Please note that none of my editions broke any civility guidlines of wikipedia, while your message to my page was clearly unecessary and close to threatening.

First, what i reverted was INDEED vandalism, as it was a previoulsy consented attempt of establishing a consent version based on the discussion on talk page, while you abruplty and with no warning reverted it. The edit-warring in that resides in you, that first bursted into removing content to enforce your POV, and only afterwards posting at the talk page and trying to threaten me with that warning.

The issue is indeed being discussed at the talk page, and has not yet reached consensus. However, editing in the way you did and acting in a badgery way towards other users is extremely uncivil posture.

If you continue, i will be the one notifying the community about this issue.

-R.Arden (talk) 17:04, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The vandalism accusation was a mistake of mine, who confused you with X ziomal X, and on that i fully withdrawn my claim. However, the lack of civility accusation is one i endorse and will stand for it, considering your message on my talk page was clearly intended to threaten me with an unjustified accusation of vandalism, while what i was doing at that page was exactly the opposite. -R.Arden (talk) 17:31, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to familiarize yourself with WP:AGF as well.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:32, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, I think you must get a correction of education about the nonsense you are telling me. Are you well? Cruks (talk) 19:40, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes, I am well, thank you. The rest of your phrase I do not understand. I requested you to remain civil and stop saying others that they are talking bullshit. Would you please indeed behave in a civil manner. Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:43, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  Note that the user from the above thread was blocked, so you may want not to repeat their mistakes.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:44, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for fixing this problem. I was trying to find some way to do it without starting an edit war. Benjamin Trovato (talk) 10:21, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is fixed for the moment but can start anytime. I would really suggest adding page numbers for some paragraphs.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:24, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ymblanter. Benjamin Trovato is a prolific creator of new articles but he does not add in-line citations to most of his new articles. Since August 2011 (17 months ago) I have been trying to educate Benjamin about the value in adding his own in-line citations, rather than assuming they are unnecessary or that someone else will do it for him. Please read the thread User talk:Benjamin Trovato#Citation of reliable sources 2, starting at the top. You will see that User:North8000 has opposed my efforts quite successfully. I hope you aren’t going to oppose my efforts too.

In the following edit, Benjamin asked that if anyone could see any statement of his that needed an in-line citation would they mark it with a “Citation needed” tag: diff

In the following edit, I highlighted the fact that a significant number of Users have added banners at the top of Benjamin’s articles. These banners ask for in-line citations to be added to the article: diff

In Benjamin’s reply to me, he argues that the banners placed at the top of his articles mean little because the Users who put them there didn’t insert “Citation needed” tags in the articles to show him where they want in-line citations added: diff

Benjamin is a competent User but he appears to be playing a game in which he says his articles don’t need in-line citations, and he also implies he will only add an in-line citation where someone else adds a “Citation needed” tag to identify where a citation is needed. I have responded to his requests by adding “Citation needed” tags in places where an in-line citation could be placed.

I am not the bad guy here. I am trying to help Benjamin raise the quality of the articles. North8000 has made the task much more difficult than necessary. Please read the thread User talk:Benjamin Trovato#Citation of reliable sources 2 in its entirety. Thank you. Dolphin (t) 12:35, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have read the thread before making edits and replying there. Thank you for notification though.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:43, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And using Wikipedia to educate users is exactly what WP:POINT is about.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:45, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You and I both know that adding "Citation needed" templates is not disruptive, and there is no Wikipedia policy against adding them, singly or otherwise. Multiple templates might make an article look ugly to you, but not as ugly as an article whose content can't be verified due to the absence of in-line citations. Wikipedia has no policy about ugliness. Dolphin (t) 12:54, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You just want to educate somebody and therefore try t make a point. This is not acceptable. You should only require on-line citations to the statements which you really find doubtful and only after you tried to find the sources and failed. Everything else is disruptive.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:15, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dolphin, you made a complete mis-statement of my conversation there with you. Too obvious to be accidental. It's starting to look like you want to wage arguments more than you want to get cites added. North8000 (talk) 12:59, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies for not responding sooner. We live in different time zones.

We appear to have failed in our mission to persuade Benjamin of the value of adding his own in-line citations. He has just erased the banner saying This article lacks in-line citations etc. and posted the following statement on the Talk page:

Since there is now no evidence that citations are needed I removed all the citation requests. If someone finds something in the article that is not in the references or contradicts another source, please leave a note here. See the diff.

Again, Benjamin is saying that if someone can see a statement, paragraph etc that needs an in-line citation, someone should leave a specific note on the Talk page or a “Citation needed” tag. In my experience Benjamin has never acknowledged the legitimacy of a banner that says “This article lacks in-line citations”. He has never acknowledged the legitimacy of the information at WP:Verifiability, nor has he acknowledged that he has even read it.

Benjamin is a prolific and competent creator of new articles. I have tried to persuade him of the value of adding his own in-line citations but I have met with little support and quite a bit of opposition. If Ymblanter or North8000 are willing to assist by trying to persuade Benjamin, that would be greatly appreciated by me. Dolphin (t) 04:24, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First, in my statement on their talk page I noted that to me it seems that the best solution would be if they add the page numbers. Second, we have an extensive and working conflict resolution system. You could try, for instance, Wikipedia:Editor assistance/Requests, or, in the worst case, open an RFC (which would need to be certified by another user), or may be go to WP:ANI. But just inserting online citation requests to every second sentence would not really take you anywhere: It is highly unlikely that it would improve the article quality, and, as you see, it only causes angry reaction of third parties.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:35, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't say I inserted in-line citation requests on every second sentence. Firstly, it is clearly an untrue statement. Secondly, you are being offensive because I did not add CN templates at random. I put quite a bit of thought into each placement. If you disagree please identify one CN template that you believe I inserted at an inappropriate place. Then we will be able to have a meaningful discussion about whether it was truly in an inappropriate place or not. If you choose not to identify one inappropriately placed CN template I will assume you concede your comment about "every second sentence" was gratuitous. Dolphin (t) 07:07, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, I agree it was not every second sentence, overall, may be one third or one fourth of the sentenses was marked. I do maintain however, that you have not invested your time in looking for the sources confirming them. Note that I did invest my time (a great deal) and confirmed a couple of sources. However, I am only willing to spend more of my time in this situation if the statements are really doubtful.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:52, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have been trying to persuade Benjamin that he can't expect other Users to find and insert in-line citations for his new articles. It would be counter-productive if I then set about finding and inserting in-line citations for him! Besides, I have none of the reference books quoted in his articles and I know nothing about his subject areas. Dolphin (t) 11:58, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Instead of one vote (yes/no/neutral) make the whole table, with, I do not know, ten criteria: experience, ...": I'd like to make the case that, in a way, that's a vote in favor of Rfacom. I agree that dividing things up like that is a really good idea ... but can we expect every voter to do it? Being fair to candidates is hard ... just managing to get in one comment without screwing something up is hard for some voters. I buy your argument that the candidates deserve this ... I just see no evidence that the typical RfA voters can supply it. - Dank (push to talk) 21:44, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I mentioned there that I believe the idea is good, but has no chance to pass. Generally, I am very sceptical about the existing governance model, which outright kills almost all ideas (to get PC working, one needed to discuss for three years and then to sacrifice four administrators, and FR, which are several years overdue, are not even on the agenda). On the other hand, this is life - the community has grown enough, and is reluctant to change anything. Getting 2/3 for even really simple and not ground-breaking things became a pain in the ass long time ago.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:48, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As you were previously involved in International sports calendar 2012, there is a discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International sports calendar 2013, which you may be interested in.Lihaas (talk) 03:04, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yaroslav, did you see this: Commons:Commons:Requests for comment/Commons Abroad and related ideas? I stumbled across the problem with the mass deletions of PD images by Leo Gestel that apparently fall under copyright in the US. These have been transferred to Wikilivres. I was thinking of you because of the problems with WLM photos of architecture from the Ukraine - perhaps those can be hosted in Canada as well? If so it could greatly help the Ukraine project. Jane (talk) 07:41, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• No, I have not see it yet, thanks for letting me know. I will have a look. Indeed, transferring not-FoP images from the former Soviet Union to an external site like Wikilivres would be a good idea.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:56, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Dear friend I have a question for you.why its written on religion in russia that tatarstan has 51.7%muslim population.in article,islam in tatarstan muslim percentage is 55%.in article tatarstan muslim percentage is 33.7.i am confused. Rajputbhatti (talk) 13:08, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks. The article was vandalized several times and it is possible that parts of it still contain wrong numbers. The source in the article on Tatarstan is reliable, so that I assume the numbers are correct.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:23, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Twin Peaks. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 04:16, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Ymblanter - this is to notify you that there is a discussion starting on the Article Feedback RfC talkpage that has ramifications for the RfC itself. Your input is much appreciated :). Thanks! and apologies if I've missed anyone Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:51, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks, I follow it, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:58, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can you translate this from Russian?♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 00:28, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I do not translate articles, but I can just write this one. Will have a look today.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:32, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, OK. thanks.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 12:19, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, found plenty of sources.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:21, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I have added a good deal of text. But it still needs more text on Economy and Culture, if you could find from Russian web sites or books.--Nvvchar. 09:03, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for expanding. I had an impression I added pretty much everything (after all, this is an obscure settlement in the middle of nowhere), but I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:56, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Balagansk on DYK. In case you wish to suggest Alt hook you are welcome.--Nvvchar. 14:08, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will have a look. I will work on the infobox now.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:14, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Salvidrim! ✉ 01:09, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This was not on purpose, I swear :)) One of these days I will eventually learn my lesson to never edit before I have my coffee!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); February 4, 2013; 14:23 (UTC)

No problem, I have similar difficulties in the morning, I am just several hours ahead of you. Thanks again for cleaning this mess up. I am sure there must be more Ulyanovkas in Kazakhstan, but these can be dealt with when we discover them.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:42, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nyttend (talk · contribs) 08:03, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help with that. You might find more for Sangar, Sakha Republic.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 12:20, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Здравствуйте. Буду с вами на русском так как вы его понимаете. Я удаляю из статей об украинских городах текст о написании их названий на русском. Причина в том, что в Украине один государственный язык. А такой текст политически ангажированными. Википедия является политически нейтральным проектом, поэтому такие надписи не уместны. Пожалуйста не отменяйте мои правки! Спасибо! :)Vovkulaka rtm (talk) 17:57, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Would you please speak English. The questions you raise were discussed multiple times at the talk page, and the current state of the article is the result of this consensus. Please stop edit warring. Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:17, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Английском увы вы меня не поймете. Можно ссылку на страницу обсуждения где это обсуждалось? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vovkulaka rtm (talk • contribs) 18:49, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Kharkiv--Ymblanter (talk) 19:00, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Прочитал. На сколько я понял типонимы на русском не является требованием википедии, а просто имперско-националистические амбиции некоторых пользователей. Я правильно понял? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vovkulaka rtm (talk • contribs) 19:06, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No. Would you please discuss over there at the talk page. The fact that you were twice reverted by different users means your POV has no consensus.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:09, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Хорошо. Там уже есть чьи-то запись. Только он остался без ответа.Относительно двух пользователей. Давайте не будем брать количеством. Мы же умные люди.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vovkulaka rtm (talk • contribs) 19:21, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was reading an old conversation you participated in, and I thought I'd mention how much progress has gone on over at Today's articles for improvement. If you missed it, an RFC was held and concensus was established that the TAFI content should be placed below the DYK content. We will be launching the feature on the Main Page shortly, and the Main Page sandbox shows it will look. Participation on the talk page is always welcome. --NickPenguin_(contribs) 04:37, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for updating me.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:11, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On this, could you please change the reference to support the new date range? The book I quoted says that "Krasnogvardeysky District was established in 1927 and renamed in 1944"; there is no mention of "Trotsky" at all, so if the book is wrong on this, it's problematic to keep it as a source.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); February 8, 2013; 16:03 (UTC)

• Sure, will add now, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:17, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for intervening in my dispute with Galassi. However, it seems that this individual is determined to keep this unsourced material in the article at all costs. I'm not overly familiar with how to resolve a dispute, so I'm wondering if you could offer some advice on how best to proceed from here. Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.100.103.67 (talk) 15:37, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI: using the rollback to revert smth which is not vandalism; cleaning up his talk page with the comment "rm bs"; edit warring. Apparently, they were notified before.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:40, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On the other hand, the father of Semyonov was indeed most likely Jewish.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:53, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so to clarify are you saying that I need to take the following steps?

1. File a report with WP:ANI

2. Accuse Galassi of inappropriate use of rollback

3. Accuse Galassi of cleaning up his talk page

4. Accuse Galassi of edit warring

You also say that the father of Semyonov was probably Jewish. I'm not arguing with you, but what makes you think that he was? Thanks for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.100.103.67 (talk) 16:08, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The name clearly sounds Jewish.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:14, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Judging by the picture of him in the article, and from what you say, I wouldn't be surprised at all if he was. Even so, it still needs a citation so I'll take it up with admin if no ref is forthcoming from Galassi soon. Thank you for educating a noob ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.100.103.67 (talk) 16:29, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's exactly my point. And I am not sure how reasonable is to include him to the category of Jewish writers.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:40, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Any interest in WP:AFSE? I've been helping Education Program:Saint Louis University/Signal Transduction (SP13) along with assignment design. Best. Biosthmors (talk) 19:50, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will have a look, but most likely I will have no time for that.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:51, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The idea is to get instructors to assign students to contribute somehow to Wikipedia for course credit. If you're not interested, maybe you could help someone at your institution? Drop me a line if you're ever have questions. Best. Biosthmors (talk) 19:00, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Cherkasy Raion#Requested move Aleksandr Krymsky (talk) 23:52, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should keep in one place. It is unreasonable to have several hundreds identical discussions simultaneously.--Ymblanter (talk) 00:00, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I made two. One for the set article and one for one entity. The first did not include a proposal to move the individual articles. And since voting did already start, the second is necessary to follow procedural requirements. Aleksandr Krymsky (talk) 05:37, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	Thanks for the welcome
	Thanks for welcoming me to Wikipedia. :o) Olga9999 (talk) 15:58, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, thanks for contributing.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:04, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[1] - не понял смысл данной правки. Учитывая, что в англвики я никого больше не знаю, решил обратится к Вам. Заодно: не могли бы вы оформить и уточнить переведенные мною из рувики статьи Scientific myth, Slavic fantasy и Letter Zyu? Я просто не знаю правил оформления статей в англвики - например не работают шаблоны статья и книга, ну и сам английский в статьях я думаю с огрехами. Приношу огромные извинения за беспокойство и заранее благодарю. Vyacheslav84 (talk) 15:48, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Я не понимаю смысла данной правки, видимо, надо обратиться к её автору. Касательно указанных ими статей, это ведь за развитие этих тем вас когда-то бессрочно заблокировали в русской Википедии, не так ли? Почему же Вы думаете, что английская Википедия должна являться мусоросборником, если Вы даже в своём родном проекте не можете их написать нормально?--Ymblanter (talk) 15:52, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

В рувики они восстановлены. [2], [3] и [4]. Vyacheslav84 (talk) 15:52, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ну, хорошо, я их не буду выносить тут на удаление, но с доработкой, боюсь, помочь не смогу.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:54, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Касательно шаблонов ссылок, в том числе и на книгу, в нашем проекте их легко сформировать, нажав на правую кнопку непосредственно над окном редактирования.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:56, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Хорошо, попробую сам оформить. Vyacheslav84 (talk) 15:58, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Carmenelectra. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 05:17, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've been experimenting with Wikidata, adding various statements and correcting interwiki links were necessary. But I've come across an issue with the WP:EN article Enclave and exclave, which covers two linked concepts in one article. This makes it very hard to provide links for the Wikidata concepts of enclave and exclave, especially as Wikidata does not appear to let me set up interwiki links pointing at redirect pages. I've discused this further at Talk:Enclave and exclave#Reconsideration of merge of enclave and exclave, mostly from the perspective of whether we should demerge the article. As somebody who seems to be involved in the integration of Wikidata and WP:EN, you may like to comment there. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 16:39, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I am travelling now, but will respond asap.--Ymblanter (talk) 00:04, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Спасибо, что поправили перевод. Vyacheslav84 (talk) 12:57, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Не за что.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:12, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The map is obviously replaceable, I think it is pretty much obvious.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:39, 6 March 2013 (UTC) Проблема в том, что контур и фон имеют очень малое значение в карте. Суть карты в спец. знаках и их взаимном расположении. Сами понимаете, что при перерисовке карты их придется переносить точь в точь с оригинала. Т.е. АП на сами знаки и их расположение не исчезнет. В таких условиях нет смысла менять контур и фон карты. А без спец. знаков эта карта никому не нужна. Т.е. суть карты останется защищена АП. Vyacheslav84 (talk) 13:54, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ничего там не защищено, это фактическая информация. Берёте свободный контур Калининградской области, в нужные знаки расставляете какие хотите логотипы (хоть разноцветные крестики, хоть чёрные силуэты), и карта готова. Точность до миллиметра в ней не нужна. Никаких перспектив у настоящей карты для КДИ нет в принципе, удалят, как только срок выйдет. О чём, собственно, Стефан Вам сразу и сказал.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:17, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I've taken a look through your edits and you seem to be a down to earth editor willing to help out where needed, with article writing being your forte. As a result, I was wondering if you've considered running for adminship at RFA. I'd be willing to nominate you if you were up for it. Wizardman 04:36, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good, once this list was created I knew at some point someone would show up on my talk page and ask whether I would be interested to run. Still, I am really pleased I was one of the first ones to approach, thanks for approaching me. Let us do it. I want to ask two other users to be (co)-nominators; I actually do not particularly care who would be the main nominator. User:Ezhiki is reading my talk page and already volunteered to nominate me in the past, and the second prospective co-nominator I need to contact. Let me create the RfA page first and then see what would be the best way to proceed. I will be travelling over Easter, so that it would be good to have this RfA in the air this week if possible.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:06, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, now I see that the RfA page must be created by the nominator. I would much appreciate if you create it, then I can make my statement and answer the questions.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:20, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:WereSpielChequers agreed to be a (co)-nominator but said it would take time.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:46, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me. I'll write up my nom tonight and post it here, we can then wait for the co-noms. Wizardman 02:27, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks. There is no hurry.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:25, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great news. Wikipedia needs admins like Ymblanter. Azylber (talk) 11:13, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, will do tonight.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:15, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've added my co-nomination. Good luck!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 14, 2013; 17:11 (UTC)

