Welcome!

Hello, Jeppiz, 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! bodnotbod (talk) 16:36, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are missing the point, no one is saying the 'urdu language' is mongolian or Altaic, instead the word urdu or historically spelled 'ordu' is taken from the turkish/altaic language and means army as the urdu language was historically related to the army camps of south asia. Khokhar (talk) 03:30, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's a Turkic word, yes. Altaic is already controversial as most linguistis dispute the existence of such a language group. Whether it was first spelled 'ordu' or 'urdu' is rather insignificant and hardly relevant to the introduction, as it wasn't spelled in the Latin alphabet at all at the time.Jeppiz (talk) 03:33, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be a lot more knowledgable than me regarding this matter so I'll leave it to you to catergorise the origin of the word 'ordu', it does seem relevant as urdu was a synthesis of many languages including Turkish by the the Mughals; who were themselves Turk. Khokhar (talk) 03:39, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. Don't get me wrong, I don't dispute that. It's the Altaic part I have a problem with. If ever such a language existed, and most linguists doubt it, it was spoken around 5000-6000 years ago.Jeppiz (talk) 03:42, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have made the necessary corrections. Khokhar (talk) 03:52, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kaixo! Zer moduz?
Dia dhuit! Conas atá tú?
Hej! hur mår du?
I know that the inhabitants of those irish towns named by the Irish in their names, I lived in Kerry, Clare, Galway Counties about 6 months and I was at several towns of them, I have as a first language Basque language, I also used the names of the Basque localities in Basque language version (but some of them have two official versions, normally the big cities: basque/spanish, french or gascon), I can understand your linguistic point of view . But the problem is this: I do not know the current language policy of the Government of the Republic of Ireland on the name of the people of the Gaeltacht area, if the official name is the only bilingual version or only the Irish version, as for example in the town of An Daingean has arisen in this regard. If you have any exact information about this topic please send me because I've read so far is quite vague.

If it´s like me you say, you can be sure that I´ll change the titles of articles in its Irish version.

Goraintziak Euskal Herritik Suediara!
Greetings from the Basque Country to Sweden.

--Euskalduna tell me here 20:00, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

O.K. I just see the website of the Údarás na Gaeltachta and I decided that as of now to create more articles on towns in the Gaeltacht area uses the official names given in this website. Of course, the changes that You made in the articles that I created will be fully respected. I hope to create more articles on the Basque language locations starting from Cork and Waterford county in the south and ending in Donegal county in the north.

Agur! Hej då! Slán agat!

