17 August 2008 (UTC) Too bad WP doesn't come with an ignore button, it would be very helpful and appropriate at this juncture. Good day to you.--Jmedinacorona (talk) 13:55, 17 August 2008 (UTC) too bad that wiki cant stop filthy language usage(see archive) against other users..and does not condemn such unapologetic behaviour! please know that wiki is about NEUTRALITY..and TRUTH (with citations)which cant be ignored with an "ignore button"..it is not about you or me or your edit being superior/inferior to my edit..Cityvalyu (talk) 14:07, 17 August 2008 (UTC) {{help}} Please someone needs to help me to prevent the harrassment by Cityvalyu (talk). If this is the kind of behavior that is allowed and encouraged, then I will NEVER make an edit again. What are my options? You can try asking an admin to intervene for you. WP:AN would probably be a good place. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 14:27, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

With Respect

Discussion concerning an article talk page deletion. Settled with me agreeing to strike out the statement, not delete.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
NPOV does not require that I do all the work that there is to be done on a page. The page was very long, and I was both unwilling and unable to remove all of the inappropriate posts made on it. This does not mean that any of those posts or yours was any less inappropriate. Your post was inappropriate, and therefore was fit to be removed. If something is fit to be removed, then it should be. One of the fundamental aspects of Wikipedia is that people share the burden of editing the content of pages. I did my part by removing your post. For the record, if you go back through the archives of that talk page, you will come across other instances in which I similarly removed comments by other users. Even if I had not done so, it would not have been a POV to remove your post, but I did do so. I mean you no disrespect and bear no animosity, but it was necessary to remove your post due to its nature, and it is important that people be free to remove inappropriate posts without accusation of POV in doing so, especially given that the accusation does not change whether the originally removed post was inappropriate or not. Christiangoth (talk) 03:00, 16 August 2008 (UTC) I mean no disrespect either, and I did go through your Contributions and didn't see any other edits where you DELETED another authors remarks, just where you had made comments concerning them, this one was especially poignant Diff]. I should have WP:AGF instead of feeling that you selected me out of all the other editors to make your deletion but I guess someone must start somewhere. However, I did go back and revert your edit and then strike through my comment, which may help others try to refrain from making off topic comments themselves. 2008 South Ossetia war is hot enough on the talk page and article itself without us needing to start a war on our own talk pages. Again, sorry for my misinterpretation. --Jmedinacorona (talk) 03:46, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