Thanks. I will come back when I am ready with my statement.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:15, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am done with the statement and the question, now waiting for WCS.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:48, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Now everything seems to be done, I am going to transclude the nomination in the (European) morning. Please feel free to modify before that if needed.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:03, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As a result of the court decisions, following parts of a map are in the public domain, and may be used freely: ... Geographic or topographic features. Those are facts, and facts aren't copyrightable. File:Balancanche.PNG - {{PD-Art}}? Vyacheslav84 (talk) 07:32, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure what you want to know. If the question concerns the same map we already discussed four times, then the locations of the bases are not protected by copyright, and this is up to you to select the symbols you want to use to designate these locations. Note this is the fifth time I have to explain this to you, with so far the same result.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:53, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I nominated this image for speedy deletion since it is an exact dupe of the image on Commons. If you had something else in mind by uploading it please let me know.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:08, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

1. Нет это не про военные карты, а про топокарту пещеры. Ну в общем я хочу убедится в том, свободное оно или нет. И для этой цели разместил и здесь и на викискладе. Если оставят, значит я правило викисклада правильно толкую. Ну и на всякий случай скопировал и туда и сюда, чтобы получить двойное потверждение. А к вам я обратился в том смысле, что она ведь в ОД по приведенному мной правилу? Ну и я не уверен, что в файле шаблон ОД стоит той разновидности, что надо (ведь есть несколько разновидностей шаблона ОД?). Vyacheslav84 (talk) 09:21, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Да, по-моему, ОД, но если у Вас есть сомнения, спросите на Коммонз: там достаточно экспертов по копирайту.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:23, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Спасибо за ответ, а лучше обратиться на русскоязычный форум викисклада или английский? Vyacheslav84 (talk) 09:26, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Если можете, лучше на английский. Если Вы не уверены в том, что Вас поймут (здесь были существенные языковые проблемы), лучше на русский.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:29, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So you will not give a warning to Jozefvanwissem (talk · contribs · count)? 124.85.188.112 (talk) 12:26, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am not really happy with the fact that you, instead of addressing the issue of edit-warring (where you with five reverts have advanced more that any of your opponents) insist that I warn one of your opponents. This looks like wikilawyering to me. Would you please start discussion at the talk page.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:32, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've already started discussion at the talk page. Please feel free to join us there. 124.85.188.112 (talk) 12:45, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:48, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Вас не затруднит прокомментировать там? Сорри если надоел... Vyacheslav84 (talk) 08:54, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Я посмотрю, но позже, сейчас занят другими делами. Может быть, вечером.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:55, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Спасибо. Да конечно дело не горит, чтобы прямо срочно. Vyacheslav84 (talk) 08:56, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the expansion. article came out nice. Can we put it up for DYK?Proudbolsahye (talk) 18:22, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. DYK is not really my speciality, I guess one needs a native speaker for putting a hook etc, I was never able to do it properly.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:37, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Im going to have a picture of her uploaded with full permission from Zohrab center soon. Stay tuned! :) Proudbolsahye (talk) 19:45, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(General idea of the thread: Discussing copyediting of the article and how it could be improved).--Ymblanter (talk) 16:54, 17 March 2013 (UTC) Здравствуйте. Вы не могли бы в знак прошлых враждебных отношений проверить my English. Thank you. А то Ежики сегодня на отдыхе. Lawrentia (talk) 15:43, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Сейчас сделаю. No problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:48, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ой, Славочка, я еще забыла, а это наверняка важно: его дед был академиком. Carl Gabliz became academician of the Petersburg Academy of Sciences. То есть семья вполне приличная, правильно выбрал, где родиться, это же важно. И дедушку, наверно, тоже надо в квадратные скобки. В русских источниках он есть. Спасибо. --Lawrentia (talk) 16:44, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Спасибо, сейчас добавлю.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:45, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Я тоже только сейчас увидела, что дала неправильный спеллинг. Прошу прощения. Спасибо. Хоть что-то приличное стало. О такой персоналии нигде нет приличной статьи, сейчас во Франц. сделаю. То, что в РуВи - это я даже говорить не могу. Спасибо еще раз. Lawrentia (talk) 16:52, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Не за что. Хорошо бы ещё ссылки в текст расставить, если у Вас под рукой.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:54, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Хорошо, ссылки подберу. Они есть, конечно. --Lawrentia (talk) 17:08, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• • Извините, пожалуйста, что я вас все время отвлекаю. Вы не посмотрите еще раз. Я поставила ссылки, но они все русские, я поставила так: ru: и - дальше название ссылки на русском языке. Спасибо. Извините еще раз. Lawrentia (talk) 17:30, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Я нашла портрет Габлица - деда: http://www.balaklawa.com.ua/66.html - если нужно. --Lawrentia (talk) 19:12, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Боюсь, пока мы не знаем, кто автор, использовать нельзя. Фотографии-то ещё не было, в лучшем случае переснятая картина, в худшем - фейк.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:19, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Наверняка картина. Так тогда рисовали портреты. А лицо значимое - наверняка заказывали портрет. Но вот кто художник, не нашла. --Lawrentia (talk) 19:24, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• • Славочка, а посмотрите французскую статью: http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandre_Serov - у меня такое ощущение, что это портрет деда Габлица, во всяком случае Гугл дает так: http://www.google.ru/search?hl=en&newwindow=1&q=%D0%B3%D0%B0%D0%B1%D0%BB%D0%B8%D1%86%20%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BB%20%D0%B8%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87&psj=1&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&biw=854&bih=546&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=2ThGUcnsDJap4AOLwYHACw Вместе с тем этот же портрет дается как портрет композитора Серова: http://all-photo.ru/portret/serov/index.ru.html Похоже, у них такой же бардак, как у нас. --Lawrentia (talk) 21:54, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Да, причём я не вижу, как в этом можно разобраться. Думаю, надо ждать, пока какой-нибудь достоверный прижизненный портрет Габлица найдётся, например, в старой книге какой-нибудь.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:01, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Но фотографий Габлица точно быть не может, значит, на all-photo в любом случае не он.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:03, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

А это фото картины. Вообще-то я думаю, что это внук. Если сравнить с другими портретами Серова. Они, конечно, должны быть похожи, но не до такой степени. Кто-то не шибко грамотный увидел портрет Серова, а в книгах наверняка писалась биография начиная от деда - и решил, что это портрет деда - так и пошло. Все же переписывают друг у друга. Lawrentia (talk) 22:25, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• • Спасибо за помощь, я уже видела. Симфонизм - это не только русское слово, оно стало международным. Серов, естественно, произнес его по-русски, но слово вышло из русского языка, став международным термином. Lawrentia (talk) 16:12, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Хорошо, сейчас поправлю.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:35, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Спасибо. Извините, что я вас так использовала. Мой английский такой, что на бытовом уровне мою примитивную мысль донести можно, но для написания статей литературным языком – явно не тянет. Я надеюсь, что перемирие произошло, а было просто недопонимание - в старые времена в родной стороне. Lawrentia (talk) 17:28, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User Ymblanter: You show no previous edit history in the Varangians, Rus' people and Rurikid dynasty articles, before the revert war waged by user Thomas.W (same as Alterman ?). Hopefully, you are not him - are you? Calling friends for help or creating more accounts is inappropriate way to try reaching consensus in Wikipedia. - - RasboKaren (talk) 21:20, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is actually not correct, I do have previous edit history, pls check carefully. But if you want to be reported on AVI by somebody else for edit warring - fine with me.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:30, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Добрый день! ru:Википедия:К восстановлению/18 февраля 2013 - статья ru:Сибирская республика восстановлена в русской Википедии. Можно на этом основании восстановить статью Siberian Republic в английской Википедии? Vyacheslav84 (talk) 08:58, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Нет, это не является основанием. Можете попробовать через WP:AFC, дав там ссылку на обсуждение удаления, но, учитывая, что обсуждение закончилось три недели назад, шансов, на мой взгляд, нет.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:06, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please notify Randykitty that he is mentioned on ANI. He told me not to write on his user talk page. Thank you. Bamler2 (talk) 04:16, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 06:26, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ymblanter! I am pleased to report that I have closed your request for adminship as successful. You may find the information at the new admin school handy as you test out your new buttons. Feel free to drop by my talk page if you have any questions. Happy editing, and happy adminning! 28bytes (talk) 07:29, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks. As I promised, I am going to be very slow and careful with the tools.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:46, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for great help, just keep doing that! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:48, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, sure.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:11, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Impressive RfA - congrats! -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:58, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:11, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Примите мои поздравления! --Ghirla^-трёп- 07:59, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  Большое спасибо.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:11, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Congratulations. T4B (talk) 11:02, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:02, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Congratulations. and all the best with the mop.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 11:18, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:20, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Here's a landslide if I've ever seen one; congrats! Now, on with that mop, go :)—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 22, 2013; 11:51 (UTC)

  Thanks, your (co)-nomination was very welcome and I guess helped me to collect some votes as well.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:54, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Ymblanter, my Congratulations, as well ;) Happy WikiMop time ;) --Chris.urs-o (talk) 12:53, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:36, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• ¡Felicitaciones! Azylber (talk) 13:22, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  Gracias.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:36, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I took for granted you were one. A hearty congratulations from His Baldness!!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 15:21, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you. No, I was not.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:31, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! Congratulations! Congratulations! Ура! --Lawrentia (talk) 02:45, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Спасибо.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:50, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Great work Yaroslav, you'll be a great admin here I am sure. Now, when are you going to attend to Commons:User_talk:Ymblanter#Admin.3F? ;) Russavia (talk) 19:26, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks. For the moment it looks like I am fully booked. Let me see in a few months what my options are. I remember about your offer, and I am not going just to dump it to archives and forget about it.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:45, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You mean to say that now that you are an en.wp admin that we are going to lose you over on Commons? If I had of known this, I would never have supported you here ;) Russavia (talk) 20:52, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, not to that point, but my understanding is that if I agree to be an admin I also commit some of my time to doing admin work. I need some time to figure out whether I can commit it at this point. I am still on Commons several times per day doing some maintenance, uploading files and checking my watchlist.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:56, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, you know that enwp and Commons are quite different in that our expectations are miles apart -- for example, we would never put you through the Spanish Inquisition you have just undergone; plus we only expect admins to do a dozen admin edits every half a year -- I reckon you could do that as part of your normal maintenance work. Anyway, great to see you will keep it in mind - we need more guys like you on board over there. Cheers, Russavia (talk) 21:13, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jeah, I will try to not repeat of my errors I have done in the Russian Wikipedia and will try not to overwork (as promised in my questions); this guarantees I will still be on board in a few months.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:18, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

If you find a common name being reported at WP:UAA/BOT (as, aparently, Semenyuk is), please add the name to the whitelist linked to at the top. This will prevnet future usernames whith these same parts from being reported. (For example, usernames containing "Ashkenazi" won't be reorted despite containing "nazi", since ashkenazi is on the list). עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 11:05, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:06, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations. Here are what pass for words of wisdom from the puppy: Remember you will always protect the wrong version. Remember you must always follow the rules, except for when you ignore them. You will always pick the wrong one to do. (See #5) Remember to assume good faith and not bite. Remember that when you are applying these principles most diligently, you are probably dealing with a troll. Use the block ability sparingly. Enjoy the insults you receive when you do block. Remember when you make these errors, someone will be more than happy to point them out to you in dazzling clarity and descriptive terminology. and finally, Remember to contact me if you ever need assistance, and I will do what I am able. KillerChihuahua?!? DISCLAIMER: This humor does not reflect the official humor of Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, or Jimbo Wales. All rights released under GFDL. 20:57, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:05, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome - and I do mean it, if I can ever help let me know. KillerChihuahua 21:22, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks, I will have that in mind.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:24, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, very much appreciated.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:41, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Kevyn Orr. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 06:15, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[5] - я конечно не в курсе порядков англвики, но удаление целого куска текста с аи в рувики приравняли бы к вандализму. Обращаю Ваше внимание на эту правку, раз я не вполне владею языком, а вы активны в англвике. Vyacheslav84 (talk) 17:37, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, here is not Russian Wikipedia where the people routinely call for sysops on any occasion instead of solving a content dispute in the established way. You might ask at talk: Electrically powered spacecraft propulsion (because Ymblanter is not a directly involved person), and ask in English. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 18:26, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Summary of the discussion: How to properly source this article.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:19, 27 March 2013 (UTC) Mr. the administrator, I need your help. Thank you. Lawrentia (talk) 04:09, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid we have a problem here. None of the text you added is supported by any sources, and I was not able to find the sources myself by searching for five minutes. If you used a book please add the book, it is ok. But if there are no sources at all I do not see how this material can stay in the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:34, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Слава, спасибо вам большое, что вы потратили столько времени на меня. Это особо приятно после всех наших недопонятностей. Я – по-русски, мне так легче. Я просмотрела еще раз ссылки. Я поняла, в чем дело. После моей статьи в другом проекте (я поняла, у вас там свои какие-то отношения, но тут все больше занимаются отношениями друг с другом, нежели делом) – а в балетных сайтах мои статьи уже давно изучаются и на них ставятся ссылки – я много видела, - и люди в этих сайтах удалили текст с явным советским пасквилем – т.е. в самих книгах-энциклопедиях он наверняка еще есть, и какие-то ЖЖ, LJ и т.д. сканируют статьи оттуда – и там все это так и стоит, пример: самый конец: http://vivien-m.livejournal.com/69901.html и http://fotki.yandex.ru/users/vio379/view/404657/?page=0 – это как раз скан или перепечатка того что было. В сайте Балетной энциклопедии еще так и стоит, что она уехала в Париж в 1926 году. Но в 2009 году в Питере вышла книга весьма небольшим тиражом: Новые исследования и материалы / Сост. Н. Л. Дунаева. Спб. Балтийские сезоны. 2009—312 с. ISNB 978-5-903368-45-0. Мне ее оттуда и перекинули. Но сейчас у меня ее нет. Это сборник статей по документам касаемо русского балета. Там есть статья: Мария Мариусовна Петипа. Пунктир судьбы. Автор: Н. Л. Дунаева. И вот в ней приведена масса документов. В том числе про советские газеты, обвинившие ее в предательстве родины, что она уехала в 1926 году и перевела во Францию всю свою пенсию, которую ей особым распоряжением выдало Советское правительство + за то, что она дочь своего отца (уже странно: страна была в разрухе, императорские пенсии не выплачивались, а вот ей, видите ли, выдали еще и за отца; да еще каким-то образом позволили перевести деньги в другую вражескую страну). Так вот: статья из книги дает документы, что она писала письма о вспомоществовании во все советские наркоматы до 1927 года, последнее письмо подписано 1927 годом. Вот из этого автор делает вывод, что уехала старая дама (1857 года рождения) в 1928 году (а никак не в 1926). Там же приводятся слова критика-эмигранта Светлова, что она жила крайне одиноко, бедно и тихо. Зарабатывать она не могла по возрасту, но на какие-то крошечные деньги как-то существовала. И шуму понаделало только сообщение о ее смерти – выдающаяся балерина, которую знал весь Петербург. Тогда и вспомнили, а многие русские эмигранты и не знали, что она тоже в Париже – настолько тихо и тяжело жила. Теперь по самой нашей статье. В источниках балетной энциклопедии действительно удалены пасквильные фразы из советских газет. Они были. Можете мне поверить. И кто-то их оттуда еще берет и повторяет. Но как это всё сказать в статье – я тут без вас и Ёжиков не справлюсь. Lawrentia (talk) 13:14, 27 March 2013 (UTC) Спасибо еще раз. Я, правда, очень тронута вашей помощью. --Lawrentia (talk) 13:14, 27 March 2013 (UTC) P.S. Мне кажется, что такая информация должна быть. Спасибо. --Lawrentia (talk) 13:14, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ну так расставьте ссылки на эту статью Дунаевой, и проблем не будет. Касательно того абзаца, что я убрал - мне кажется, было бы довольно странно писать, что что-то, на что у нас нет источников, опровергается чем-то другим, на что у нас тоже нет источников, тем более, если к самой персоне это имеет крайне отдалённое отношение. Но, если Вы считаете, что это очень важно и обязательно должно быть в статье - хорошо, но там тоже потребуются ссылки. ЖЖ в качестве источников в любом случае не пойдёт, разве что у Дунаевой есть свой блог, и она там выложила эту статью - но тогда бы я её поиском сразу и нашёл.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:22, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Я чего-то делаю не так: у меня не проставляется ссылка на книгу - она как раз под все вопросы. А компьютер в ответ ругается на английском языке и не ставит ссылку. Спасибо. --Lawrentia (talk) 14:20, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  По всей видимости, она выложена на каком-то сайте, который стоит в блэклисте. Поставьте просто на печатное издание. Или Вы это и делаете?--Ymblanter (talk) 16:19, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  А, вижу, уже разобрались, пока меня не было.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:21, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • • Нет, не разобрались, я теперь без вас не могу. Знаете, я что подумала: я бы хотела вернуть текст про советские газеты. Только он остался без источников. Но он был. И как тут быть - я не знаю. Вы полностью правы в том смысле, что нет источников - и не давать. Но ведь были же. Старые газеты я вряд ли разыщу. --Lawrentia (talk) 16:59, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Тут посмотрите :)—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 27, 2013; 17:18 (UTC)

Нет, так по старым газетам трудно - неизвестно ведь, когда и где именно. Мне ответили. Обещали сканировать и выслать по страничкам. Там не очень большая статья. Это и будет источником. Я думаю, самое правильное. --Lawrentia (talk) 20:51, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Нужна Ваша помощь, проблемы с марионеткой того кто вандалит в статье о Ван Виссеме.--Galassi (talk) 00:15, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just logged in for the first time in four days, will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:11, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Too late, already has been protected.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:34, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ymblanter,

I'm the one who started this thread on the Altaic languages article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Altaic_languages_Warring

Unfortunately nothing actually got resolved.

The whole point is that good editors can't do anything at the article because there's a gang controlling it. They just refuse to provide any references and edit-war the article to their liking.

Also your referral to "Fringe Theories" is not quite right — their position is scientific, just not a very widely-accepted one, and they're trying to dominate the article with it.

The article also got locked in the bad version for a week to make matters worse.

Wikipedia (not me, dying to wash my hands of this) needs an admin to give some attention to a blatantly distortionary, kidnapped, article:

• Minimum -- "controversial subject" banner across the top that only admins can remove (hopefully says "Reason: Inclusion of Korean and Japanese in Altaic not widely accepted")
• More -- review my NPOV version with me, compare to sources, touch up, super-lock, ban evil editors.
• Most -- go through lengthy "moderator" process in the article's Talk section.