--Euskalduna tell me here 20:25, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Jeppiz, no offence, but the section you removed was perfetly referenced and NPOV. It did not accuse Aftonbladet of being antisemitic, it just covered the allgations of others, something there's no reason for the article to ignore. It's very much an issue. While criticism of Israel is not antisemitic, by singlehandedly removing it you're simply ignoring the fact that it can be. In any case, would have been nice to talk about it beforehand. Poliocretes (talk) 22:47, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It would have been even better to talk before inserting a paragraph that can be seen as highly offensive. And it did not "cover the allegations of others", it covered an article that said that Aftonbladet is not antisemitic.Jeppiz (talk) 22:49, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look in the history section, Jeppiz. That paragraph was written by someone who does actualy seem to speak Swedish (it wasn't me btw, though you seem to think so). Anyway, the point is that several people, who from the look of it come from very different backgrounds, have all contributed, and simply blanking out the section without discussing it first was uncalled for. Poliocretes (talk) 23:04, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from large removals of discussion that help to build our encyclopedia as the best possible encyclopedia, in this case seeking the assistance of editors knowledgeable in the Hindi language and Devanagari script to add such script to articles that need it. Thank you for this consideration. Badagnani (talk) 00:37, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've answered on your talk page, but here goes in short: The purpose of talk pages is to discuss how to improve the page to which the talk page belong. Requests for translations from Hindi belong at the talk page of articles to which they refer, not on the talk page of Hindi. Talk pages of every language article would turn into translation services if others followed your lead.Jeppiz (talk) 04:33, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. Hayden120 (talk) 08:47, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to self revert, because I really didn't want to get into this discussion. I showed why it was not RS, and you didn't even provide a reason, outside of "it has been discussed before". It was, but I provided further evidence. Discuss it. Find a reason why a paper that promotes the blood libel should be RS. When everybody agrees that it is okay to use a paper that promotes the blood libel as RS, feel free to revert. Until then, please leave it alone.Sposer (talk) 16:35, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No offense, but you seem to have misunderstood Wikipedia's rules. What you're saying with your "When everybody agrees that it is okay to use a paper that promotes the blood libel as RS, feel free to revert. Until then, please leave it alone" is that it is you who decide what is RS or not unless everybody else agrees otherwise. I suggest you read up on Wikipedia's rules before making similar claims.Jeppiz (talk) 18:10, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Remember me from Corsican language? I was just reading some stuff from Ethnologue and you're right, sometimes they're so far off the mark that one can't even give them points for cleverness. I apologise for reverting you. Ultimate Destiny (talk) 07:01, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. You appear to be involved in an edit war on Scandinavia. While the three-revert rule is hard and fast, please be aware that you can be blocked for edit warring without making 3 reverts to an article in 24 hours. You are not entitled to 3 reverts and are expected to cooperatively engage other editors on talk pages rather than reverting their edits. Note that posting your thoughts on the talk page alone is not a license to continue reverting. You must reach consensus. Continued edit warring may cause you to be blocked. Toddst1 (talk) 20:48, 18 June 2009 (UTC) Toddst1 (talk) 13:04, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please be aware that our policies on biographical articles on living persons require a high standard for sources, especially for any controversial or negative information. Many of your recent edits at Mallika Sherawat are inconsistent with this policy and your edit-warring to include controversial information without reliable sourcing is unacceptable. I am assuming that you were unaware of these policies, but please be more careful in future since violating WP:BLP and/or edit-warring may lead to your account being blocked. Abecedare (talk) 17:45, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the idea of the "Persian" map was "at greatest extent of the language's influence", not "current nation's political borders", sort of the way the Turkic map parallels the later heyday of Genghis Khan's greatest conquests. But if you're going to leave the map down, could you at least put the "No Map" verbiage up, as with other boxes having no maps? Thanks. — Sizzle Flambé (☎/✍) 07:47, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I found the previous (and better) map and put that in its place. Thanks. — Sizzle Flambé (☎/✍) 23:44, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! I'm sorry for not answering before. I found a German map earlier today that also was better, but let's stick with this one!Jeppiz (talk) 23:50, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thanks! getting used to this whole process.kevinharte —Preceding undated comment added 22:06, 21 November 2009 (UTC).[reply]

I don't want to start an edit war, but I am going to remove the POV tag for a second time (I personally have only done it the once. If you are going to undo this, please could you first kindly point out how specifically the article is "biased" on the article's talk page, so that we can work towards addressing this, and/or consensus can be achieved on whether this amounts to bias.

The amount of coverage given to the reaction is clearly ridiculous (hence the "undue" tag), but it's not bias to reflect the fact that there is nowhere near a 50-50 split in opinion on the matter. WFCforLife (talk) 18:22, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment. It goes without saying that tags should always be backed up, and I did back it up the first time I put it there, although not this second time as I feel the same arguments apply. I'm in a bit of a hurry now, but I'll come back to it. In the meantime I won't put the tag back before having had the time to outline in more detail why the article does not satisfy WP:NPOV.Jeppiz (talk) 18:54, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what you mean by references in the text. MoodFreak (talk) 19:00, 27 November 2009 (UTC) When I look at the code under the page for those reference, it is very complicated. Is there an easier way to add the references? ~!MoodFreak (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:36, 28 November 2009 (UTC).[reply]