brigadier statements not equal to president/ prime minister statements

Heated debate concerning 2008 South Ossetia war with Cityvalyu. Taught me a thing or two about WP:Civil
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
am undoing your revert since it gives toomuch importance to one of the brigadier's in georgia ..Not fit for a lead intro..Cityvalyu (talk) 12:32, 17 August 2008 (UTC) nevertheless ,see edit summary to know why i reverted..Cityvalyu (talk) 12:40, 17 August 2008 (UTC) please also see the reply to your post in my talk pageCityvalyu (talk) 12:48, 17 August 2008 (UTC) npov: remove/ be specific be specific..in what way you consider it non neutral..(is the georgian point of view the only neutral view??)..explain your edit to add that template in south ossetia war...Cityvalyu (talk) 14:16, 17 August 2008 (UTC) edit war Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to 2008 South Ossetia war appears to carry a non-neutral point of view (your latest revert edit HAS NOT been changed or reverted to correct the problem BY ME). Please remember to observe our core policies. Thank you. Your recent edits contain biased and NPOV additions. please stop using filthy language (eg: talking out of ass) IN TALK PAGES and please take this opportunity to apologise for your non wiki policy behaviour Please stop.Cityvalyu (talk) 15:05, 17 August 2008 (UTC) I added this friendly notice to his talk page and he then decided to add it to my talk page in an attempt at retaliation (?) for posting it . My supposed bias and/or NPOV edit was to reverse an edit he made to remove a sourced statement made by a high-ranking Georgian officer who was in-charge of the peacekeeping forces of the Ministry of Defense and the highest ranking official both militarily and civilian for Georgia in the area. «Javier»|Talk 18:25, 18 August 2008 (UTC) i guess you qualify as a liar.point 1: it was not removed totally.. SHIFTED TO APPROPRIATE SECTION (COMBATANT STATEMENTS)..hidden facts: 1 THAT YOU REVERTED YOUR PoV REPEATEDLY "without any logical backing to support".. one among the numerous brigadier's opinion not equal to president of any nation discussion on article as well as my talk page that proves her/his hollow claims..Cityvalyu (talk) 01:26, 19 August 2008 (UTC) Please stop harassing me trying to push your POV. You continue referencing a discussion we had previously to qualify your harassment and when anyone reads it they see the inane nature of beating of dead horse, since I have since agreed with the American/British difference, on the same day. Yet you keep going back to that. I don't know who you are, and at this point I don't care to know who you are. You are not cooperative, your abusive in the extreme and can not see any point of view except your own. It's sad that this has come to past, because initially, I welcomed any constructive criticium, but you have crossed the line in civility and made it personal for you. Move on and talk concerning current edits and try and get beyond the past. Thank you.--«Javier»|Talk 01:58, 19 August 2008 (UTC) regarding your present reply to a past discusiion , please move on after apologising for non wiki behaviour..no one is preventing you from apologising..regarding going back, you seem to be doing the same (see above) and as a consequence i have a right to reply to a false and HYPOCRITICAL accusation(uncivil, personal) against me!!! ..correct me if i am wrong!!..hpoe you enjoy your unapologetic stand!!Cityvalyu (talk) 02:08, 19 August 2008 (UTC) Warning You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war; according to the reverts you have made on 2008 South Ossetia war}}. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Cityvalyu (talk) 15:05, 17 August 2008 (UTC) I am taking your harassment to WP:AN. Your addition of this warning to my user talk is a direct personal attack since I have in no way engaged in the above accused actions. You placed this on my page in retaliation for my having placed the notice on your talk page due to your continued editing of the article 2008 South Ossetia war without first taking the controversial edits to the talk page, where even now many complaints about your edits have been made by other editors.--Jmedinacorona (talk) 15:15, 17 August 2008 (UTC) The end of the harassment by User:Cityvalyu, hopefully. --«Javier»|Talk 18:37, 18 August 2008 (UTC) since you are bent upon vandalising your own talk page by removing replies to your accusation of harassment against me..please ask your conscience on whether the following constitutes harassment.you wrote : Who the hell are you? Maybe I should request help from an admin or someone in a higher echelon to review your postings on my talk page because all I can see is your attempt to inflame a situation that by your posting totally disregards the replies I made to him. Did you even read any of it? It appears you are talking out of your ass in your above reply. Go badger someone else..i even offered to forgive(you didnt apologise though) ..is that harassment??please dont vandalise my replies..please note that i have no locus standi to respond if you dont apeak lies about me or if you apologise for harassing me..please take the issue to wherever you want..let them judge your filthy harassing unapologetic lies!!!stop vandalisng my replies and edits01:51, 19 August 2008 (UTC) I provide this references for the use of the statement "...talking out of your ass.--«Javier»|Talk 23:12, 19 August 2008 (UTC) Why don't you stop justifying your 'usage' of uncivil condemnable words?? Can't you see that it is blatantly abusive if not harassing?117.193.33.56 (talk) 22:13, 20 August 2008 (UTC) References vandalism you have changed "tshinvalli hospital"(reference says so) to actual hospital(original research with weasel word) despite talk page clarification..now you accuse me of vandalism!! is quoting reference vandalism? is restoring neutral (non us/georgian/russian version) point vandalism?..my friends used to say children of pro**** or such morally corrupt characters have no remorse to speak immoral lies blatantly..though i dont subscribe to that view entirely, i personally have noticed many criminals doing the same and later getting caught when the truth ultimately emerges out..please understand that you need not be like those shady characters and have the option of rather apologising for lying that a "valid edit" as "vandalism"..why did you reinsert wrong facts without consensus or proving the used word's verifiabilityCityvalyu (talk) 01:41, 19 August 2008 (UTC) please know that wp:point (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:POINT), wp:undue, wp: vandalism can help you understand wiki.. ..please refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:TERM to understand what they stand for before using them inappropriately ( i am assuming you didnt do any stupidity intentionally)..as i have responded politely to all your vitriolic allegations in your edits (that you made about me on a personal basis), i am retiring now..have a nice day..please consider thinking twice before using lies against another editor(like me) if you dont want replies.take care..Cityvalyu (talk) 02:45, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct

Another debate concerning the POV of an editor who believed that a non-English speaking countries dating format should prevail on en.wikipedia
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Please look at this page, and decide if you will endorse an RfC on Skyring. That involves signing to assert that a dispute exists. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:58, 27 August 2008 (UTC) The change to MOSNUM seems to be holding. If discussion dies down, we can detag it, and then ask Skyring to abide by consensus (about a week from now); the evidence for this will include the straw poll, in which I hope everyone will !vote. If he doesn't, then an RfC, which will guide us whether to appeal to ArbCom. Consensus is slow and frustrating; but sometimes it works. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 14:15, 28 August 2008 (UTC) Don't give up. Do you disagree that articles written in distinctly British English should use 31 August 2008, a distinctly British format? If not, accepting that compromise will do what we want, by depriving Date Warriors of a claim to MOS approval; because it is already consensus that switching articles from British to American and back is a bad thing. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:48, 31 August 2008 (UTC) I do not disagree that if an article on English WP has a distinct British or American "flavor", then the article should follow a dating convention to reflect the distinction. What I do object to is having to determine the dating convention of non-English speaking counties and making a third convention of articles dating styles, solely based on what they use. This is English wikipedia. Pete's arguments are, in my opinion, so "out there" that any argument in opposition reminds me of arguing with one of my children why it is prudent to wear a coat when it's 35°F outside.--«JavierMC»|Talk 21:17, 31 August 2008 (UTC) Pete is (on this issue) isolated and outnumbered. Let's keep it that way. (Either of the proposed ties to national language will forbid much of Pete's disruptions; many articles on Europe were written by Americans in American.) Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:24, 31 August 2008 (UTC)