Sorry to bother you personally, but you're the one who closed the Admin Noticeboard thread, and I'm finding a distinct lack of official process for pursuing this necessary pursuit further. I see you're a new admin. If there's another admin I should talk to just let me know.

Wikipedia Thanks You — 98.180.19.232 (talk) 11:38, 7 April 2013 (UTC)AltaicNPOV[reply]

This is a content dispute, and admins have nothing to say in content disputes, not more than any other editors. This is why ANI discussion became useless after the page got protected. We can only perform administrative actions such as blocking or page protection, but we can not really decide on content. I see that there is discussion going on the talk page, and let it go on until consensus is found. Btw I would appreciate if you stop evading your block.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:42, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But the point is they are violating the basic Wikipedia content principal by writing an article without references to back it up. What if a gang of creationists takes over a human evolution article and re-writes it to say Darwin is a former theory now proven wrong — without any references. Every time someone tries to correct this, they reverse it. There are more of them than the editors trying to fix the article, so the good editors get banned for "edit warring". The article is giving blatantly distorted information to the public, and any admin can see this. I know that admins very much do get involved in "content" for biographies of living people.

Is there some higher level of appeal for article issues, above the Admin Noticeboard? I'm aware of the major dispute resolution process where the Wikipedia board gets involved, but hope I don't have to go that far!

Thanks, 98.180.19.232 (talk) 12:28, 7 April 2013 (UTC)AltaicNPOV[reply]

Also I'm pretty sure I've seen "Controversial Subject" banners that only admins can remove (?). — 98.180.19.232 (talk) 12:36, 7 April 2013 (UTC)AltaicNPOV[reply]

You could try Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard, but not before the talk page discussion gets stale.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:51, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Just a comment that it would have been good to have gotten referred to Dispute Resolution (or to Formal Mediation and Arbitration which I'm also now finding) when I first posted the issue to the Admin Noticeboard — if nothing could actually be done to help there.

It's been a very lengthy and unpleasant experience trying to deal with this, and few other people would go through the trouble — especially not for a problem article they just noticed in passing while browsing around Wikipedia! Which leaves all those gang-controlled distorted Wikipedia articles up.

Can you personally undo the block on the User:AltaicNPOV account, or make a request to someone in charge of that, vouching for me — you know I'm only trying to be constructive here on Wikipedia, but this is time-consuming and difficult to explain and document.

And I'm finding illogical/arbitrary/unexplained admin behavior, with no appeal, and further arbitrary blocking preventing appeals, to be the norm in this Franz Kafka story... I mean this process of dealing with Wikipedia administration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.180.13.177 (talk) 15:56, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am sorry, I promised not to deal with blocks on my RFA. The easies is to sit out the block and then act. Or otherwise to ask to be unblocked at the talk page of your main account.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:04, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some mad vindictive admin has blocked that account for eternity. Do you have any admin friends who might be able to help? I'm doing none of this for myself you know, and the article actually is a distortion (as you mention in your referral to Fringe Theories) — that in addition to me every other Wikipedian who becomes aware of this should be trying to do something about. Could you maybe bring the issue to a private admin discussion area, refer it to your "supervisor" (?!), etc.?

It's really a problem as otherwise I'll have to wait a while and come back with a new account, can't cite my previous efforts etc. Looking like I'll just drop the issue. Leaving a bad article up permanently. It's the lack of enthusiasm to prevent that which is so mystifying me about admins. Why volunteer for Wikipedia if you aren't passionate about Wikipedia articles? Yes, I'm getting around to asking if you might like to take on dealing with reforming the Altaic Languages article yourself so I can go on with my life :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.180.13.177 (talk) 16:32, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do not have friends, and as a matter of principle I am not on IRC or whatever. Please post an unblock notice on your talk page.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:41, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I'll try that... maybe. Not quite convinced you couldn't do something with the article block and/or a "controversial" banner, but thanks anyway for discussing the matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.180.13.177 (talk) 17:14, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ярослав, здравствуйте. Прошу удалить эту страницу (мне не нужна). Заранее спасибо. — Stas1995 (talk) 14:34, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Удалил/ done--Ymblanter (talk) 14:36, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For the PP on Dépardieu, just about to go off-wiki and I really think this person needs to take it to talk where, IMHO, it is very unlikely that this material be approved for the article. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 17:18, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As one of the supporters of the proposal in the 2013 RfC on RfA reform, you are invited to join the new WikiProject for RfA nominators. Please come and help shape this initiative. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 18:52, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will have a look, though I feel it is definitely too early for me.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:03, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Yaroslav! Just so you know, we have a {{Ruswelcome}} template, which is a modification of the standard welcome template that also mentions WP:RUSSIA; it's useful in welcoming editors who are interested in Russian topics. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); April 18, 2013; 17:38 (UTC)

Right, I should have known that, since this is what I got from you. Thanks for reminding.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:40, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Ymblanter, good to meet you. I think we will need to work further on the list of seas (which just makes clear the weaknesses of the list that was there before, I didn't add any seas to it). We could split off Mediterranean from Atlantic; we could remove many of the Bays; ... and I suspect there are gaps, also. All the best --- Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:56, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think the only way to get a comprehensible list is to find a source which lists them all, like a big atlas. I will see what can be done.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:00, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Спасибо. --Lawrentia (talk) 19:26, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Не за что, я пока ничего не сделал, и сегодня и не сделаю.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:28, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Во-первых, уже что-то сделали - редиректы на другие языки. Во-вторых, спасибо за готовность помочь. Уже тоже не в первый раз. И я этому очень рада. Вы знаете, что я хочу сказать. Я, правда, очень рада. Так что при всех случаях - большое спасибо. А статья эта должна быть. Вы сами увидете, когда прочитаете - если прорветесь через мой английский. Еще раз спасибо. --Lawrentia (talk) 19:36, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• • Ярослав, спасибо. Можно еще, наверно, взять фотографию – есть вот тут: http://pavelbers.com/Michail%20Barichnikov%20Vestris.htm А еще я нашла видеоролик на английском языке – где Барышников и Якобсон готовят номер "Вестрис": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-467XS3Vt0 – может, как-то можно поставить видеоролик в статью или хотя бы проставить ссылку? Спасибо еще раз и извините, что я вас так задергала уже не первый раз. Lawrentia (talk) 19:32, 23 April 2013 (UTC) Я очень рада нашей дружбе, я расцениваю именно так. И очень вам благодарна. И еще я вижу, что имею дело с очень грамотным администратором. --Lawrentia (talk) 19:32, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Давайте по порядку - сначала сделаем статью, потом будем разбираться с иллюстрациями. Там нет простого ответа, надо смотреть лицензии и ролик, потом сделаем. Пока у меня и текст довольно тяжело идёт, Вы его слишком эмоционально нагрузили.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:36, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Да, я видела - вы пытаетесь разгрузить от эмоций, а у меня там захлест - и есть от чего. Я еще не знаю, как объяснить, что такое Кремлевская больница. Спасибо. Lawrentia (talk) 19:39, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can you expand this?♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 15:11, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is in the register, meaning it is easily doable. Will do a bit later.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:41, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 16:22, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Arlene's Grocery. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:29, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if you knew, but you were outed by name on a recent article at The Daily Dot about the Yuri Gadyukin hoax. It was also picked up by The Verge. Didn't see any other notes on your page, so I thought I'd let you know, just in case this article wasn't written with your cooperation. czar · · 03:13, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I didn't see that the name was common knowledge. Anyway, a news story in tribute to you—thought you should know. czar · · 03:17, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen it, thanks. No, I did not participate in any way, just randomly found by searching Internet for my own name. Giving the name is indeed no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:22, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Malana Lea. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.

I wish to appeal the closure of the debate. Someone pulled notability inheritance idea completely out of the blue and did not debate the "Merge" response I presented to counter the notablility is not inherited "charge". The broken links and long list of movies and TV appearances were also not commented on by random editors who wrote "Delete". Step one is to debate with you. Then I would like to move on to the formal process. Jok2000 (talk) 18:54, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since I do not see how I ave broken the policy, the editors who voted were not SPAs, and you were the only one to oppose (though indeed a very vocal one), we better move straight to the formal process. I would not object creating a redirect though.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:58, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the error made is that you think the page "Elizabeth Tsing" exists. It does not, this would be the first page for this actor. Jok2000 (talk) 19:01, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well additionally, I was not vocal, but rather presented answers to all of the irrelevant bureaucratic process thrown at the discussion, which standing unchallenged, is proof the answers were enough to end debate against what I wrote. Jok2000 (talk) 19:03, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I checked that the page does not exist before closing the debate. You gave some answers indeed, I just did not find them convincing. Sorry.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:33, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You did not participate in the debate. So the policy error is that if you did not wish to participate, you should have ruled "no-consensus" based on the existing debate, which was actually a collection of citations, not an argument per se. Jok2000 (talk) 20:21, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There was consensus for deletion. Please note that in discussion with me this is already the third argument out of the blue, after I rejected the first two as not based on the policies, one of them was assuming smth what I was thinking. I suggest that you stop bringing new arguments here and concentrate on the deletion review instead.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:58, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any purpose to this suggestion? I would think that if you're closing AfDs without following policy, you would want to find out about it here where you can eventually delete hopefully helpful insight into your thought processes. Jok2000 (talk) 21:30, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have furnished a company page for the website users and random visitors who want to know more about this company and its services. I have neither used any marketing words, nor any back link and the website link. It is because my purpose was just to mark the company's presence on wikipedia. The company has its global presence and it is not spam at all. Recently, the parent company LiveAdmins LLC has attended a trade show named DMEXCO held in Berlin, Germany. It shows that the company has no intentions to go for spamming.

I want to request that please highlight the issues that were there in the content of company page but please allow me to furnish this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fredquinncy (talk • contribs) 07:04, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody is talking about spamming, but the consensus was that the company does not meet our notability criteria.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:35, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If I add third party references, will my page become eligible to be live on wikipedia? One of the editor has mentioned the spamming issue as well but I am really interested in taking guideline from you to make this article good enough to be there on the wikipedia. Several other live chat service or software providing companies are already there on wikipedia and I have taken inspiration from their pages. Thanks for responding back. Looking forward to your generous help.

Third party references should be reliable sources, and most likely they do not exist, as was checked during the deletion discussion. Other pages can very well be eligible for deletion, just nobody looked them up.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:04, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I removed it as it was initially a red link. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 02:01, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do not quite understand what you have removed, but thanks anyway.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:42, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Will you take a look on the biography of these Russian mathematician. I made it last year by translation from the german wikipedia article de:Pawel Petrowitsch Korowkin. It has not get any large contribution ever that. The german wikipedia also has a article de:Korowkin-Approximation. Please take a look in these articles. I am not sure whether they are notable or not. Solomon7968 (talk) 22:52, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will have a look, thanks for pointing out.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:59, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning, Yaroslav! You apparently have more experience how to cope with cranks, especially nationalists. Could you give an advice what to do with 50.73.253.49 (talk · contribs) after [6]? It is a current incarnation of the person identified as Alexazulian pusher. Should I continue the Special:Contributions pursuit and rollback all his/her rubbish? Or blocks to this (and possibly other) his/her IPs may already be tried? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 08:59, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I gave them the last warning, next edit from this IP like this will result in a block (if you see it, you can just directly go to my talk page). This seems to be a stationary IP, and all the contributions have been already rolled back (exceppt for the two, which seem to be more or less constructive). If there are other IPs recently edited with the same pattern, yes, I think the contributions should be rolled back with a simultaneous warning on the IP talk pages (there is a very small chance that they belong to different people - though I do not see how they could be unrelated - provided they exist).--Ymblanter (talk) 09:10, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I checked now - the other two you mentioned in the WikiProject:Russia seem to be inactive.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:29, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Does insertion of a forged wikilink qualify? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 18:27, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I lean to the conclusion that the edit was good-faithed, but it hardly can be considered constructive. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 18:33, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, let us wait for the more clear case.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:38, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

At last, [7] is a clear-cut case. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 11:27, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Blocked them for 24h. Thanks for pointing out.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:45, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote that we (who edited the text about A.A. Karatsuba) must come to consensus with Stevenj. However, he do not want any consensus on any conditions excluding his own text in three lines, one of them is very offensive for A.A. Karatsuba (everybody who knows about real facts can confirm it). What to do? Our discussion with him turned out to absurd because he pretends he does not see our sources (published by Springer papers in mathjournals), but as his sources quoted words of "notalble people" (by his opinion) but not publications. We agree (see Talk page Anatolii Alexeevitch Karatsuba) to delete such claims in this article which very annoyed Stevenj (although they are right, and all explanations have been made to Stevenj, he rejected them bacause it doesn't correspond to some other Wikipedia texts which Stevenj created himself!). So we tried to state such a consensus deleting what Stevenj stated as "exaggerated claims". However, it is not enough for him. He simple don't want that any good text about A.A. Karatsuba would be. I will not mention "double standards": I edited some other Wikipedia texts about American mathematicians and never had problems like that with this paper about Russian mathematician. How to revert the former text and to block Stevenj who has his own not related to the Wikipedia grounds to del to delete the text about A.A. Karatsuba?Mathtruth (talk) 10:34, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is pretty much possible to come to consensus. You just need to stop concentrating on the personality of Karatsuba (remember, he was presumably your thesis advisor which in Russia means kind of semi-god, but other people do not have to regard him as semi-god) and instead see on what points you agree, and whether any of the points you disagree on is really essential for the article. Actually, I expect Steven, who is a more experienced Wikipedian, to come with this initiative. Then you can start together working on the text. If it turns out to be absolutely impossible, you can file a WP:DRN request. I am personally not a computer scientist, and I can not (and do not want to) really judge on the validity of the arguments.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:46, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, the reason why I reverted your input was because it takes away from the original article. Unless you intend of writing that same information for each and every Colombian embassy abroad; it just doesn't go with the layout of the page. If you wish to contribute that information about Colombia's embassy in Portugal, I would suggest writing it in either Foreign relations of Colombia or in Foreign relations of Portugal. Regards, Aquintero, (talk), 12:51, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do not really want to contribute, I just closed the AfD request, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Embassy of Colombia, Cairo, as merge (as it was the consensus). Now with you resisting to merge, I am not sure what to do.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:50, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that I open the ANI request, your imput there will be much appreciated.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:03, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please participate in the discussion. Wikipedia talk:Notability (academics)‎#Inclusion of Pulitzer Prize for History. Solomon7968 (talk) 08:46, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Not exactly my speciality, but I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:31, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! --Lawrentia (talk) 16:34, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Ymblanter, somehow I seem to overlook this sometimes. Lotje (talk) 14:54, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:54, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nyttend (talk) 13:33, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have seen it, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:34, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you decided to delete the page. I'm not an avid wikipedia user so I've seen that only now. I posted all the links to scans of the sources of that article here: User talk:Blackmetalbaz#Mediterranean scene. Der Blutsauger (talk) 01:06, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You can try to recreate the article; if the resulting recreation is significantly different from the previous article, it will not be amenable for speedy deletion. However, among all your sources I only see one which specifically mentions Mediterranean scene; all others talk about bands which make parts of it. It might be a better idea to write about these bands, because in my opinion the notability of Mediterranean scene is still unclear.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:02, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If the bands are notable how can the collective not be notable? They have an unique style (referenced in a lot of magazines) and so they're notable for WP:MUSIC #1 and #7.

I'm not really an expert, how much the recreation had to be different from the previous article? The previous article had all the references (and I hosted them for you to see) to be notable under WP:MUSIC #1 and #7 and I cannot keep them on my hosting, so what I need to add? Der Blutsauger (talk) 18:44, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

References to paper editions should be fine. The previous version in my opinion was really very short of norability, as the AfD discussion showed, so that the new one must demonstrate the notability better. If individual groups are notable, this does not yet mean that the collective is notable - it should receive sufficient press coverage as collective.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:46, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I really have to rewritten everything from scratch? I can't recover the last version and improve on that? Originally I decided to write only one page for all the bands of this collective because they play in the same style (more or less), they have the same members and they act as an unique band with different monickers.

Der Blutsauger (talk) 19:04, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can restore the deleted version to your userspace, if you want. (Please do not upload files, at least until you really know how to do it).--Ymblanter (talk) 19:13, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's ok for me. About the uploads... are you talking about the logos of the various projects? I was authorized by Marco Ardagna (head of their label), I need them to send a written authorization to someone? Der Blutsauger (talk) 19:40, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The info on the files is here. If he grants permission, he really should understand that he dos not just give permission for you to upload, he gives permission for everybody to use the logos for free, including commercial usage and all possible modifications. This is why OTRS is needed. Concerning the article, I will restore it now.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:03, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Der Blutsauger/Mediterranean scene--Ymblanter (talk) 20:11, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry. I'm a bit of a jokester, but this is probably not the most appropriate forum for that. I'll keep my edits constructive in the future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.212.213.5 (talk) 17:44, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a good idea.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:27, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding your wrongful blocking of an editor. The discussion is about the topic Talk:Robert B. Bell. Thank you. —68.50.128.91 (talk) 21:24, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In regards to your response to the Administrator's Notice Board Incident complaint, I take it that you will no longer involve yourself in the Robert Bell edit request? 68.50.128.91 (talk) 04:10, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not really. I will aske somebody else to block you. I am not sure why if you have chosen to constantly break policies I should step down and stop reverting.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:00, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No policies are being broken by me. And yes, I agree, you should not edit war, but asking someone to do it for you is an evasion of policy. So, either handle this like an adult or just drop it. 68.50.128.91 (talk) 17:49, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am not really interested in discussing the issue with you. You have been explain the rules multiple times, please learn to respect them. Thank you for understanding.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:13, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Very well, I will consider this dispute between us solved. Thanks for your cooperation. 68.50.128.91 (talk) 23:16, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can you help expand this?♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 16:23, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is less trivial than Russian articles but I will try.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:10, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for deleting the nonsense article on Critical repetition frequency. This article contained the picture File:Importance Skill Chance.JPG, which was only used there (and in the previous German article, which has already been deleted, too).

Since I do not know the deletion process in the English wikipedia so well, I asked in my deletion request that this file shopuld be deleted, too.

Could you please do so?