It's not for you to say what I can or should not do.get a life.--Kevinharte (talk) 06:32, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You vandalised another user's personal page and I restored it and commented on how it's not for you (nor anyone else) to start undoing editor's edits to their own talk pages as long as the edits are in line with Wikipedia policies. I don't know why you try to start confrontations with all people. Nobody gains from that.Jeppiz (talk) 07:19, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All people? That not a bit of an exageration? Jeppiz,I don't want any contact with you,don't write on my page.--Kevinharte (talk) 17:17, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't write on your page to seek contact, I've merely pointed out politely when you violate Wikipedia policies. Many others would have reported you or blocked you long ago.Jeppiz (talk) 17:24, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I very much appreciate your efforts on the Jonathan Cook AfD. Quite frankly, I find such debates to be tedious and exhausting. So I thank you.
--NBahn (talk) 01:14, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Incipient_edit_war_at_Josip_Broz_Tito you suggested to me to report DIREKTOR's and Alasdair's removal as vandalism. Can you please tell me where i can report them? Thanks for your help --AndreaFox2 (talk) 22:13, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would ask you to delete (and not just cross out) your restatement of the banned user's language. As the Arbitrator's decision makes clear, that is an unacceptable circumvention of the ban. Many thanks, my friend.--Epeefleche (talk) 02:42, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and thanks for your comment! I'll gladly do that, but I'm not 100% of which diff you mean. Is it the one where I summarized the points made by a topic-ban user on the AfD on Cook? Just tell me whether that's it and I'll remove it right away. Have a nice evening!Jeppiz (talk) 02:55, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that was it, and thanks for your openness to considering my request. But perhaps its a moot point now, as (IMHO in violation of bans) the topic banned editors and Slim have inserted the material. On another point, I hadn't thought we had reached consensus to delete the "according to his website" clarifications, but noticed that you've deleted it/them. Have I missed something? Many thanks, and kudos for being one of the few to have retained balance and good humor throughout this somewhat testy AfD.--Epeefleche (talk) 19:11, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed it now. I've more or less left the AfD since a few days. In my experience, many AfDs start out well enough with people making reasonable arguments for deleting and for keeping, but after a few days both sides get more extreme and less polite. As this is a topic on which I don't have any personal feelings, and as I've made the factual arguments I wanted to make, I've left it behind me. It was a pleasure reading your comments; even in the cases where we did not agree, you always made your point in a well-articulated and polite way. As for the "according to his website", you're very welcome to change it as you see fit. For me, it was only a question about smooth reading of the article, but if there are other motives for keeping it, I don't have anything against including it again. Cheers and keep up the good workJeppiz (talk) 19:52, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I hope I have the good fortune to work with you again. It's been a pleasure, as I've felt that you were one of the few always willing to listen to others' views, and reconsider yours if you felt appropriate. This project needs more of that. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:13, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Per l'articolo sul dittatore Broz puoi contattare l'australiano user:Sir Floyd attaccato dal solito DIREKTOR. Se puoi, lascia un messaggio in user talk:Jimbo Wales per un appello finalizzato a sbloccare user:Luigi 28, user:Barba Nane, user:Ducatista2, user:Miranovic, user:Trusciante, user:Pantaleone, user:Vastaso che son stati messi al bando su istigazione delle famigerate utenze slave che hai già segnalato come problematiche: difatti agiscono una in sostegno dell'altra contro il regolamento che definisce questo comportamento meatpuppetry sanzionabile con la messa al bando. Considera inoltre che DIREKTOR ha ricevuto 3 blocchi per guerre editoriali e fu ristretto ossia limitato in una serie di articoli nei quali insiste con il suo POV: leggi qui Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Dalmatia#DIREKTOR restricted dunque se lo bloccano ancora una volta è prossimo alla messa al bando. Questi slavi negano la pulizia etnica contro i cittadini italiani ordinata dal dittatore Broz e di conseguenza vogliono fare qui pulizia istigando gli amministratori contro utenze italiane e non che si oppongono alla loro agenda politica, che è pure sanzionabile con messa al bando. Per avere un'idea guarda qui e successivi interventi, poi qui con successivi interventi; ancora leggi qui con l'ennesima guerra editoriale prima e dopo questa modifica; posso continuare con altri articoli nei quali DIREKTOR nega la pulizia etnica fatta dai croati nella guerra interslava dopo il 1991 e attacca utenze serbe: insomma è inaccettabile questo schifo! AlasdairGreen27 è un pericoloso troll: leggi qui --Mengardo (talk) 18:02, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I inform you: read user talk:Jimbo Wales#Ex Yugoslavia case —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.206.126.34 (talk) 15:04, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jeppiz, this is a message from an automated bot to inform you that the page you created, Claudia Lynx, has been marked for speedy deletion by User:Kmehrabi. This has been done because the page seems to be about a person, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant (see CSD). If you think the tag was placed in error, please add "{{hangon}}" to the page text, and edit the talk page to explain why the page should not be deleted. If you have a question about this bot, please ask it at User talk:SDPatrolBot II. If you have a question for the user who tagged the article, see User talk:Kmehrabi. Thanks, - SDPatrolBot II (talk) on behalf of Kmehrabi (talk · contribs) 02:45, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Claudia Lynx. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Claudia Lynx (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:07, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hej. You asked this question on a few different talk pages, so I will reply here to keep it in one place. The infoboxes use a template called {{Swiss populations}}, which allows an editor to add the ISO code for the canton and SFOS number for the municipality, and it will draw population data from Category:Template:Swiss populations data. I agree with you, though; it does seem rather confusing. It might be better just to replace them with a plain figure and a reference. Best regards, Hayden120 (talk) 15:47, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The infoboxes were set to use the Template to allow the populations to be easily updated every year when the new statistics come out. The template documentation links to the database that contains all the population data, which is where it can be edited. I'm interested in your other 2 comments