I suppose I have done something wrong, when I simply readded the delete request in this file. Please help. The very best wishes from Vienna,

Roland Roland Scheicher (talk) 16:48, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. The file is on Commons, and it is best to reopen your deletion request there. I am not a Commons administrator.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:11, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:68.50.128.91 and Talk:Robert B. Bell. Thank you. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 23:50, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How did you arrive at the conclusion of no consensus here? Given the majority of keep votes were not even grounded in policy? Also the keep vote by 86.99.140.141 is a sock of Nangparbat, someone moved the strike to an IP above. Darkness Shines (talk) 14:16, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There was a considerable amount of votes from users in good standing saying NOEVENT does not apply. You are welcome to take it for the deletion review of course.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:58, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there were editors saying oneevent did not apply, but they were obviously wrong as the guy is known only for one event. Somebody saying something does not make it so. If you look on GNews you can see he is only known for this one event, getting shivved in prison. Darkness Shines (talk) 17:11, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have already made this argument on the AfD page, and I took it into account. If I agreed with you, I would close it as delete. If you are not happy with my decision, please take it to the deletion review.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:18, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, should I give you the link when I do? Darkness Shines (talk) 17:37, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I will find it myself. Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:10, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"If I agreed with you, I would close it as delete." - exactly what part of Darkness Shines' comment is not agreeable? Can you please explain? This terror-convict was a nobody till his murder and then suddenly his sole claim to notability becomes his death how much more blatant does it need to get? Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 07:04, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

the deletion review request is open, please comment there. Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:11, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. I'm sending this to you because I mentioned your name. Sorry, I accidentally put this notice on your user page instead of your talk page, but thank goodness another editor noticed my mistake. Haha. Well, here it is again... in the right place this time. Thanks. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 05:24, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give me links to them? Maybe I can give you a hand. StevenJ81 (talk) 22:23, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. That was a couple of months ago, somebody hinted at it on Wikidata, and I found it by search. I do not think I will be able to find it again, and, frankly, I got tired of the discussion at d:Talk:Q1218 and let them write what they want. Thanks again.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:52, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I found that one myself. Emotionally and religiously, I'm on their side, but that's not the issue at Wikipedia/Wikidata. I think you handled yourself very well there. If the discussion flares up again at hewiki, let me know. My Hebrew is ok, not great, but I'll help if I can. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:17, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good, thank you very much for your help.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:20, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your comment at User talk:68.50.128.91. For future reference, it is possible to embed blocking reasons, duration of the block, and even your signature within the block notice template itself. Here's the code to use:

{{subst:UW-Block|time=Duration|reason=For a custom block reason|page=Targeted page|sig=yes}}

Wasn't sure if you already knew about that or not ... sorry for making an assumption if you already knew the format to do it. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:20, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I know about this, it is just that I usually prefer to use custom text notices, because they are easier understood. (Not only for blocks, but also for different notifications). I added the template because it contains the unblock template, which can be copied and pasted from there. I did not realize that this kind of presentation can be abused as well.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:25, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Ymblanter for your balanced comments and constructive contributions at Maharishi Effect. Best, — Keithbob • Talk • 03:04, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:57, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your block of 68.50.128.91 was a clear violation of WP:INVOLVED. You reverted him at 15:00, and then at 15:39 you blocked him. And it doesn't matter one bit whether your revert was warranted or not. And then to add fuel to the fire, you removed his talk page access at 16:09. While you and some of the other admins involved in the block have tried to hide the fact that there is a blue code among you, anyone can look at your and their edit histories to find the truth. Although IP 68 made some inappropriate edits, and perhaps deserved the blocks he received, they were done in a rude, perhaps even malicious, manner with not one ounce of respect shown to him. You are an admin and there will always be problematic editors, but if you don't have a thick enough skin to deal with them in a calm, reasoned and fair manner, then you should turn in your tools. Especially if you are going to blatantly disregard policy, which you also did when you previously sanctioned him simply for removing warnings, which is perfectly allowed per WP:BLANKING. I would also suggest that you listen to the good advice given to you by another admin who told you to include any comments you have about the block in the block template, which you have failed to do. Instead, you choose to separate comments, like this one with a very immature edit summary intended to taunt and humiliate the blocked editor. And I should mention that IP 68 is extremely tame compared to many other editors I've come across, whose treatment by admins has been much less severe and hostile. And, by the way, the removal by one of your fellow admins of my comment on IP 68's talk page right after the block was a blatant and atrocious violation of TP policy, which was only exceeded in outrageousness by the protecting of the page at the same time because of my post. Violating clear policy to censor editors is disgusting. There was absolutely no justification for either of those moves. The Blue Code is alive and well on Wikipedia. So sad, because there are so many great admins and the few, like some of you involved in this situation, give them all a bad name with so many editors. Already, I've seen several discussion among editors who are fully aware of your actions and those of the other admins in IP 68's block. I can tell you that it's doing no favors for your reputations. I have no doubt that you will either hide this, gossip about it with other admins, deny that your are offended by it, try to convince everyone how off-base I am by trying to smear me, etc., and that's totally fine. The point is that you're getting the message. And it's now officially on record. And anyone who's interested can read this discussion on the talk page of my friend, admin Drmies. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 12:18, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with your assessment of the situation.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:26, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion at AN in which your name is mentioned. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 13:20, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Westboro Baptist Church. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 18:16, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you find anything on this?♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 20:16, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, been there, nice area. Just wait a bit, I am on European time, and for me the day is almost over, and tomorrow I will be traveling. May be tomorrow evening.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:29, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Здравствуйте. Похоже можно будет подавать на WP:DRV. Источники тут. Да и с JetBrains, вроде всё так же, хотя надо будет ещё в ru.wikipedia статью вывести из КУшного состояния. Можете пока восстановить это мне в ЛП? --Be nt all (talk) 02:56, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• (This was a request to userfy an article). Я восстановил сюда: User:Be nt all/JetBrains. Котлин последние три года был редиректом. Восстановить версию 2011 года?--Ymblanter (talk) 07:02, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Спасибо. Да, по языку - версию до WP:AFD --Be nt all (talk) 12:43, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Be nt all/Kotlin (programming language)--Ymblanter (talk) 12:51, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Спасибо --Be nt all (talk) 03:39, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Здравствуйте, Ярослав, я переписала зановo статью про JetBrains и добавила источники. Мне кажется, она теперь должна соответствовать требованиям. Посмотрите, пожалуйста: User:Eugenia_d/sandbox -- Eugenia d (talk) 23:40, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Я боюсь, я в этом мало что понимаю, но в любом случае источники сейчас есть, быстрому удалению статья не подлежит, так что можете просто перенести в пространство статей (при помощи move, чтобы не потерялась история правок), а если вынесут на удаление, доказывать значимость.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:22, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

спасибо за ответ! а это будет корректно по отношению к удалившему редактору? есть история переписки в https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sjakkalle/2013_%28pre-break%29#Regarding_JetBrains_Deletion. я добавила туда ссылку на свой черновик статьи, но Sjakkalle уже две недели не реагирует. (есть еще выше обсуждение той же статьи: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sjakkalle/2013_%28pre-break%29#Appeal%20for%20help%20regarding%20deleted%20article)

Если восстановленная версия статьи сильно отличается от удалённой, можно восстанавливать, хотя, конечно, лучше сообщить удалившему администратору, что Вы её восстановили. Его согласие формально не требуется. Надо будет - вынесет на удаление.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:43, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ярослав, спасибо за совет! я перенесла статью из User:Eugenia_d/sandbox в User:Eugenia_d/JetBrains. Подскажите, я правильно понимаю, что мне теперь нужно перенести её тем же способом в Articles/JetBrains? Удаливший редактор не возражает против такого восстановления, но хочу уточнить, всё ли правильно делаю. Нужно ли еще что-то перенести вместе с этой страницей? Как принято в таком случае аргументировать move (recreation of an article non substantially identical to the deleted version)? И как мне теперь вернуть себе sandbox, который стал редиректом? заранее спасибо! —Preceding undated comment added 12:05, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Статью надо переименовать просто в JetBrains. Если вынесут на удаление, тогда и будете аргументировать. В sandbox просто добавьте поверх перенаправления, что Вам нужно, ну, или просто руками вытрите перенаправление, останется пустая страница.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:40, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

так?Eugenia d (talk) 16:16, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Простите, я не понял. Статью просто переименуйте и всё. Ну, или я могу переименовать, если хотите.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:27, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

по ссылке был скриншот страницы move. прошу прощения, что не объяснила. Переименовала: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JetBrains. Спасибо! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eugenia d (talk • contribs) 18:40, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ymblanter! Donguz Formation was recently created and could use a couple of edits so it doesn't get speedy deleted. Do you have time to look at some Russian sources? --Tobias1984 (talk) 07:13, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will have a look, but this is clearly not speedy deletion material. Added to the watchlist just in case.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:17, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:03, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I never merged and am too busy to learn it now. New Bach cantatas exist in at least two items for BWV 100, BWV 117, BWV 119, BWV 122, BWV 143, BWV 213, BWV 224, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:27, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Completed, it was much worse than just this. Currently all articles on Bach cantatas should be linked by interwikis. If there are problems please let me know.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:45, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Славочка, здравствуйте. Вы не могли бы еще помочь. На моей странице меня поругали за Konstantin Sergeyev, а я не поняла, в чем дело. Каждое отдельное слово поняла, а все вместе не поняла. И еще: почему в Leonid Yakobson убрали ссылки на Ютюб с хореграфией, но зато добавили музыку. Все-таки музыка – это удел композиторов и больше подходит для их статей, а в хореографе – главное хореография. Его фильм получил призы – и люди могли бы сразу посмотреть, для балета знание русского языка не требуется. Спасибо. Lawrentia (talk) 15:37, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Я вроде не трогал ссылки у Якобсона, если случайно что-то удалил, это моя ошибка, исправлю. Я к нему периодически возвращаюсь по вечерам, когда время есть. По Сергееву посмотрю.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:40, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

По Сергееву исправил, так, как Вы поставили, бот, видимо, путает с интервики.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:43, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• • • Ага, по Сергееву поняла свою ошибку, я не знала. Спасибо. По Якобсону очень сложная статья - я знаю. Я ее по-русски делала долго: и по сайтам, и по книгам, и по личным связям. Извините, что я вас так замучила этой статьей, но это очень важная статья. По сути дела - информации много, но она вся разбросана, нету единого целого материала, вот только наши статьи получаются единственные. Спасибо еще раз. --Lawrentia (talk) 15:51, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:02, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Yaroslav, the Saint Petersburg State University article contains a lengthy List of rectors. Are there corresponding Russian articles? Then it will be good to improve the present unreferenced Uiversity article. Solomon7968 (talk) 13:57, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there are articles about almost all of the rectors in Russian Wikipedia. I can probably reference the list, but I never use Russian Wikipedia for info, since it is very unreliable.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:02, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I added a timeline infobox to the article. The article has some Original research whether it was the first or Moscow university in Russia. Are there any reliable source for it? Solomon7968 (talk) 14:10, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It was the first, I will find a reference.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:31, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it is more subtle, when I am back, will try to do smth.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:25, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether if Stu Klitenic should be deleted or not. The conversation will be held at the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stu Klitenic until a consensus is held and everyone is welcome to join the conversation. However, do not remove the AfD message on the top of the page. Ashbeckjonathan 03:48, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Кажется, что сушуствуют расличние традиции мөжду Википедии и Wikipedia. In Википедии, the tradition after the title is to give a name with stress accents - e.g. Ленин, Владимир Ильич and then 'Влади́мир Ильи́ч Улья́нов (псевдоним Ле́нин)'. In Wikipedia,this is not the case, but the stress accents are normally shown in IPA format: e.g. Vladimir Lenin, and then 'Vladimir Ilyich Lenin (Russian: Владимир Ильич Ленин; IPA: [vlɐˈdʲimʲɪr ɪlʲˈjitɕ ˈlʲenʲɪn]'. (For English names in fact the stress accents and pronunciation are rarely shown at all, as you will be aware).

There is a good reason for this. Most readers of English Wikipedia do not read the Cyrillic alphabet. By providing Russian names with stress acents and without any further explanation, Wikpedia would give such readers reason to believe that these accents were part of the standard Russian written spelling, and they might therefore transcribe the names, with the accents, as standard spelling (in student essays or whatever). In such circumstances, you can see that Wikipedia would in effect be peddling inaccurate information. Indeed, where articles on Russian people in English Wikipedia have such accents in their names, I believe it is often because English editors have taken the names wholesale from Russian Wikipedia, (or because they have been written or started by English-speaking Russian Wikipedia editors, using the traditions of the latter). The appropriate way of indicating stress for Russian names in English Wikipedia articles therefore remains the IPA transcription.

I hope you may agree and reinstate my edit. Thanks, --Smerus (talk) 05:43, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This very issue (stress or no stress) is currently being under active discussion, with arguments presented for both sides. I am now travelling and might not be able to provide a link before Saturday (I believe it was referenced from Wikipedia Talk:Project:Russia, but until this discussion is closed I believe we should wait and do not add/remove the stresses.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:14, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will wait for your further response. Some discussion took place a couple of months ago, I can't remember where. I particpated. The discussion was inconclusive and I think has petered out. The argument I presented above was made there but never answered. Best, --Smerus (talk) 13:39, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe there is currently a discussion ongoing about this, but a recently held one at WT:RUSSIA#Using accent marks to indicate stress (which I believe is the one you are thinking of) quite unequivocally resulted in a support for indicating stress both in Russian spelling and in IPA. According to native English speakers, there are more people who can read Cyrillic (and are familiar with the stress marks) than there are people who can read IPA. Those who can read neither are not losing anything anyway. If you are not satisfied with the outcome of that discussion or find it inconclusive, you are always welcome to re-open it in a more prominent location (which Yaroslav's page isn't :)). At this point, however, the opinions voiced on this subject so far leave you in a clear minority. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); June 10, 2013; 13:44 (UTC)

Smerus: as Ëzhiki pointed out, this has been discussed thoroughly and very clear consensus has been reached. And the discussion was not inconclusive as you say. Azylber (talk) 23:23, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not without reluctance, I set out again the issues which the discussion did not deal with. There are two issues confused here: 'correct spelling' and stress indicators. No one has asserted that the use of stress indicators in Russian text is a standard part of Russian orthography. And in fact they do not occur in Russian printed texts, in any handwriting with which I am acquainted, in (e.g.) comments on this talk page in Cyrillic, or in Russian Wikipedia - except in the lead line of articles of Russian WP (as in some Russian works of reference), where it is a standard convention to indicate stress with accents. This practice (which is not a convention in English Wikipedia or works of reference) has been carried over by some editors into English Wikipedia.

I do not know the statistics of acquaintance with IPA and/or Cyrillic amongst English Wikipedia readers - and nor, I suspect, does anyone else. (Although I would point out that the contributors to the discussion mentioned by Ezhiki and Azylber were all Russian readers, and therefore perhaps not fully representative of English Wikipedia readership). I certainly accept that IPA is not a very trasparent mode of representing stress for English readers. I agree that - for example - it would be very helpful to include in the lead line for Serov (and for others) something like: 'stressed: Alexánder Nikoláyevich Seróv'.

What in my submission is not helpful is to include in the lead line in English Wikipedia is the formulation 'Алекса́ндр Никола́евич Серо́в', because:

• 1) It transgresses WP:EN, which clearly states that 'The native spelling of a name should generally be included in parentheses'. And the use of stress accents is not part of the 'native spelling'. The familiarity of Cyrillic readers with the use of stress-marks does not therefore override WP:EN. English Wikipedia should be written with the interests of English readers as a priority.
• 2) It consequently potentially misleads non-Cyrillic readers into believing that stress marks are part of the native spelling.

I would be grateful to see some attempt to address these specific issues within the context of agreed and fundamental Wikipedia standards, including WP:EN and Wikipedia:Russian_Romanization and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Cyrillic) (which do not, by the way, appear to sanction the use of stress marks). As mentioned above, there is no present uniformity on this issue in English Wikipedia - for example, Lenin and Stalin don't have stress-accented transcriptions, Mikhail Lomonosov and Peter the Great do. Best, --Smerus (talk) 08:36, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Smerus, I'm somewhat surprised that you are not aware that the use of stress marks is ubiquitous in Russian dictionaries and reference works; and in the latter they are used exactly the same way as in Wikipedia—to show where stress falls in the title term. That alone makes the rest of your points moot. The native spelling does not become incorrect due to the inclusion of stress marks, and the point on misleading non-Cyrillic readers had been thoroughly refuted in the thread I linked to yesterday. And as far as your statement that the "English Wikipedia should be written with the interests of English readers as a priority", I would understand this argument if you were proposing to get rid of Cyrillic spellings altogether, but applied to the stress marks it just doesn't make any sense. The inclusion of stress marks in English spelling (where they are easily confused for accented letters) makes even less sense: between a non-Russian speaker including stress marks as a part of Russian spelling and an English speaker incorrectly spelling a term with accented letters in English, the former is clearly a lesser evil.

This said, I repeat my suggestion that you re-open this discussion at a more prominent location. That at least might attract attention of new participants. Trying to argue this on a user's page to a small subset of previous participants who've made it quite clear they don't find your arguments convincing is simply a waste of time, both for you and us.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); June 11, 2013; 13:49 (UTC)

Yes I think you are right that we are not seeing this in the same way, and that is why I have opened the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (use English). Best, --Smerus (talk) 15:06, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Smerus

You seem to be identifying 4 groups:

1. English speakers who read no Russian - who will read the English and to whom the Russian is meaningless squiggles

2. English speakers who know the alphabet but won't know that stress marks aren't part of the alphabet

3. English speakers who know the alphabet and want stress marks

4. Russian speakers who will read Russian wikipedia, but also want stress marks which ru.wp has Алекса́ндр Никола́евич Серо́в .

And you want the lead formatted for the benefit of group 2. Is this correct? This to me would seem very odd, since I don't believe that group 2 exist. If anyone has learnt the cyrillic alphabet (which is what 2 hours on a rainy train journey, or Lesson 1 in any course) then they already know that stress marks are not part of the alphabet but are used in course books and dictionaries because stress is irregular.

I'm just looking at Daphne West's course on Amazon.com and the stress is mentioned immediately before the alphabet, page xvi in the "Only got 10 minutes" section. So what readership exactly are you aiming to help? Seems to be value-destroying to remove the stress marks. Certainly would be a pain for you, you have ru-3 Этот участник свободно владеет русским языком, on your user page, I don't believe at ru-3 you know every name stress, I know I don't and often find them useful, so you'd be making both me and yourself click through to ru.wp every time we want to pronounce a Russian name. What is the benefit of that? In ictu oculi (talk) 11:12, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! The article was redirected in April 2013 because it was WP:TOOSOON and supposedly failed WP:NFF and there was no major coverage yet. Now it's June 2013, filming has started and has even been completed already, so it passes WP:NFF, not too soon either. Enough coverage is there now, reliable sources have been added, it is notable too. All the issues are solved, so why is it being redirected now? The film is going to release in 50 days. I don't think it can be redirected now and I hope you will undo your edit. Thank you! Veera Dheera Sooran (talk) 16:26, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, the new version is sufficiently different from the old one. I restored it.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:05, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I ran a Google translate of the Russian article and it gives the list of directors as:

• Vladimir Steklov
• Ivan Matveyevich Vinogradov upto 1983
• Sergei Sobolev 1942 to 1944
• Nikolay Bogolyubov 1983-1987
• Valery V. Kozlov 2004 to present

Is there any reference for the director from 1987 to 2004? It can be used to improve the present article. Solomon7968 10:28, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bogolyubov was the director until 1988 (never use Russian Wikipedia as a source!!!) [8]. In 1988 to 1993 it was Vasily Vladimirov, 1993 to 2004 Yury Osipov.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:32, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That means Bogolyubov was the director from 1983 to 1988. So my rest of list is correct. Solomon7968 10:37, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. :) There's some talk at Wikipedia_talk:Copyright_problems#Wikipedia:Suspected_copyright_violations about how to handle the backlog at WP:CP. I've been thinking lately that separating out some of the workflows might help, and your input there would be most welcome. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:02, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I have this page in my watchlist, but did not yet have time to react. Thanks for alerting, will try to react late afternoon (your early morning).--Ymblanter (talk) 11:04, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Development finance institution 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:

• Andrea Levere, Bill Schweke, and Beadsie Woo, Development Finance and Regional Economic Development], Washington, DC: CFED, July 2006</ref> These institutions provide a crucial role in providing

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:17, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ymblanter, thanks for your many edits. Would you be interested to help ugrade Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(Cyrillic) from draft to RfC for adoption as guideline? In ictu oculi (talk) 02:50, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In principle, yes, but I remember that there were some discussions in the past, and a considerable part of the community thinks it sould not be a guiideline. At least this was my impression.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:32, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think the balance has changed. NC Mongolian and so on are guidelines, why should this not be - since this is how articles in any case are. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:00, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Might be. We could give a try.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:04, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can you add the Russian/Ukrainian names and find the other wiki articles and find anything on him?♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 21:41, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm it is the same article as Alexander Korneychuk. Am I right? The Legend of Zorro 21:55, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but I'm not sure which spelling is right, a lot of our articles on Ukrainians spelling it Oleksander.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 22:18, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will have a look. Spelling is obviously a hard issue, we need to check how is he best known in English-language sources.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:12, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander Korneychuk has the highest Google books hit with 136 results. Nearest is Alexander Korniychuk with 10 results. The Legend of Zorro 20:04, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 19:16, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ярослав, вы не заглянете туда, если найдется время? Там Ленинградартист просто развернул деятельность, а мне не верят. Очень по вам скучаю :(( --Shakko (talk) 19:54, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Обязательно, но, наверное, уже завтра: только что вернулся из Польши, три дня был без интернета вообще.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:00, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Grigory Chernetsov, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lukh (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) 11:41, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Right, given that I created it yesterday and corrected in a minute after the creation, may be updating the database would be not such a bad idea.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:43, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am surprised that the page on Rajeev Chawla was deleted by you by saying that he is not a notable person. In my edit I provided many evidence of notability How can the page be undeleted

1. Interview of Shri Rajeev Chawla by Innovations for Successful Societies (ISS),jointly hosted by the Woodrow Wilson School of Public & International Affairs and the Mamdouha S. Bobst Center for Peace and Justice of the Princeton University, USA http://www.princeton.edu/successfulsocieties/content/focusareas/CS/oralhistories/view.xml?id=283 2. Shri Rajeev Chawla received the Prime Minister's award for Excellence in Public Administration http://pib.nic.in/newsite/erelease.aspx?relid=26544 3. http://www.unpan.org/DPADM/UNPSDayAwards/UNPublicServiceDay/2006PublicServiceDay/tabid/1298/language/en-US/Default.aspx 4. Presentation on Bhoomi as provided in the UN Public Administration Website http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/UN/UNPAN023395.pdf 5. Newsweek Article mentioning Bhoomi along with several other best practices http://www.newsweek.com/2010/08/16/how-e-government-is-empowering-citizens-worldwide.html 6. Reference to Bhoomi in UN Conference http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan025305.pdf 7. Winners of the UN 2006 Public Service awards http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan022965.pdf 8. Report of the 2006 UN Public Service Awards http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan023650.pdf 9. United Nations web page on details of the 2006 UN Public Service awards functionhttp://www.unpan.org/DPADM/UNPSDayAwards/UNPublicServiceDay/2006PublicServiceDay/tabid/1298/language/en-US/Default.aspx 10. CV of Shri Rajeev Chawla as listed in UN website http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan025191.pdf 11. Employment Record of Shri Rajeev Chawla as listed by Government of India http://persmin.gov.in/ersheet/MultipleERS.asp?HiddenStr=01KN027500

All these sources were in the article during the AfD process, and the consensus was still delete. Most, if not all of them do not qualify as reliable souces describing the subject of the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:12, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have started this. Might interest you.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 07:00, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid here my help might be very limited, an interesting topic, but I do not have access to special literature.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:00, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Russian Federation isn't at all a recognized member of OECD/OCSE.See also OCSE/OECD article.In Russia article is written that Russian Federation is an OECD/OCSE member.Lies!151.40.3.61 (talk) 16:09, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[9]. I suggest you complain to OSCE if you think their website published wrong info.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:13, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(a request to look at the paper and some related discussion).--Ymblanter (talk) 16:02, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Не присмотрите за кадавриком, "русским композитором"? --Shakko (talk) 11:29, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Попробую. Поставил в список наблюдения.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:31, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

спасибо. а то у меня национальная гордость проснулась. Оказывается, у лорда Маунбаттена была идея фикс насчет нашего марша, и он его даже на день рождения королевы заставлял играть (в русс. статье описано). И они играют! А композитора написать не могут. Думаю, это все же был "Дунаевский" первоначально. --Shakko (talk) 11:34, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

А спеллинг названия марша правильный? Странно, что статьи нет (правда, в статье про морских пехотинцев ссылки тоже нет).--Ymblanter (talk) 11:36, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

английское написание, по-хорошему, надо брать с офиц. сайта морпехов (там одна из первых ссылок). Статьи нет - это нормально, в русской тоже я только сегодня ее написала. --Shakko (talk) 11:49, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	The Admin's Barnstar
	For re-listing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rachel's Vineyard. Bearian (talk) 15:58, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:02, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have proposed a means of preventing copyvio plot summaries that requires changing the site-wide Javascript. Your feedback is appreciated at Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems#Editintro for fiction articles?, before I take this to a wider audience. MER-C 06:55, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:20, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yaroslav, if you have some spare time, then help a bit with the hell at talk:Heat please. I can’t cope with a mile of rubbish there because simultaneously engaged in other conflicts. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 12:05, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am leaving in five minutes, will have a look later today, in a couple of hours.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:16, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yaroslav, I can mistake, but your apparently pay even less attention to topics of physics than I pay to topics related to Russia. Of course you may work with whatever articles you like, or to acquire an aversion to physics. But one dive into a hell of incompetence at talk:Heat, or into some other hell, would have in any case more merit than daily hovering on drama-noticeboards. Dramaboards do not require so high skills as you have: they are for retarded or lazy people. Do not behave like these admins (add a personal attack to your taste). Regards, Incnis Mrsi (talk) 10:20, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I actually added Heat to my watchlist and I am following the talk page discussions. I believe at this point my intervention is not yet needed, and the disruptive user is likely to be topic-banned. The problem is that at the point the signal to noise ratio at this page is very low, and it is possible that I have missed some of the signal, but at least at the moment I do not see any destructive edits to the article itself. I also see a couple of users who seem to be competent in the field. Anyway, I am watching the talk page and I hope to be able to react if smth happens.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:30, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good. My post was actually personal: after yesterday adventures I realized yet another time that dramaboards are dangerous for me. The people likely would made same conclusions without me, and any retard can declare that a consensus is reached. I only wasted my time and yielded myself to hatred. And you, are you sure that anything from 2009 will not reappear? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 10:56, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, I guess it would not reappear. Someone like Lvova would be quickly taken care of here, and very efficiently. And I do not care anyway.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:00, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly they would, per WP:DIVA. BTW, together with one Yaroslav Blanter since November 2009. I do not expect en.wikipedia to discreet thoroughly one sub-species from another. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 11:49, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I obviously disagree.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:53, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can I ask you to reconsider this close, please. The numbers you give (10 delete/merge, 4 keep) is easily a consensus to get rid of the article per usual practice at AfD. thanks. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 07:01, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are actually correct,, I miscalculated the fractions. Shame on me.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:21, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When will you close these discussions: here, here, here? Banhtrung1 (talk) 15:28, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am not planning to close these discussions, and I can not recollect me ever promising to close them.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:32, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you closed this discussion, so I think you will close the rest. Banhtrung1 (talk) 03:15, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not admin and can I close discussion which over 7 days? Banhtrung1 (talk) 03:16, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:NAC over what discussions can be closed by non-admins. In short, you should not be involved, and it must be an obvious consensus for keep, merge, or redirect.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:40, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ярослав, здравствуйте. Никого тут не знаю кроме Вас. Данную статью постоянно вандалят. Вы не подскажите куда жаловаться и к кому обращаться? --85.232.118.82 (talk) 18:28, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Вандализм мы откатили, последний вандал предупреждён, я поставил в список наблюдения, если вандализм продолжится, придётся защитить.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:36, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently my mistake or a malfunction occurred. I intended to rollback [10]. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 18:42, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I understood this. But then I discovered there was more vandal edits and rolled back everything from April (there was only one useful sentence added, which I re-added). Thanks for helping.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:49, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Спасибо Вам большое, Ярослав. --85.232.118.82 (talk) 20:13, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Ymblanter:

Thank you very much for fixing up a problem that I didn't realize I had caused. Firefox crashed on me when I was writing the last few words of my, well, whatever that was. It's the first time that's happened since I switched to Windows 8. I rebooted, assuming that my edit would be lost and was surprised to find the text still there in the edit box. I typed the end of my sentence, and saved just as my doorbell rang and I had to make tea for guests. As a result I didn't realize that something had gone wrong, and it wasn't later when I checked my watchlist that I saw your fix. I shouldn't have trusted the browser after it crashed, I guess. Anyway, thanks again for recovering it for me. I wouldn't want anyone to think that I was deleting people's comments on purpose. —Anne Delong (talk) 19:27, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, you are welcome. Everybody realized it was a good faith edit.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:32, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you deleted my article about ENTHOI Lakatamia FC as an administrator. I believe that you should not have done that before you were reading the статья. If you did you would noticed that команда играла в Πервый League нa Кипрe. Cтатья states that it happened during cезон 2005/06, which exist в Википедии. Τы could check that cезон. If you needed source, then почему you didn't delete статья 2005–06 Cypriot First Division. If you are interested for the benefit of Wikipedia, as an administrator you should have checked that. You could check Google.

Anyway, вот мои sources: [11] [12]

--KRBN (talk) 11:30, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, my business was to determine consensus, and this is what I did, but since you are clearly getting confrontational instead of asking you to add the sources again I will add them myself. When I have time.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:34, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I asked Wikiproject:Football to comment on the reliability of the sources, if they are fine, I am going to restore the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:00, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 13:30, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 19:17, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I completely forgot that TSC was under a topic ban; I have blocked for 1 month. GiantSnowman 18:31, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was not sure for how long a block is warranted, and I decided that it would be better if someone else does it. But I am sure we will see several rounds of appeal, and the block duration will come to a consensual value.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:33, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

i did it because the of this

Year	Film	Cesar nomination	Cesar win	Director
2012	The Man Who Laughs(L'homme qui rit)
	Life of Pi			Ang Lee
	Asterix and Obelix: God Save Britannia			Laurent Tirard
	Le grand soir
2011	Grenouille d'hiver			Slony Sow
	Un baiser papillon			Karine Silla
	Raspoutine			Josée Dayan
2010	Houba ! Le Marsupilami et l'Orchidée de Chicxulub			Alain Chabat
	Une femme d'affaires			Frédéric Schoendoerffer
	Potiche			François Ozon
	La tête en friche			Jean Becker
	Le grand restaurant (TV)			Gérard Pullicino
	Mammuth	Best Actor		Benoît Delépine and Gustave de Kervern
	L'Autre Dumas			Safy Nebbou
My Afternoons with Margueritte			Jean Becker

Year	Film	Cesar nomination	Cesar win	Director
2012	The Man Who Laughs(L'homme qui rit)
	Life of Pi			Ang Lee
	Asterix and Obelix: God Save Britannia			Laurent Tirard
	Le grand soir
2011	Grenouille d'hiver			Slony Sow
	Un baiser papillon			Karine Silla
	Raspoutine			Josée Dayan
2010	Houba ! Le Marsupilami et l'Orchidée de Chicxulub			Alain Chabat
	Une femme d'affaires			Frédéric Schoendoerffer
	Potiche			François Ozon
	La tête en friche			Jean Becker
	Le grand restaurant (TV)			Gérard Pullicino
	Mammuth	Best Actor		Benoît Delépine and Gustave de Kervern
	L'Autre Dumas			Safy Nebbou
2009	Bellamy			Claude Chabrol
	In the Beginning			Xavier Giannoli
	Diamant 13			Mat
2008	Hello Goodbye			Graham Guit
	Mesrine: L'instinct de Mort			Jean-François Richet
	Babylon A.D.			Mathieu Kassovitz
	Disco			Fabien Onteniente
	Asterix at the Olympic Games			Frédéric Forestier and Thomas Langmann

i wanted to remove the error. that's why --178.235.183.165 (talk) 11:18, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure what you wanted to remove but you removed about a half of this table, in particular, the Life of Pi.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:21, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Got it, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:23, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you make this edit, and why are you asserting me to be a sockpuppet? Please support your reply with evidence, not personal opinion. 212.183.140.59 (talk) 10:27, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been investigated last time, and found to be a sock.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:48, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Me, or a previous user of this IP (it is from one of the UK's largest public pools of IP addresses)? When? Where? 212.183.140.59 (talk) 10:53, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/DeFacto. And you will be now blocked as well.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:56, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see anything about me there. Are you sure you are not confusing me with a previous user of this IP? Are all the IPs from this ISP now blighted because of some historical use by an unwelcome contributor? 212.183.128.113 (talk) 11:07, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. All IP from this range with the predominant interest into metric systems will be treated as socks. I guess someone would need to block the range. I am not doing this only because of my insufficient technical skills and because I have to catch my flight in three hours.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:10, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No NO mobile user from the UK is allowed to edit articles related to the metric system - no matter how much they want to improve them? Wow! That sounds like a seriously flawed judgement to me. Especially as the issue is so controversial in the UK, with so many people having strong opinions on it. Hardly a day passes when it isn't in the news there, in some form or another. Wiki is in serious danger of misrepresenting the NPOV on this issue then, I would content. Where can we get this matter discussed properly? 212.183.128.113 (talk) 11:15, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Get unblocked first and then please feel welcome to discuss it.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:17, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not blocked. Can you tell me where that diktat about metric articles is documented so that I can read it for myself? It's not that I don't believe you, but I want to read the detail, specifically the small print. 212.183.128.113 (talk) 11:20, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You recently protected History of the metric system because of persistent sockpuppetry. This was either a mistake or was tendentious. Either way, can you now unprotect it please. 212.183.140.59 (talk) 10:51, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, because you are a sockpuppet and you are persistent. Everything was done properly.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:16, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've already explained, I am not a sockpuppet. You are being indiscriminate here, accusing me of something because I happen to be a mobile UK user. That is unsustainable. Please reconsider the protection. 212.183.128.113 (talk) 11:27, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to understand why you deleted the Datalink Bankcard Services Company wikipedia page since it met the editorial guidelines.

No, it did not: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Datalink Bankcard Services Company.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:26, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. administrator, I need your help! Проверьте, пожалуйста, my English. Lawrentia (talk) 01:11, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Вечером прилечу домой, посмотрю.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:07, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Конечно. И сначала вы отдохнете после дороги. Я там явно не справилась с английским. Воспользовалась транслейтером в Гугле и Яндексе, но после них надо вызывать живого переводчика. Спасибо. Ёжики сейчас на выходных. Извините, что я опять к вам. И опять со своим балетом. --Lawrentia (talk) 12:36, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you, Ярослав. Вы очень хорошо перевели с моего английского на нормальный английский язык. Славочка, а там дальше - совсем непонятно? Дело в том, что этот балет стал краегольным камнем, окончательно определившим развитие русского балета. Может, это хоть кому-нибудь будет интересно? А потом, в 1930-х годах Сталин полностью довершил уничтожение Московского балета: он перевел в Москву ленинградцев, которые заняли все места. В результате балетное направление Московской труппы было уничтожено, его немного сохранил Игорь Моисеев в своем ансамбле. Ну ладно, спасибо. --Lawrentia (talk) 00:48, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Дальше ещё не смотрел, сегодня постараюсь продолжить.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:22, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I request that this page that you have deleted be returned to its original published state. The reason for deletion was based on the lack of 'third party sources', but this is in fact untrue. Perhaps there were not enough to your own personal standings, but the sources that were cited for this listing did in fact have referential quality for the rest of the article, and legitimates the topic of the article for inclusion on Wikipedia.

If you disagree to reinstate the article then at least make access to its original text, so that others may re-make the article listing with new third-party sources. This is deemed as essential due to the fact that many other articles link back to this topic.