- This population figure is usually unsourced (the source provided does not support the claim)
- A different population figure is often found in the main body of the article.

On which articles is the population unsourced? Every one should have a source. So far I've only checked the Lugano figure, and that one is supported by the excel table on the Swiss Federal Statistical Office. So, if you've found one with incorrect sourcing, can you let me know. As for the figures being different in the article and the infobox, I'm in the process of adding the template to every municipality article. If you see one with old information in the please feel free to add the populations template. I've adjusted the lede on both the Bern and Lugano articles. Tobyc75 (talk) 16:10, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I feel rather stupid now :-) I followed the link and somehow missed the excel-tables at the bottom... Do you think it might be an idea to link straight to the excel table rather than the current page, in case others are as blind as I was? Jeppiz (talk) 16:15, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've nominated Larissa Riquelme, an article you worked on, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Wikipedia:Did you know. You can see the hook for the article here, where you can improve it if you see fit. Metropolitan90 (talk) 07:19, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The DYK project (nominate) 12:04, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi. You raised some very good points on Talk:List of cities proper by population. The discussion might be of interest for you. See you there. -- BsBsBs (talk) 18:26, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not vandalising the page, why do you think this is so important? And you can add various sources for any information, it doesn't matter. He has played hundreds of games in his career and has done plenty more significant things than giving Messi a swollen ankle. Also you don't own this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.46.46.194 (talk) 19:40, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removing sourced content can be vandalism, and you have also vandalised the page in other ways, such as adding nonsense as in this edit [1]. Saying that he has played hundreds of game is irrelevant, he has played one game in which he made headlines around all of Europe. However, my discussion page is not the place to discuss this, that discussion is already found under the talk page of Ujfalusi. If you want to contribute, then stop vandalizing and start discussing there.Jeppiz (talk) 19:48, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there JEPPIZ, VASCO from Portugal here,

About the stuff which has been occurring in this player's page, i'll say the following about the situations which concern me:

You advised users to check the talkpage of the article before engaging in significant changes. I did so, with the same result - immediate reversions of my edits. Why? OK, the POV about his physical approach (which is correct, 100% true!), is deemed unencyclopedical, i'll stop adding it. But how 'bout the rest?

1 - After having the idea of writing competition names in English, someone told me names should be (per forum discussion(s)) in its original form. In Ujfalusi's case, La Liga, i had it in intro, you reverted it.

2 - In the situation with Messi (late lines of CLUB CAREER), i inserted several wikilinks and composed language, you reverted EVERYTHING (?!). Why did i remove some references? You can ask anyone, it was not vandalism, why insert refs in Swedish and French when there are already sources in English? This is EN.WIKI i believe, and the three i left (two ENG, one SPA because situation pertained to Spanish football) are more than enough to "cover" the incident.