89.221.172.162 (talk) 14:57, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would gladly move it to a user space of any registered user. Concerning the deletion, I have no personal standing, otherwise I would not close this AfD, but the consensus was that the article is promotional and lacks reliable sources.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:01, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your response. Is there any specific part of the article that needs better citation? The article has been under review for 'promotional' tendencies in the past, but this issue was addressed and fixed by another user. In order to reclaim the article text, I have a registered user name? Do I simply pass it on to you by writing it here? 89.221.172.162 (talk) 15:11, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I need a registered user: Either you should register an account, or if you know someone who does not object having the previous version in the user space (not me).--Ymblanter (talk) 15:14, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am logged in now. Any further suggestions on which parts of the article should be better cited? Chloework11 (talk) 15:18, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here you are: User:Chloework11/Designit. Basically, the content should be sources by reliable third party sources (see WP:RS and WP:N), whereas currently most of it is sources to the company website. This does not create notability.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:24, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your argument a year ago was as follows: "A secondary role in a film which has not been even completed does not create notability." A year has passed and Percy Jackson (a major Hollywood production) has been released. She has also completed filming a lead role in an adaptation of a book by an award-winning Canadian author and landed a recurring role in Bates Motel, a successful TV series. I think she's done enough to merit inclusion. Hergilei (talk) 05:59, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

She must have principal roles in multiple films, which means at least two, see WP:NACTOR. Right now, she has zero.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:02, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So why haven't you speedily deleted Annet Mahendru and Emily Bett Rickards? They both fail that criteria since they won't be series regulars until next season, their first principal role.Hergilei (talk) 06:19, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Because they are not in my watchlist, but you are encouraged to nominate them for deletion (if they have not been deleted eralier, they do not qualify for speedy though, they must go to WP:AfD).--Ymblanter (talk) 06:46, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think they both qualify to stay on Wiki according to my interpretation of the criteria but it seems you don't. So now that you're aware of them, I'll be interested to see the results of your deletion nomination. As for Paloma Kwiatkowski, you speedily deleted based on G4 which mentions articles which are 'A sufficiently identical and unimproved copy'. I did expand the article and added additional information and references about her leading role in Marlene and her casting in Bates Motel. And I believe her role in the now-released Percy Jackson is notable, see http://variety.com/2013/film/reviews/percy-jackson-sea-of-monsters-review-1200574762/ By the way, the 2012 "deletion discussion" was just you and three other people. Hergilei (talk) 06:59, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Then I think the easiest would be if you raise the issue here: Wikipedia:Deletion review.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:05, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(a discussion on illustrating the article with specific images).--Ymblanter (talk) 15:39, 7 August 2013 (UTC) Слава, еще раз спасибо за помощь. Извините, что я вас обоих достала своими балетами. Вы не посмотрите еще к статье Tatiana Riabouchinska есть фото ее в "Золотом Петушке" – есть тут: http://ljwanderer.livejournal.com/186272.html - и в других местах тоже циркулирует. А есть еще карикатурный шарж на нее в этой же роли художника Алекса Гарда. Я так вместе поставила в русской статье: http://cyclowiki.org/wiki/Татьяна_Рябушинская. Мне кажется, что очень эффектно поставить вместе. Но я не поняла с правилами. Мне еще давно мой мэтр и учитель наш Вася Зимин, пострадавший как верный соратник по борьбе за исправление ошибок, объяснял сложности с правилами загрузки иллюстраций – должно быть разрешение непосредственно от автора. Но как быть, если автора нет в живых. Когда будет время, посмотрите, пожалуйста, эти илююстрации. Спасибо еще раз за помощь. Lawrentia (talk) 14:52, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Нет, нельзя загружать, надо искать наследников фотографа и просить передать права.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:39, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• understood --Lawrentia (talk) 16:54, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to check whether you are done with this article or still planning to add to it. I need to update the divisions count due to a recent merger, and since I usually go through everything you add as well, I'd rather wait till you are completely done with all of it. No rush. Thanks!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); August 9, 2013; 12:08 (UTC)

I am done with that one (as well as with Vesyegonsky, Sandovsky, Molokovsky, and Sonkovsky). I will leave tonight for holidays for a week, and it is unlikely that I will make any edits in the district articles at least till Aug 17 (Saturday). The next one will be Kesovogorsky District, but I still need to complete Sonkovo and a couple of rivers before starting it. Please feel welcome to do the updates. I would appreciate if you let me know once it is safe for me to proceed with the districts of Tver Oblast (Kesovogorsky -> Bezhetsky -> Maksatikhinsky -> Lesnoy -> ?).--Ymblanter (talk) 12:13, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; Krasnokholmsky District is the only one I still need to update; will do it later today. The rest are all safe to edit. Enjoy your vacation!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); August 9, 2013; 12:16 (UTC)

Thanks, I will proceed once I am back.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:18, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion of a particular sentence in the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:19, 17 August 2013 (UTC) Mr. administrator, I didn't understand: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Little_Humpbacked_Horse_(ballet)&diff=567865515&oldid=567853858 Спасибо за помощь. Thanks! Lawrentia (talk) 01:28, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Я просто совершенно не понимаю, что Вы хотите сказать. Можно переформулировать закомментированный кусок по-русски (прямо тут)?--Ymblanter (talk) 08:46, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Славочка, извините, пожалуйста, мой английский. Мне, правда, жутко неудобно – от меня не помощь проекту, а сплошная головная боль. Но вы же знаете: я, как вижу ошибку – меня несет исправлять. Этот абзац имеет такой смысловой оттенок: В 1876 году артист Московской императосркой труппы Сергей Соколов (я его перевела так: Sergey Petrovich Sokolov) повторил в московском Большом театре постановку Сен-Леона, но вместо напридуманных якобы русских танцев ввел настоящий русский пляс (информация отсюда: http://demo4.qwer.com.ua/index.php?v_ddd=14&v_mmd=8&res_mode=740&pid=69342 ru: СОКОЛОВ Сергей Петрович - добавить рефы с двух сторон, задний с палочкой). Таким образом, балет The Little Humpbacked Horse окончательно определил два пути развития русского балета – в Петербургской императорской труппе и в Московской императорской труппе. Если в Петербурге предпочтение отдавалось высокому грациозному танцу, то Московская труппа разрабатывала хара(ударение)ктерный танец: танец психологический, танец-спектакль. Появились два направления русского балетного искусства. Дальше в скобках: Московское направление просуществовало до начала 1930-х годов, пока по решению товарища Сталина приказом часть Ленинградской (бывшей Петербургской) труппы не была переведена в Москву. Ленинградские танцовщики и хореографы заняли главенствующее положение, московские артисты вынуждены были покинуть московский Большой театр или оставались на задворках – исполняли маленькие партии или вообще ничего не исполняли. Московское направление балетной школы было уничтожено. Частично его использовал Игорь Моисеев в созданном им ансамбле. Вот. Lawrentia (talk) 19:25, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Спасибо. Это я постараюсь завтра написать, только потом, пожалуйста, поставьте к этим утверждениям источники, а то их тоже могут снести.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:19, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ymblanter. Please note the following addition as per Talk last month. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:52, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:54, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

		WikiProject National Register of Historic Places Award
		For helping WP:NRHP to illustrate 50,000 historic sites. Keep up the good work! Smallbones(smalltalk) 14:27, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:56, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User Thomas W. insists that no Slavs, Anglo-Saxons and Finns have ever been among Varangians and deletes even footnotes with the most reliable sources. He promises to block users opposing to vandalism. The anti-Norman theory has never denied the presence of Vikings contrary to the fringe Norman theory denying any involvement of Slavs. Vikings have never had inheritance from an uncle to a nephew like inheritance in the Rurik's familiy and in the Ashina family. For example, the official legal history of the Russian empire beginning from Nicholas the First insisted on the two-nation origin of the state, Varayag-Rus as the ancestry of usual Russians and Khazar Varangians as the ancestry of Cossacks etc. Both theories (Norman and anti-Norman) are now replaced with a new theory denying a nation and a state of any (Rus or Cossack) Varangians but similar to an anti-Norman one, advanced by Sigismund von Herberstein long before the Norman theory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.66.225.219 (talk) 10:56, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that you read the policy on reliable sources and stop adding this material to the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:10, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! As there is a Wikipedia article about you, you are cordially invited to contribute a short audio recoding of your spoken voice, so that our readers may know what you sound like and how you pronounce your name. Details of how to do so, and examples, are at Wikipedia:Voice intro project. Please feel free to ask for help or clarification on the project talk page, or my talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:57, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, we have discussed this once on one of the mailing lists. Since English is not my mothertongus and since I have a clear accent, I believe it would be counterproductive.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:59, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry: I didn't make the connection. You'd be welcome to contribute in your native language. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:00, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please be more careful with your wording in warnings, particularly this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Moscow_mayoral_election,_2013&diff=566841529&oldid=566838360. It gives the impression that there were two sides edit warring. Holdek (talk) 21:10, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As I already had a chance to remark, I believe your activity in this article is purely destructive. May be you should turn your attention to topics you understand better. Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:26, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Holdek (talk) 23:07, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Follow up: considering that this was the second time you've acted erroneously toward me on my talk page, and did not apologize either time, please do not post on my talk page again. Holdek (talk) 00:49, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do not believe I was acting erroneously, and last time you were strongly admonished by the closing administrator. But fine, next time I will post directly at ANI and ask somebody to notify you.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:40, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I saw that you closed this AFD as no consensus. In your rationale for your decision, you state that "Those who propose delete argue that since no sources have been found, the player is non-notable." and that "Those who propose keep argue that he meets WP:NHOCKEY (based on RS) which is an indication that he might be notable, but the sources are difficult to find since he retired a while ago.". You also note that there is a 7:4 consensus in favor of deleting the article. While it is true that it's harder to find Internet/online sources for players who retired long ago, this player played AHL and ECHL hockey as recently as 2004. What would you say about a player such as Wayne Gretzky, who retired in 1999? Wayne Gretzky is obviously notable, but my point is that the fact that the player retired long ago should not, in itself, be a valid argument for keeping the article. Although WP:NHOCKEY presumes notability, it won't—nor should—guarantee notability. Basically, if a hockey player meets any of the WP:NHOCKEY criteria, there's a great chance that there are enough sources that confirm the player's notability. But WP:NHOCKEY in itself won't guarantee notability. This means that, if a player meets WP:NHOCKEY but its notability is disputed, it's up to those who believe the player is notable to find sources that confirm the player's notability, whether it be online or offline sources. The 7:4 consensus in the AFD indicates, at least to me, that WP:GNG trumps WP:NHOCKEY in terms of notability. Levesque has not played in the NHL either. I do not agree with your closure, and I think it should be changed to delete. I think I'm going to start a deletion review. Best regards, Heymid (contribs) 08:42, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good, I think the deletion review is indeed a good way to proceed. It was a borderline case, and I would not mind if the decision has been overturned.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:08, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've started a deletion review now. Best regards, Heymid (contribs) 09:35, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:46, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying this was a super-notable hockey player... never even heard of him before today... but I was able to add references to the article proving his existence as a professional hockey player with relative ease. I'm not sure if other editors didn't want to put in the effort because he isn't a well known name... but I don't feel that deletion is required. Just my opinion. I can probably do a lot more with the article, I just put in a few minutes this morning waiting on my kids to see if this was really all there was. DMighton (talk) 12:04, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. It would be great if you could double the message at the deletion review page, it is a more obviousl place to check than my talk page.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:07, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Most references you added are only statistical pages for individual games and transactions. His NHL profile does not add to his notability either (I suppose that every player drafted in the NHL draft have NHL profiles), it's just basic information about him, but nothing in the stats, game log, notes etc; only one link in the "News" tab too. This also makes it hard to expand the article with more information regarding his playing career. Also, he was only drafted in the 4th round, as 111th overall. I don't think this player is notable enough for Wikipedia. Heymid (contribs) 12:21, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• The deletion review has now been closed as no consensus, defaulting to an endorsement of your original closure. Even if your decision had been overturned, I hope you do not feel discouraged just because I disagreed with one of your closures. Keep up the good work Ymblanter! :) Cheers, Heymid (contribs) 18:46, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  No problem, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:49, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Willie Levesque. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Heymid (contribs) 09:35, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are a number of problems with the Canadian historic places lists. They include:

• provincial lists are too long (some are over 1,000 entries) and need to be split
• lists are not sorted, and are not sortable even by municipality, due to the way the address was dumped
• don't use {{coord}}, so can't use {{GeoGroup}} for mapping
• references numbers (into the CRHP) are sometimes inaccurate, and need to be verified
• the same place may be multiply designated (federal/provincial/municipal, sometimes multiple federal)
• there are missing entries due to the way the data was retrieved

I have no easy ideas on how to address the last point, so am focusing on the other items. What I'm doing is a multi-step process:

1. Fill out the municipality field in the {{HPC row}} templates and deleted the municipality (and redundant "Canada") from the address field (if no municipality is given, try going to the referenced CRHP entry to figure it out)
2. Sort entries by municipality and count entries to figure out how to split the list. This is generally along the lines of counties or their equivalent (some Canadian counties have been supplanted by regional municipalities, see the Nova Scotia list for examples); you'll have to figure out which counties places are in
3. Split the big list; I've not been explicitly seeking consensus, but if the history indicates it might be needed, best check for it. The remaining steps are then done to each sublist.
4. Validate that the id numbers actually link to the proper CRHP listing. If they don't, find the right one by searching the CRHP (every listing I've seen with a wrong id was listed under a different one)
5. Merge duplicated listings where possible (it isn't if there is more than one federal designation, for example, but provincial and municipal listings can be merged into those)
6. Sort the list by primary alpha words (see the Nova Scotia or PEI lists for examples)
7. Change references to {{HPC row}} to {{HPC rowt}}, which uses {{coord}}. This requires changing "lat" and "lon" to "latd" and "longd", and changing the sign on the longitude. (IMHO the last is lame, but the template was already in use on several lists before I took this on)
8. Make sure municipality names are linked (I usually do this in conjunction with one of the other passes, and don't worry about redlinks)
9. If the name field contains pipe links, add "namea" field containing just the name, otherwise the coordinate field gets screwed up
10. Add {{GeoGroup}} and a locator map to the top of the list

I have done this for Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, PEI (almost done), and am starting in on New Brunswick. Others have previously done work on the Canadian territory lists (Yukon, Northwest, Nunavut, all fairly modest in length), and those for British Columbia and Saskatchewan. This leaves Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, and Quebec to do, where some splitting has been done, but little else.

Things this work does not do fix:

• making the list sortable by address, which would require adding sort keys to the municipality field so that the listings get sorted properly within municipality (see {{sort}})
• making the list properly sortable by name (I tried putting sort keys in the name field, and it caused problems with the coordinates)

Did I mention this is tedious work? Thanks for helping! Magic♪piano 20:53, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanations. I will have a look at Alberta tomorrow.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:56, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Agenda of the Tea Party movement. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 20:16, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ymblanter, in case you want to help: The Historic Sites of Japan need to be converted to use {{NHS Japan header}} and {{NHS Japan row}}. For now only the national part. I did a couple as examples. Multichill (talk) 15:41, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:08, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello; Is it possible to do any conversion by ?bot? as seems to have been done for these Chinese ones? The format of the Japanese lists is intended to be internally similar, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 11:39, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I guess this is more a question to @Multichill: than to me, but I guess if it were he would do the conversion himself without asking me. Let us wait what he answers. If the conversion is not possible, I volunteer to do at least some of the manual conversion (one-two lists per day).--Ymblanter (talk) 11:50, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I tried converting with a bot, but didn't manage to do it without too much mess so I abandoned that. Multichill (talk) 16:51, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Здравствуйте. Посмотрите, пожалуйста: на Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates что-то не то с интервиками, почти все показывают не туда куда нужно (ru:Категория:Орган?? и пр.). Щёлкаешь по ссылке на Викиданные - там вроде бы все ссылки в порядке. Лично я без понятия, что это могло бы означать. --A.Savin (talk) 22:30, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Доброе утро. Да уж, первый раз такое вижу. Спросил тут: d:Wikidata:Project chat#Disorder with interwiki links in Wikipedia--Ymblanter (talk) 05:33, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

А-а, понятно. Спасибо --A.Savin (talk) 09:14, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Не за что, вроде всё уже пофиксили.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:31, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This seems copyright violations to me. Don't you think so? Jvwissem (talk) 19:23, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, there is nothing to copyright. Besides, your last recreation clearly demonstrated that you goal is not improving Wikipedia but something else.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:26, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Ymblanter. I'm contacting you because you're involved in the Article Feedback Tool in some way, either as a previous newsletter recipient or as an active user of the system. As you might have heard, a user recently anonymously disabled the feedback tool on 2,000 pages. We were unable to track or prevent this due to the lack of logging feature in AFT5. We're deeply sorry for this, as we know that quite a few users found the software very useful, and were using it on their articles.

We've now re-released the software, with the addition of a logging feature and restrictions on the ability to disable. Obviously, we're not going to automatically re-enable it on each article—we don't want to create a situation where it was enabled by users who have now moved on, and feedback would sit there unattended—but if you're interested in enabling it for your articles, it's pretty simple to do. Just go to the article you want to enable it on, click the "request feedback" link in the toolbox in the sidebar, and AFT5 will be enabled for that article.

Again, we're very sorry about this issue; hopefully it'll be smooth sailing after this :). If you have any questions, just drop them at the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) 21:49, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Yaroslav, I have been trying to nominate Mario Zampedroni for deletion on multiple projects, and someone on the Spanish Wikipedia has been looking into it and they found out this page links to Sergio Zagraevsky, which has now also been nominated for deletion on the Spanish Wikipedia. This person claims to be the head of the Artists Trade Union of Russia. Can you take a look at this and tell me if he is legitimate or not? Thx, and Happy WLM month! Jane (talk) 06:54, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jane, thanks. I actually know Zagraevsky from my time in the Russian Wikipedia, and he is very active in self-promotion, but I am not exactly sure about this particular issue. I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:58, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I just noticed that his page links to an "Art critics academy" organization of 40 people, which doesn't sound notable at all either: Russian art critics Academy . Jane (talk) 07:18, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of Historic Sites of Japan (Kanagawa) 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:

• | name = [Kamakura's Seven Entrances#The Asaina Pass|Asaina Pass]]
• |}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:18, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of Historic Sites of Japan (Kanagawa) 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:

• | name_kanji = 法華堂跡 (源頼朝墓・北条義時墓
• |}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:42, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am vastly interested in your recent contributions on th*rmal physics (h*at); I have learned some useful facts from what you have written.

Since I have been topic banned for a on this matter for some weeks now I am not going add anything to this information because I understand I run the risk of being permanently removed from the editorial team on all matters in Wikipedia if I comment further on thermal physics matters.