3 - I removed the overlinking of the link EJECTION (SPORTS), which is found in "International career", and that became doubled after the Messi paragraph insertion, you...reverted it. I inserted a translation title for foreign refs, another good addition, you reverted it. Can i ask why?

All in all, sorry for any incovenience, keep up the good work - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 21:34, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your message. The fault here is mine. It was late, and I obviously did a mistake - I only meant to remove the part about Ujfalusi's "physical strength and stamina", not the many good changes you have. It seems that I edited the wrong version. Sorry about that, I'll change it back if it hasn't been done already!Jeppiz (talk) 07:18, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for you reply, regards - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 14:04, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is one editor who is hell bent on sanitising the page and removing any news that he percives as negative. I feel that Mallika's statements on her early life were quite controversial ad hence needs to be addressed in early life section. We just cannot hide the news. Since you had shown some interest before I thought I would drop u a line. You may also want to have a look and chip in. --Indian Chronicles (talk) 16:20, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jeppiz, thanks for the comment, I've started to reply to your comment at Talk:Switzerland#POV_in_most_Swiss_articles Tobyc75 (talk) 16:54, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying that the sending off did not cause controversy? "Controversy is a state of prolonged public dispute or debate, usually concerning a matter of opinion." Is the rugby world not divided in its opinion on the matter? I did neither say it was a correct nor an incorrect decision, merely that it sparked controversy. I fail to see why it warranted amendment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swperb (talk • contribs) 19:57, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

List of languages by number of native speakers (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Luxemburg, Saraiki, Persian and Punjab

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:18, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Klaus Fleming, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pojo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:28, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The NE has 2010 pop estimates online ("Världens 100 största språk 2010"). Do you have access to the site? Some of the languages have significant changes, perhaps corrections. — kwami (talk) 20:55, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why can't we have full access to the site? http://www.ne.se/spr%C3%A5k/v%C3%A4rldens-100-st%C3%B6rsta-spr%C3%A5k-2010189.164.39.59 (talk) 08:03, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	Friday night in Belgium award
	Thanks for your efforts to help at Khazars Andrew Lancaster (talk) 19:29, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Khazars, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Uyghur (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:13, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think you need an Undue tag, not a POV tag. The undue tags are placed in the section and that section is already tagged. Also, tagging now will just add heat and we will all be old and gray arguing about it for ever. In general, dramatic acts during a discussion only generate more heat and will just take up life. I suggest you just tag he section with Undue rather than the whole article. Thanks. History2007 (talk) 22:50, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not let a WP:SPA take you out with him. He may have no worry about 3RR, for he is a WP:SPA. And please do not give them excuses by using the word dishonest. Please choose your words carefully. This will go back on ANI and what you say will be remembered and aired there. History2007 (talk) 01:47, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment is fine, but it should be at the bottom of the section and signed with a new timestamp. See tpg for practices on refactoring own comments. NE Ent 14:30, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The thread is "Jesus,Argument from silence".

Guide for participants If you wish to open a DR/N filing, click the "Request dispute resolution" button below this guide or go to Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/request for an easy to follow, step by step request form. What this noticeboard is: It is an early step to resolve content disputes after talk page discussions have stalled. If it's something we can't help you with, or is too complex to resolve here, our volunteers will point you in the right direction. What this noticeboard is not: It is not a place to deal with the behavior of other editors. We deal with disputes about article content, not disputes about user conduct. It is not a place to discuss disputes that are already under discussion at other dispute resolution forums. It is not a substitute for the talk pages: the dispute must have been discussed extensively on a talk page (not just through edit summaries) before resorting to DRN. It is not a court with judges or arbitrators that issue binding decisions: we focus on resolving disputes through consensus, compromise, and explanation of policy. Things to remember: Discussions should be civil, calm, concise, neutral, and objective. Comment only about the article's content, not the other editors. Participants who go off-topic or become uncivil may be asked to leave the discussion. Let the other editors know about the discussion by posting {{subst:drn-notice}} on their user talk page. Sign and date your posts with four tildes "~~~~". If you ever need any help, ask one of our volunteers, who will help you as best as they can. You may also wish to read through the FAQ page located here and on the DR/N talkpage. Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you! EarwigBot operator / talk 16:44, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply] IP? I was deliberately not looking at all the events of the past ANI threads, but I happened to notice this this change of public signature and then saw this previous revert, then this one and they seem pretty close - geographically. I am not sure if that means that we all may have some type of previous history together that some of us may have been unaware of. But there was some type of other IP edit from Oregon in the middle of those ANI discussions in the past 5-6 days and I can not remember where it was. Do you remember it? Thanks. History2007 (talk) 21:19, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply] Ok, now after a few more clicks: this was it on that thread. And this one as well. All very close in geography as well as mindset. History2007 (talk) 22:14, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply] Heads up Just to let you know that this is not ANI material - it's an announcement not an incident, and thus normally belongs on WP:AN (✉→BWilkins←✎) 12:56, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply] Thanks! You're of course completely right, and I even knew that. Wrote it in a hurry, stupid mistake on my part.Jeppiz (talk) 13:09, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply] 89.168.113.120 The IP editor whom you've appeared to have dealings with, appears to be engaging in disruptive editing at the article Vang Pao. I see that you had previously left a lvl 4 warning on his page on the 20th of February. I reverted the editors deletion of content, what I thought at the time was a good faith edit that changed the context of the content, which the editor has since reverted. I am curious as to how we should move forward regarding this IP editor.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 20:49, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply] Re: Quran I have replied to your comment on the article's talk page. I trust that if you read the reasoning (not having to agree with all of it - the political bias conclusion is a bit iffy for me), you will agree that the deletion of the paragraph was obviously justified. Meanwhile, please do not assume such malice from an editor. It was extremely insulting and hurtful. SamuelRiv (talk) 03:14, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply] Venetian and Gallo-Italic I provided some sources for my statement about Venetian and Gallo-Italic languages/dialects.--Carnby (talk) 23:37, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] Ottimo! Le ho letto e penso che siano buone quindi ho aggiornato l'articolo. Ho anche lasciato un messaggio sulla tua pagina nella wikipedia italiana.Jeppiz (talk) 23:48, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] Grazie!--Carnby (talk) 23:53, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] Resurrection of Jesus There is no good way of handling civil but unhelpful commentary at Talk:Resurrection of Jesus—that's one of Wikipedia's weaknesses. Every explanation is an invitation for more unhelpful comments in reply. There are two ways to proceed, and I outlined my suggestion (say nothing and let others rant for a few days). The alternative is to start reverting repetitive and non-actionable comments, but that creates a huge distraction because when it eventually reaches ANI, misguided passers-by will say "you can't do that". I don't think there is enough to go to ANI now, but in view of the previous block perhaps there is (although I think it would be more effective to go to ANI after ignoring them for at least three days and seeing whether anything useful comes from them in that time). Currently, their repetition is plausibly defended on the basis that all they are doing is replying. Johnuniq (talk) 09:52, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] Surena Yeah, as you know i was blocked because i did something against the rules, and i am very sorry, can you do me a favor? please take a look at all these sources and tell me if they are good enough to be used, i have found some extra sources too, here are all the sources for the picture: http://tonbak.wordpress.com/2011/07/04/surena-the-ancient-persian-general/ and http://www.iran-daily.com/1391/4/8/MainPaper/4267/Page/6/Index.htm and