Regards

--Damorbel (talk) 05:26, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your warning to me on my talk page: the user in question has been openly lying about me on ANI, and when I asked him to stop and calmly explained why what he was doing was wrong, he continued. I think any good-faith user who looks through all the evidence would agree that while I was not a paragon of civility, I certainly was the lesser of two evils. I do apologize for my aggressive tone, though. I was sorely provoked, but that is not an excuse for a lack of civility. Can you please take a look at the context, though? I'm beginning to get very frustrated of virtually everyone in the admin corps ignoring me when I ask for help, and the only people who get involved being random ANI-junkies who like to stoke up drahms. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 13:55, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do not really understand anything in the subject, I just happened to have the talk page of that user in my watchlist. I am sure one of the administrators will have a look since the matter is on ANI.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:58, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

...that's quite a list. Next time I'm driving through I should stop--though by the time you get there from Amsterdam, everyone's tired and grumpy, and that drive through the town just to get through is awful. Drmies (talk) 14:16, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message, but I am afraid I am somehow missing the context. It would be great if you could expand a bit.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:22, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The song starts at 2:00 (I can't tell what the director of the video was thinking). Surely a globetrotter likes you has Jacques Brel on their Walkman. :) Drmies (talk) 14:40, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good, thanks, I hope I am starting to understand now. This is about the photos, right? They are not mine, I just take them here to help. And actually I have never been there, though it is very high on my list, I may go over Christmas or in Summer. I am based in Delft, much closed to Amsterdam. But thanks anyway, I really like Brel.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:46, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I saw List of protected heritage sites in Liège go by. I just flipped through this here, his last concert in the Netherlands; that line "C'est dur de mourir au printemps, tu sais" always brings tears to my eyes. It must be hard to die in the spring. Well, I suppose it's hard to die period. (Also hard, to understand--how can there be Belgian artists who have sold more records than he did??)

I was checking Google Maps, and it seems that they've finished work on the way around Liege--it used to be that all that traffic to Luxemburg and the Ardennes went right through town: you can see it on the walls of the houses, an inch thick. Last time, a few years ago, I saw that some of it was already rerouted and it may be better now. Bonne chance, Drmies (talk) 14:57, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's a really great link, thank you very much. I usually drive to Luxemburg via Antwerp and Brussels, but if Liege is now in order it would be a serious alternative route - Brussels is too stressful.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:08, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Ярослав! Можно ли поставить в Anastasia Abramova открытку отсюда: http://cyclowiki.org/wiki/Анастасия_Ивановна_Абрамова - она найдена в дебрях Интернета. Она 1928 года рождения, но очень хорошая, на ней все четыре попранные звезды Большого театра. Thank you. Lawrentia (talk) 16:03, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Вы уж извините, но я на этот сайт не хожу никогда, так как он принадлежит людям, записывающим всю информацию о посетителях, а я этого не люблю. Ну и, кроме того, у нас с ними существенно отличаются взгляды по широкому кругу вопросов.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:07, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Слава, извините, пожалуйста. Я не знала всего этого. Меня пригласили туда вполне пристойные люди - сказали, что недавно создан альтернативный сайт, где по крайней мере, за исправление ошибок не называют гадиной и берием - именно Берий, в таком виде было. Я знаю, что существует много сложностей вокруг, но я совершенно не в курсе их. И честно говоря, они мне неинтересны. Когда столько ошибок, столько неверной информации, которая распространяется по другим сайтам, - мне кажется, что есть чем заняться, помимо обзывательств и каких-то личных счетов, про которые я вообще ничего не знаю. Слава, я совсем не хотела как-то вас задеть. Поверьте, я очень многого не знаю. Мне очень неудобно перед вами, что так получилось. Я вам очень признательна за помощь. И сейчас чувствую себя не очень уютно. Не собиралась вам обижать. Извините. --Lawrentia (talk) 16:19, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  Да нет, Вы меня нисколько не обидели, просто картинки, загруженные на этот сайт, я увидеть не смогу.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:22, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Вы не поняли. Это вы меня обидели. Я пишу там, где меня принимают и не называют столь виртуозными словосочетаниями, значение которых мне не совсем ясно. Но думаю, что здесь не место для обсуждения русских разделов. Thanks for your friendly help. Lawrentia (talk) 00:12, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the sources for those pictures are http://baletfoto.ru/abramova.html and http://bolshoi-theatr.com/articles/484/part-20/ . All three photos belong to a somehow grey area. They appear to be anonymous pre-WW2 made in the RSFSR. If the author is indeed anonymous then the work is in public domain under {{PD-old-70}} (or {{PD-Russia}} ). We, in good faith, can proclaim the photos to be anonymous but there is a small possibility that the name of the photographer is known: it might be printed in small font on the back of the postcard, somewhere in a Bolshoi theatre album. If the author of the photographs is known and died after 1943 then we cannot have those photographs on wiki. I really want to have a second opinion on the matter Alex Bakharev (talk) 00:10, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks Alex. I am afraid it is not safe to upload them to Commons since the photographer can be somehow known, it is just these sites do not care to list the name or to investigate the case. We may upload one of them as fair use though claiming that we need some photos from the time of her career, and those are not readily available as free images, I guess.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:00, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  Good idea! I have uploaded the image as a fair use and inserted it to the article Alex Bakharev (talk) 01:33, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  Great, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:28, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Privet Yaroslav!

I want to propose a change to the lang-ru template, and I would be very interested in knowing your opinion, before proposing it formally. I've explained it on Ezhiki's talk page, although he probably hasn't seen it yet, as he doesn't normally read his talkpage during the weekend :)

It's here: User_talk:Ezhiki#Change_to_lang-ru

Cheers! Azylber (talk) 18:18, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:27, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:RaBOTnik :) Azylber (talk) 05:41, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great, I hope we will get some development. Unfortunately my understanding of bots is close to nothing, probably much less than that of Ezhiki.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:45, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a problem, I will code it! I've also chosen the name, I thought you'd like it haha Azylber (talk) 05:51, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've placed the request :) [[13]] Azylber (talk) 22:55, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've been working on task zero. I've written an update on what I've done and what I've found in the data that I've analysed, and also there is a little something I need help with, if you're interested :) Please take a look: User:Azylber/RaBOTnik/Task0/Question1 Azylber (talk) 08:53, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Azylber/RaBOTnik/Task0/Question1 :) Azylber (talk) 18:37, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I did it quite a while ago, but I will have one more look.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:38, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, no, sorry, I put the wrong link!! I meant to put User:Azylber/RaBOTnik/Task0/Question2 Azylber (talk) 18:41, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, started. Note than some of the entries are ambiguous, and some are acronyms and do not have an established stress.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:54, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, we should ignore the ambiguous ones. That's what the bot's going to do I suppose! Azylber (talk) 18:59, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Did I do something wrong in closing this one? I'm using Mr.Z-man's script to do these, and everything appeared to be in order when it completed. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 12:56, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, you have done everything perfectly, apparently, I was looking at the older version of the page (caching issues). I have already reverted my edits. Sorry for that.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:01, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No apology necessary. I've wasted efforts a couple of times myself after being fooled by an out-of-date AFD log. Thanks for the reply. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 14:42, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Howcome You lock the list with Copenhagen S-train taken away ? The German "S-Bahn" refers to the rail ("Bahn") while Denmark refers to the trains. Copenhagen S-train is 100% equal to Berlin S-Bahn and unlike Hamburg S-Bahn is the system complete evrywhere. Whithin the Hamburg S-Bahn there are track sharing outside the city limits (and Hamburg is also a state whithin the same borders as the city) and at an other location there are road-crossings. But Copenhagen S-train system is 100% "fireproof". In the city centre train departures as often as evry second minute. No crossings with other trains, no crossings with streets. Of the 85 stations, 70-75 is within the urban area and 32 stations are located whithin the city core, ticket fare zones 1 & 2. The fact that some of the lines 100 years ago was local common railroads has nothing to do with today. Even London Underground began with local common railroads. Metropolitan Line from Watford, but not only Metropolitan line also what today is known as District line and Circle line were common railroads from start. Where regional trains also exists, there are four tracks (or more) - and the S-trains tracks are only used by S-trains. And yet again this is 100% equal to how the main trainline in east-west direction works in Berlin. Atleast four track, of them two are only used by S-Bahn trains. There is not much underground, but that's is not a concideration. The same applies to the Loop in Chicago. I'm not Danish, but I live on the other side across the Øresund sea. Regional trains takes less than 1 hour to central Copenhagen. I'm a regular user of Copenhagen S-train, and I hava also have had many opportunities to compare with Hamburg, Berlin and elsewhere. This decition (to lock the page with Copenhagen off the list) is incorrect and unlogical. I've read the talk page and cannot find any argument against Copenhagen S-train that is correct. Opinions and lies only. Hence I ask of You to put it back and then lock the page. (Besides there is no logic in keeping Berlin and Hamburg S-Bahn but not Copenhagen) Boeing720 (talk) 22:36, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Would you please go to the talk page and discuss the issue. The information will not be added before consensus has been reached at the talk page.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:28, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to bother You again. But I have now done as You kindly asked meto do, and used (again) the talk page. The "main opponant" last stated "Though I suspect I would change my tune on the question if it was unified under the same transit "umbrella" as the Copenhagen Metro". That is a certain fact, as I've explained at the talk page. No further comments has been made there after. Could You possibly have a look at the talk page ? I belive the misconception has to do with a previous error in an other article, "S-train" (now corrected in the lead), but a better article is "S-Bahn" the German name for the same conception. Thanks. Boeing720 (talk) 21:57, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have the page in the watchlist, but I am not going to take part in that discussion, because for me, as the administrator who protected the page, this would mean I am involved.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:47, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Regarding the Georgian alphabet article, please note that one of the edit-warriors (Volksjäger162) has been indefinitely blocked as a likely sock of the indefinitely blocked user Obitauri. So the three-day full protection you placed on this article might not be necessary anymore. Do you think it might be OK to lift the protection early? — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 16:40, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I unprotected it a while ago seeing that indeed one of the sides of the dispute was a sock. Pleease let me know if I screwed up smth and the page still appears as protected.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:31, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Genocide of indigenous peoples. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 01:36, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your time there. Fingers crossed, it is looking like an effective and successful third party intervention. Very much appreciated. Hesperian 12:22, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem. I obviously do not have any position in the dispute, but if the other side continues to insist the article is not notable I will advise taking it to AfD again. This is just not a speedy deletion material.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:24, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well, I spoke too soon, it's not looking so effective an intervention now. That's not your fault though.

No objection to having it tested at AfD. If it gets deleted at least it will be done fairly, through due process by an unbiased community.

Hesperian 13:39, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Now it seems to be over, at least for the time being.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:40, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, buddy.

Before going and applying whatever changes you wish to do. Why don't familiarize yourself with the subject (Ukrainian National transliteration). Unlike the Russian language, the Ukrainian has two similar letters (Ukrainian: г) and (Ukrainian: ґ). During the Soviet occupation of Ukraine the sharp g was omitted from the alphabet, while exceptions to pronunciation were adopted.

I do acknowledge the fact that many Russophone speakers are not even aware of such a small detail and many simply do not care. Whether you knew it or not, I just wanted to make sure that we are on the same page. Respectfully, Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 05:32, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for a very polite and respectful message. Unfortunately, you creating much more mess by copying an article rather than moving it, so that the whole page history is now lost. Please never ever do it again. I will clean the mess up for you now.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:34, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for understanding. It should be noted that is one of big discussion in Ukraine, due to the fact that it is simply an accepted form transliteration rather than an official Latin alphabet. I do agree that such words as Zghurivka do look a bit awkward, but it is common among other Slavic population such as Slovakia, Czech Republic, and others (ex: Praha (Prague), Kutná Hora (mining mountain), hrad (castle), Uherský Ostroh (Hungarian Fort)). Back in the 19th century this dilemma led to the real "War of alphabets" (Alphabet war at Encyclopedia of Ukraine). The fear of Polonization dropped the idea of Latynka adaptation. It could be due to such precedents, there is no unified adopted Latin alphabet (such as in Serbo-Croatian) for Ukrainian language today. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 15:29, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Guys, I am not an expert in Ukranian transliteration but we have WP:UKR policy that prescribes using Wikipedia:Romanization of Ukrainian/BGN/PCGN transliteration table unless the common English name is clearly established (not the case for Zghurivka). According to my understanding of the policy the town should be transliterated Z∙hurivka with the midpoint used to separate Z (З) from h (г). To my untrained eyes Zghurivka looks my nicer than Z∙hurivka but it is important to follow a common method of transliteration. If we want to change WP:UKR we need to discuss the things before making the changes. User:Ezhiki is an expert on different forms of Cyrillic transliteration, may be we need to take and advice from him Alex Bakharev (talk) 22:16, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Let us wait until Ezhiki comments. I personally have no opinion.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:21, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can hardly call myself an "expert" on Ukrainian transliteration, but I can contribute my opinion from a standpoint of the Wikipedia guidelines and romanization practices prevalent in English with regards to Slavic languages.

First off, WP:UKR is indeed the applicable guideline in this case, and in its current form it recommends using national transliteration for geographic names. I personally think it's a bit of a silly choice (as silly as using the GOST system would be for Russian), since in English the BGN/PCGN system is clearly prevalent when political issues are swept aside, but assuming a consensus exists to use national transliteration and the majority of geographic articles conform, it's up to the participants of WikiProject Ukraine to work out a recommendation. And insofar as the national transliteration recommends using "gh" in the "зг" combination, the "Zghurivka" spelling is the one to be used.

Now, if a more sensible approach of using the BGN/PCGN system is to be followed (and since WP:UKR declares itself subordinate to using "common sense", I don't see why it can't be), then we have a choice of using "Zhurivka" and "Z·hurivka". The usage of interpuncts in BGN/PCGN is always optional and is usually reserved for cases where unambiguous spelling is a matter of life and death, so to speak (although in all fairness, when it is indeed a matter of life and death, using a fully reversible transliteration system would seem to be a more prudent approach). So this leaves us with "Zhurivka" (which, incidentally, is BGN/PCGN's approved recommendation as well—something easily verified by going here, choosing "Ukraine" from the list of countries, entering "Згурівка" in the "Name" field, and hitting "search database"; note also that the "Zghurivka" spelling isn't even listed as a valid variant). Yes, that spelling is completely ambiguous with the romanization of "Журiвка" (which is also an existing toponym), but producing fully unambiguous spellings is not the goal of the BGN/PCGN romanization; standardization is. Making Zhurivka into a disambiguation page and including on it all places called "Журiвка" and "Згурiвка" is a perfectly valid solution. Whether one agrees that "Zhurivka" is a good romanization choice for "Згурiвка" or a horrible one, the fact remains that it is an approved BGN/PCGN variant, meaning that a good number of readers looking for it would be searching using the "Zhurivka" spelling.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); September 23, 2013; 14:03 (UTC)

Thank you for your recent articles, including White Factory, which I read with interest. When you create an extensive and well referenced article, you may want to have it featured on Wikipedia's main page in the Did You Know section. Articles included there will be read by thousands of our viewers. To do so, add your article to the list at T:TDYK. Let me know if you need help, Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:21, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Piotrus. I would need still to add a couple of things, and then a nomination help would be needed: I never review DYK articles since I do not feel sufficientl language proficiency, and I am well above 5 DYK's. --Ymblanter (talk) 06:30, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, My apoligies if I am doing a terrible job at contacting you like this but I am seeking an appeal to any and all wiki admin editors to please help with the Semi protected Royal Rife page. Their is an editor admin that has been watching that page for years and has been abusing his powers to keep the page locked in a state of ignorance and misinformation. It is a very poorly written page and Mastcell refuses to allow people to post factual , referenced , proven materials instead he insists that he is right and that black and white is the only way, his way, regardless of the references or truth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Rife

The page needs help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.247.104.253 (talk) 06:27, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am not going to unprotect the page right now, but if you post at the talk page of the article explaining what changes you want to make I will look at them (most likely not before Saturday).--Ymblanter (talk) 06:30, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Полюбуйтесь, какого прекрасного человека я тут нашла[14]. В наличии и мадам Грицацуева, и лейтенант Шмидт, и короли и капуста... Великолепный. И спасибо вам, Ярослав, что за моей страницей на коммонс приглядываете. --Shakko (talk) 07:11, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Не за что, и с днём рождения.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:13, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Will you please delete my user page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by HouseOfArtaxiad (talk • contribs) 17:59, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 18:46, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Stefan Čikić, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Panchevo (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) 11:47, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.How can you prove your undo of my edit?I think my activities were abided by the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:NCGN#Belarus - Major cities (voblast capitals) are named according to the most common English usage. ALL OTHER settlements are named according to national rules (exceptions may be discussed case by case).National rules are https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instruction_on_transliteration_of_Belarusian_geographical_names_with_letters_of_Latin_script. What wrong have I done?Mahilyow and Babruysk I left untouchable.Revert my edit back,please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dalakop (talk • contribs) 14:14, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, you reverted everything, including large cities like Mohilev. Second, as I noted, you should reach consensus in the discussion first. Please do not resume edit warring until consensus has been reached.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:47, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to add that while the Instruction on Transliteration is a regulation adhered to by the government of Belarus, the rest of the world is not obliged to use it. Wikipedia in particular uses the BGN/PCGN system, which is far more commonly used in the English-speaking world (of which the English Wikipedia is a part). The Instruction's renderings are welcome to be included in the first line of the articles, but the articles' titles should be per BGN/PCGN.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); October 7, 2013; 14:58 (UTC)

The main discussion is at User talk:Belamp, and I would appreciate if you post this message there as well, since two users achieved there a perfect agreement between each other and now call it "consensus".--Ymblanter (talk) 15:09, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Will do; thanks.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); October 7, 2013; 15:33 (UTC)