http://books.google.dk/books?id=p7kltwf9yrwC&pg=PA136&lpg=PA136&dq=general+surena&source=bl&ots=1CGspHhxcB&sig=eV5nFa2TIvgC0vpl88lkxLyRni4&hl=en&sa=X&ei=7aA7UbmgE5GLswb7uYGYCg&ved=0CD4Q6AEwBTgK#v=onepage&q=general%20surena&f=false and http://www.persianempire.info/parthia9.htm http://www.livius.org/su-sz/surena/surena.html and http://english.irib.ir/radioculture/iran/history/item/81340-surena-parthian-era-hero-of-iran and http://historyschmistory.tumblr.com/post/3344757787/the-surena-the-surena-a-general-was-born-into and http://iranpoliticsclub.net/photos/U09-Parthian1/index.htm And here is the picture i want to put on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SurenaImage.jpg --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:15, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] Hello, I've tried to answer as well as I can, you find the answer here [2] on your talk page. I hope it helps!Jeppiz (talk) 12:00, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] Thank you very much :). Great, so i can put the sources that are good on with the picture without having any trouble right? i want to be full sure so i don't do anything wrong again. --HistoryofIran (talk) 13:22, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] I my understanding, yes. However, if someone reverts you, then use the talk page of the article to discuss the matter. People are never blocked for making one "bad" edit, but everyone can be blocked for reverting even if the edit is "good". It's not the quality of an edit that can lead to a block, but repetitive edit-warring. Best of luck!Jeppiz (talk) 13:56, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] Just FYI, see follow-up discussion on History's talkpage. The one source you identified as reliable isn't actually supporting the claim he wants to insert. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:01, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] Thanks for your comment. I didn't comment on the claims, just on the quality of sources. That's why I took care to stress that any edit needed to be based on what source said.Jeppiz (talk) 14:15, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] Article Feedback deployment Hey Jeppiz; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:08, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] Noclador I agree that the language I used is in general counterproductive. However, Noclador started it by reverting all my commits (despite not knowing what he's talking about) and calling them "major BS". [[3]] Is this a good example of acceptable language? Doesn't seem too different to what I wrote. Another example of Noclador's ignorance and lack of respect (describing the native language of Varsei as "some obscure local dialect") here: [4] Gixz (talk) 01:05, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] Your personal attacks Your comment on my Talk page is disruptive [5]. A few days ago,, I lost my temper and left an angry comment on an admin's Talk page. A day later, I acknowledged that I blew it, struck my own comments, and apologized. Now you have linked to the original comment calling it a personal attack, with no mention of my self-correction or apology. That is dishonest, lawyering. Please refrain from misrepresenting the truth and taking editor actions out of context in order to "win" games.Strangesad (talk) 14:59, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] Well, your edit history makes it clear that you tend to lose your temper at a lot of people. You should perhaps work on it. For the record, any further post from you on this talk page will be reported as harassment. I want nothing to do with you, as you have shown yourself to be a user with a bad temper and a disability to work with others.Jeppiz (talk) 15:11, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] arbitration http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Statement_by_.7BParty_1.7D — Preceding unsigned comment added by Humanpublic (talk • contribs) 18:48, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] Jeppiz, n your statement on the arb request, you claimed that the topic ban was supported by "a large number of admins", with one neutral. I assume that that last item referred to me, however I am not an administrator, and several other editors who commented were also not administrators. You may want to change your statement to reflect this. -- LWG talk 19:44, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] Thank you for the information!Jeppiz (talk) 20:05, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] A barnstar for you! The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar Thanks for your anti-vandalism contributions. Zheek (talk) 15:20, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] IP-hopper has returned with a new IP address Hi. See this: 95.5.25.10. Started again. Zheek (talk) 10:10, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] Hi. I saw it, just posted about it at WP:AN. I'll be out for the day but will check back in the evening.Jeppiz (talk) 10:12, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] OK. Zheek (talk) 10:17, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] POV/Biased edit Hi. Compare this diff with used sources like Britannica and previous revision(s). Changes to the last accepted lead/intro section and replaced supported theory with something different. The new content does not matches with sources. Zheek (talk) 15:30, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply] Request for Arbitration declined This is a courtesy notice that a request for arbitration, which named you as a party, has been declined. Feel free to see the Arbitrators' opinions for potential suggestions on moving forward. For the Arbitration Committee, --Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 02:28, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply] Please comment Hi. Please comment: Scythians: Consensus for the lead section: Iranian people or Iranian-speaking people. Thanks. Zheek (talk) 10:24, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply] 1991 Just wanted to thank you for this contribution. I was so tempted to hit the revert but to have done so would have landed me with a long suspention. I am on 1RR. You know the admins and how they operate, I can revert vandalism only and they would never see that as vandalism. Cheers. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 10:00, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply] A barnstar for you! The Civility Barnstar We all have our days. Irānshahr (talk) 20:40, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply] I have to second this. Thanks for your input on the administrators board.--Aichik (talk) 13:27, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply] And again... There we go again... and after the Arbcom analysis... History2007 (talk) 20:48, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply] Iranian protests article Hello again, unfortunately a not so neutral person have come and deleted most of the information and neutral sources, but i have added it back, the person is not neutral about it, this is what he/she wrote: Quote: "sons of Pahlavi hookers get out of here.:(" [6] And this: :Quote: "Mousavi is one of the most hawkish Iranian politicians (see his involment in founding Hezbollah, reopening nuclear program, etc.):(" [7] If you ask me i think the page should be protected. Here is the person: User talk:46.239.47.122 --HistoryofIran (talk) 15:59, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply] A kitten for you! Thank you for you know what. Take care ~ DanielTom (talk) 14:21, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply] Disambiguation link notification for May 28 Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Regis Philbin, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Italian and Irish (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:57, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply] Khazars While I do believe your intentions were good, I would prefer if you refrain from doing this in the future, as it might unnecessarily complicate and escalate the issue. Such is often the case, given the sensitive nature of the topic. —Dark 01:55, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply] Re Hello, Jeppiz. You have new messages at Mar4d's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Mar4d (talk) 09:12, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply] Hello, Jeppiz. You have new messages at Mar4d's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Mar4d (talk) 10:51, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply] Hi Hi Jeppiz, thanks for your contributions, I replied to your comment on User_talk:AsceticRose.Kiatdd (talk) 18:52, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply] Strangesad You may be interested in this: WP:ANI#Request swift admin intervention to prevent further disruption to the Jesus article by User Strangesad.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 19:55, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply] Edit conflict on Karachi Population! Hey! i just edited the Population of Karachi, Pakistan to 23,500,000 and thats the correct population according to Wikipedia and Ministry of Population Welfare, Government of Pakistan!! Why did you change it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniyal7871 (talk • contribs) 14:06, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply] Because that article uses a particular source, and your edit made the source say something else than what it really says.Jeppiz (talk) 14:08, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply] Yeah Sorry, My Bad, but can you tell me how to change the references if possible, or how to report it to Wikipedia so they may change it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniyal7871 (talk • contribs) 14:20, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply] Sure. Every article has a talk page that is dedicated to discussing how to improve the article. If you think the source should be changed, you discuss that on the talk page of the article. If other users agree, the source can be changed. If most users oppose a change, with a relevant reason, then we usually don't change the source. For all lists of populations, we must use the same source for all cities.Jeppiz (talk) 14:24, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply] Arab Americans Further to your comments about my edits of the page and your massive reversal of all my edits, I have now left an extensive note of my comments on the ones we presently have. You may consult and comment as you see fit, or leave it for concensus of other colleagues as you requested. I'll give it a full three months of discussions before amending anything. I'll just continue watching without any changes. werldwayd (talk) 16:01, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply] Thank you. I think waiting a week will be enough unless anyone objects.Jeppiz (talk) 16:05, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply] Discussion about Spanish speakers by countries Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. (Migang2g (talk) 01:47, 14 August 2013 (UTC))[reply] August 2013 Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Gaeltacht may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page. List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page: several villages, ie the area [[Aran Islands]] consists of the three islands of [[Inishmore]] (with [[Kilronan]], [[Inishmaan]] and [[Inisheer]]. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:33, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply] Disambiguation link notification for August 16 Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gaeltacht, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cloghan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:00, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply] A barnstar for you! The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar Thank you for all that you have done to protect Wikipedia from fringe-view advocates. Now that Strangesad is topic-banned, this user hopefully won't cause any more trouble. FutureTrillionaire (talk) 01:36, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]