Great, thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:35, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Славочка, здравствуйте. А можно зафигачить это фото: http://proscena.ru/?p=85 – оно 1902 года рожд., выпускной класс, из них две балетные звезды, а остальные просто известные. Спасибо. Lawrentia (talk) 15:20, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Да, вроде, я не вижу проблем. Постараюсь попозже сделать. --Ymblanter (talk) 16:16, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Угу, в галерейку поставить. А то я боюсь, что фотография затеряется. Мне сейчас совершенно некуда ее пристроить, а ставить вообще ни во что – потом не найдешь. А если меня кто-нибудь будет обижать, я пожалуюсь Рожкову и Плисецкой – и они напишут, что он Берий. Thanks for your help. Thank you! Lawrentia (talk) 01:47, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Загрузил на коммонс, добавил к Tamara Karsavina в галлерею. Исправьте, пожалуйста,если что не так... Alex Bakharev (talk) 02:25, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, I somehow got sick and was not so active yesterday.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:22, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Мужики, спасибо. Слава, я не знала, что вы болеете. Я шутила: я к Рожкову и Плисецкой не буду обращаться, я их сама боюсь, я туда даже заходить боюсь. Это просто очень сильное впечатление от прошлой жизни. Выздоравливайте. Бахареву – орден дружбы. Я не знаю, есть ли здесь такой, но все равно награждается. Спасибо. А теперь посмотрите, как я сделала. Чего-то мне не очень нравится, как я сделала. Lawrentia (talk) 14:01, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for starting Julia Yeomans. I've added you to the "Online participants" for Wikipedia:WikiProject Women's History/The Royal Society 2013, as this section was looking rather thin! Edwardx (talk) 10:21, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is fine, though I am obviously going to edit in the hours convenient for me, not necessarily during the designated time.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:35, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ymblanter, you have already noticed the disruptive editing of User talk:Musarabbyahmad on city climates and other issues. Besides this, the user is reviling and attaking other editors in a very offensive language. Some are 1, 2, 3 and 4. I and others have warned him previously. I see you are an administrator. Can't you take any action? -AsceticRosé 13:45, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ymblanter, please don't block my editing. My work is to fix and re-correct the Wikipedia. I want to repair the climate box and arrange as true and real climates. Did you see any mistakes of climate? So look that, Amritsar fell in to −6.6°C, but the box was given into −3.2°C, so I want to fix it and make successful the Wikipedia. Hope you will be understand. Be a friendly broo... and don't listen this mad and mental user Asceticrose. Musarabbyahmad (talk) 14:12, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First, it is not appropriate to call other users "mad and mental". Second, the tables you correct are sourced. You change the numbers without changing the sources. This is not really appropriate. If you believe old sources are not good, and new sources should be used, please discuss this and in any case refer to the new sources. Otherwise, it is very difficult to understand why you replace numbers without any apparent reason.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:15, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey dude, listen to me. Be a friendly, so don't to be rude and boorish. Please try to understand. Hell with this "sources". I want to fix my Wikipedia and make the website 100% true. If you believe me, if you become my friend, I will be grateful for you. I need to help you, and I also help you, I know you seeming it is right pages. But mercilessly don't revert again. Musarabbyahmad (talk) 14:24, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You will be blocked immediately, since you obviously present threat to Wikipedia.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:25, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:George Zimmerman. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:16, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies: I misread your comment an ANI ("More of User:Holdek"). You hereby have permission to freely use "going forward" and "having said that" for the entire month, as often as you like. :) Drmies (talk) 22:58, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Will try to use it as often as I can in November, because I know in December it becomes blockable.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:22, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Since you contributed to the discussion resulting in the ban of Wikiexperts, you may want to consider the CEO's appeal at Wikipedia:AN#Ban Appeal of AKonanykhin. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 17:33, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will have a look later on.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:07, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think the protection on Anatoly Karatsuba can be dropped yet? Jackmcbarn (talk) 15:11, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We can try, and if inappropriate edits resume, I can always protect it back.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:45, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm getting unstuck in trying to compile a table of terminology for the Belarus geographical naming conventions. There appears to be a flood of new articles and stubs recently and it appears that English Wikipedia is now leading the way with transliteration/transcription norms (which, as we know, simply isn't Wikipedia's role). As the contributors don't seem to know what to do other than follow the current directives, we're ending up with orphaned pages and broken links absolutely everywhere.

My thoughts are to follow the Belarusian government standards for the English speaking world (which DON'T involve the irritating version of what is essentially Latinka), i.e. as laid out per this map and other official sites. What's good enough for the Belarus government should be good enough for us.

You can check the sad beginnings in my sandbox. Any constructive input from sensible Wikipedians would be appreciated.

I've left this message on Ezhiki and TaalVerbeteraar's pages as well. Cheers! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:54, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The beginning seems reasonable, thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:53, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, please can you clarify this - does not make sense for a number of reasons. GiantSnowman 17:48, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The user has been indeffed, and further discussion of his appeal does not make sense. He will presumably post an unblock notice at his talk page, and, depending on what will be in the notice, further discussion may be warranted. Also, if someone thinks Drmies's block is inappropriate, I believe this should be a topic for a separate thread. I do not see how what else can be discussed in this thread, but I am open to arguments, and if reasonable arguments have been given, I can unclose it.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:53, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, your close did not state that the user had been indeffed, merely that "Closed by Drmies for the time being." GiantSnowman 17:55, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I thought it would be obvious from the Drmies's statement in the thread. Will clarify now.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:00, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Newyorkbrad/Bradspeak. Drmies (talk) 18:10, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, have not seen this one before.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:18, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks both. GiantSnowman 18:37, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, you closed this AfD as 'delete' today, and I was wondering if it could be reopened. Leading up to this AfD there was a discussion here in which the AfD nominator was in a minority of one in a heated discussion on the topic. He then took it to AfD without informing anyone in that discussion, nor did he notify any motor sport Wikiproject. Furthermore, one of the two contributors to the AfD was an editor (MatstheGreat) who only has a few edits, all on the same day, all on AfDs, all delete, and all copying someone else's reasoning word for word. It just seems a bit shaky to me, and I know a few of us would like the chance to improve the article or do something to it, so that it might be kept. Cheers, Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:22, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I can reopen it for a week. Please remember though that if a large number of participants of motor sport Wikiprojects would arrive and vote without good arguments, the result is not going to change.--Ymblanter (talk) 23:29, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, understood. Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:31, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bretonbanquet is liar! Before whole discussion article already had speedy deletion - everyone reading article during discussion saw speedy deletion template or AfD template. He then took it to AfD without informing anyone in that discussion is clear lie - speedy deletion not contested by discussion participants reading article, so AfD no problem. You restart AfD for liar? FootballCleaner (talk) 01:18, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Understandably, I'm not particularly impressed by this personal attack. I didn't see the speedy delete or the AfD that you put on the PURE article, because I didn't read the PURE article during the discussion. Why? Because the discussion wasn't actually about the PURE article. It was about your persistent removal of information about PURE on a different article (2014 Formula One season). You did not inform anyone about your AfD, unless you can provide a diff to prove it. Bretonbanquet (talk) 01:38, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In fact there wasn't a single link to Propulsion Universelle et Recuperation d'Energie in that discussion. Bretonbanquet (talk) 01:45, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You say He then took it to AfD without informing anyone in that discussion. Deletion template started before discussion. Ymblanter check I say truth and deletion template was before discussion. Link was in article - noone in discussion reading article on topic discussed their fault, not reason attack me with lies. FootballCleaner (talk) 01:54, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you put the deletion template there before the discussion, and then discussed a related topic elsewhere without telling anyone you'd put PURE up for deletion. The discussion was not about the PURE article, it was about the 2014 season article. Did you even read WP:AfD? It says "After nominating: Notify interested projects and editors." You did not do that. Desist from calling me a liar. I think four times is enough, and someone else's talk page is not the place for this. Bretonbanquet (talk) 02:04, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You say on Ymblanter talk page lie I started deletion after discussion - I tell truth on Ymblanter talk page. FootballCleaner (talk) 02:12, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your friend Prisonermonkeys accuse me on talk delete after discuss.[15] Then I explain accuse wrong. [16] Then you tell same accuse Ymblanter talk page.[17] FootballCleaner (talk) 02:24, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 21:40, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Original Barnstar

I have already seen your editing on my Wiki Entry of "Milan Zeleny", who is my professor. I notice the copyright problem of my original page. Actually he has already sent the OTRS Permission Request to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. Give his permission of letting those contents released on Wikipedia. OTRS didn't reply yet and I think it still needs some time. Thanks so much for your contribution and editing~ I will talk to you later Zhuyuxiang (talk) 04:32, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I will leave than the stub as it is, if the OTRS comes back you ca always restore the previous version.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:15, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to discuss your relisting of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Transcendental Meditation research. You wrote that you were relisting because we were at "exactly 1/3 keeps". To me, there seems to be a clear consensus to merge/redirect the article (full disclosure: I !voted to do so in the AfD). If we're at only 1/3 keeps (assuming a vote-count is appropriate), then to me there's clearly a consensus to merge or delete the article. Of course, an AfD isn't necessary to redirect the article; any editor can simply enact the consensus to merge/redirect after the AfD closes. But I thought I'd check in with you to ask you to elaborate a bit on the reasoning behind re-listing rather than closing as consensus to merge/redirect. Thanks in advance - I know from experience that it's not fun to have people criticize your AfD closes, so please know that I'm not upset or questioning your judgement - I just would like to hear more about the reasoning behind it. Thanks. :) MastCell ^Talk 00:36, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If I counted correctly, we have 1/3 of keep votes and 2/3 or redirect + merge votes. You are right that it could have been closed as merge and redirect, however, this is just at the lowest border, one more keep vote would result in the no consensus closure. The keep votes come from users in good standing, who have their reasoning (which I may not exactly agree with, but this is irrelevant for the closure). I decided that in this situation it would be beneficial if the discussion stays open for one more week, so that new users have time to reflect on presented argumentation.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:40, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In the deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chen Zijie, I could only presented evidence of official to prove they were playing in the fully professional leagues, which was deemed as self-published document by the nominator. Finally, this discussion was closed by you and all articles were deleted. However, Chinese Super League is on the list of fully professional leagues. Geng Jiaqi, whose page was deleted in this discussion, is a Chinese footballer who is playing for Chinese Super League club Shanghai SIPG. He had played in a 2013 Chinese FA Cup match against another Chinese Super League club Qingdao Jonoon on 10 July 2013. Source:[18][19] According to WP:NFOOTBALL and discussion, this page is notable because this match was between two teams that both came from fully professional league. So I ask for permission to re-create this artical. Thanks. --Alexchen4836 (talk) 04:37, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My point is that AfD is not suitable to determine which league is fully professional. I suggest that you open the discussion and eventually add the leagues to Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues, and, if this is done by consensus, please ping me subsequently, and I restore the pages.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:57, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I opened a discussion in its talk page in October. However, proofs from the regulations and official website of the league were deemed as self-published sources. And I could not provide more convincing evidence. Among the articles at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chen Zijie, Geng Jiaqi is notable according to current rules. He played in the Chinese Super League, which was already in the list of fully professional leagues, and he played in a FA Cup played between two Super League clubs. I re-created and was deleted again. In the Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_105#Geng_Jiaqi, the administrator said that I needed to approach you and asked for permission to re-create. --Alexchen4836 (talk) 15:50, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid if you recreate it will be deleted again (not by me). But you can try of course.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:17, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If Geng_Jiaqi played in the Chinese Super League, I do not see problems to recreate it.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:20, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's the problem. I recreate the page of Geng Jiaqi, showing the proof, but it was deleted and the administrator said that I needed to ask you for permission to recreate his page. See Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_105#Geng_Jiaqi. --Alexchen4836 (talk) 04:08, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I userfied the article, User:Alexchen4836/Geng Jiaqi, please edit it so that it is obvious that he played at least one game in the Chinese Super League (right now it lists zero), reference it, and then move it to the main space.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:52, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Ymblanter. I'd be grateful for any input on this matter on my talk page. Cheers! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 05:31, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid I am missing a context there. Could you may be peovide a bit of a context? Why did the map question suddenly arise? Were there some previous discussions?--Ymblanter (talk) 09:00, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dag13 began changing the maps for CIS member countries several days ago without any indication as to what they were depicting. I even submitted a couple of deletion requests myself at Wikimedia Commons which I've since retracted. Please see this discussion on the Rusko-SNS.svg file. As I'd consider it to be useful to depict the CIS countries within a context (i.e., as per EU countries, the Germany page map and EU context as an example), I proposed that the legend be fixed and that they must be added with a link and legend simultaneously in the infobox, plus a clear edit summary as to what the maps are referencing. I'm envisaging that editors on some pages won't be as receptive to the idea as I am, so just wanted comments from others who might be interested. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 23:19, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:58, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	The Resilient Barnstar
	You are the pride and joy of Wikipedia! Without people like you Wikipedia would not move forward! Banaster Giver Extra Polite (talk) 11:37, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:02, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(Zhuyuxiang (talk) 20:21, 11 November 2013 (UTC))[reply]

Hi, Ymblanter:

Thanks for you time~ I first created the Wikipedia Page "Milan Zeleny" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milan_Zeleny. But then there is a potential copyright issue for this page. You help to re-edit that page last week if you can still remember.

The fact is first: I really get the permission from the copyright holder, which is my professor, Milan Zeleny. He allows me to post this text and photographs describing biographical information, personal CV information, professional information and professional publications on Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Actually the point of that Wikipedia page I created is to introduce the biography for this Czech-American economist.

Second, Professor Milan Zeleny has already written the Permission Request Letter and sent it to permissions-en@wikimedia.org two weeks ago. But there is no reply from OTRS until now. Milan Zeleny wrote this letter in reference to the template on Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries. As for the problem of the modification of the text from source http://ebooks.iospress.nl/Download/Pdf/29019, Milan Zeleny is copyright holder of the source book. In his Permission Request letter, he said he agree to contribute and publish that work under the free license "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported" and GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts).

So right now, how long should I keep waiting for the results from OTRS? How often does the OTRS respond to the Wikipedia user's request permission as for the copyright issue?

Could I send Milan Zeleny's permission letter directly to you or other administrator so that you can help me revert my original page assuming that you check and approve my permission request?

Thanks so much for your advice~

(Zhuyuxiang (talk) 20:21, 11 November 2013 (UTC))[reply]

User: zhuyuxiang

Unfortunately I have no relation to OTRS and can not answer this.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:30, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(Zhuyuxiang (talk) 20:55, 11 November 2013 (UTC))[reply]

I mean could I just send the copyright holder's permission letter to you rather than sending to OTRS? Do you or other administrators have the right to handle copyright issue, like reviewing user's the permission letter, giving the approval based on your judgement.

Because it waits so long without any results, I can also have Milan Zeleny, the copyright holder of the page content send his request permission to you directly. Basically, I don't think there is still the copyright issue on the Wikipedia page of "Milan Zeleny". The reason is that I did research on the Wiki policy of Donating the copyrighted material and Milan Zeleny's permission letter meets the Wiki requirements.

Thanks~ (Zhuyuxiang (talk) 20:55, 11 November 2013 (UTC))[reply]

No, I can not handle it. It should really be handled by OTRS, not by administrators.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:58, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ymblanter, I saw your question at the Articles for Creation Help Desk [20]. I'm not a member of that project, but I keep an eye on the help desk page and have often moved suitable draft articles listed there into main space (usually after fixing them up a bit). Any auto-confirmed editor can do it. I also add the AfC project template to the article's talk page. You can see an example at Talk:Piero Niro. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 07:40, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Can I just move the article to the main space and put the template at the talk page, or there are also some logs I need to take care of? I checked several atricles which were initially created as AfC, but could not find anything in the history which could help me.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:50, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There may be some logs somewhere, but if there are I never log anything. I do leave a personal note on the creator's talk page to tell them where the new article is and that they should feel free to expand and improve it. The problem with AfC is that experienced editors who are not project members often find the whole process arcane and off-putting with all its special scripts, templates (most of which can't be found without the script), "requirements" (some of which are rather silly), etc. and are afraid of making a mistake. I don't use the script and just go ahead and move appropriate drafts into article space, but not everyone is willing to do so. Thus, the project loses a lot of help from subject experts which would help clear their backlog and ensure that legitimate articles don't languish forever or are declined by AfC members not familiar with the subject matter. In fact, in the past I've found that some of them are even unfamiliar with notability criteria for special subjects and simply rely on WP:GNG. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:42, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see, thanks. I will then go ahead and move it to the mainspace.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:48, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Hope you're well. Can you translate this from Russian and expand? Not sure the spelling is correct Rumovsky I'd have thought would be better.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:37, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will have a look, though now and fore more weeks I am almost full-time busy at my real time job.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:08, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you restore, and redirect, or give me access to this article? I'd like to integrate what I can into the Ultra Monsters article Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 03:10, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Medeis/Miclas. Please do not forget to mark for speedy deletion when you are done.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:20, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I have finished with it and marked it (properly, I hope) for deletion. Really appreciate the help! μηδείς (talk) 18:39, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:25, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

		The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar
		For your consistent work on copyright cleanup and especially for your contributions to clearing the horrendous backlog at WP:CP. You are much appreciated. :) Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:53, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Maggie.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:57, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Vladimir Putin. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:15, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Keep votes in this AfD were precedent on WP:ANYBIO which says "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor", in this case the Queen's Service Order. Discussion was had on whether this Order is significant. However, the closing admin ignored the discussion (and thus the Keep votes), saying such a discussion was "outside the scope of AfD". The preceding would not look good in an RfC DRV :) I'm course happy that it was Kept through no consensus but would have liked a more solid rationale for future consensus and hope no one else does take it to RfC DRV it would probably be overturned. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 16:16, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

AfD is just not the place to decide whether QSO is sufficient for someone to pass WP:N. We had two people who presented solid argument it is, and two more presenting argument it is not. To me, this is no consensus closure: everybody agreeds on facts, but presents them differently. I do not think it could be in any way used for precedent for another QSO case. May be the best way to proceed is to open an RFC on whether QSO is sufficient for notability. (I personally have no opinion on this and probably would not vote).--Ymblanter (talk) 19:08, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I said "RfC" above but meant to say "DRV". Anyway, I don't think your position would hold up in DRV, but I'm not challenging it. Debating if a source or achievement is sufficient to meet the notability guidelines is the core purpose of AfD, it's exactly where such consensus is decided. If you believe there was no consensus in the debate, you could say no consensus and continue discussion elsewhere such as in an RfC, but the closing rationale said the discussion was "outside the scope of AfD" which is not accurate. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 19:56, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, I actually disagree. If we were talking about just a single article, yes, I could just close it as no consensus, and that would be the end of it. But now one can nominate other articles, where QSO would be the sole ground for keeping the article, and we would have the same discussion all over again. Instead, it should be a policy or, more likely, a guideline. To establish a policy or a guideline, AfD is insufficient, one needs to open a RfC. BTW feel free to challenge my closure at DRV if you want to, I certainly do not mind.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:01, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is no tradition in the English Wikipedia to establish policy or guidelines about specific awards automatically being notable. It's controversial to do so for a number of reasons. I understand the desire for easy and clear table of yes or no, but the guidelines are not that black and white. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 00:52, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[21] - вообще-то http://www.geoffreylandis.com/laser_ion_pres.htp является личным блогом http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoffrey_A._Landis , поэтому несмотря на самиздатность авторитетный источник ИМХО (по пункту "признанный авторитет в данной области"). Прошу помочь в данном вопросе. Заранее благодарю. Vyacheslav84 (talk) 17:36, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, I just wanted to drop a note and tell you I was sorry I confused you with another user over at the RFA talk page. Your usernames are close and I misread the username. 138.162.8.59 (talk) 19:31, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was indeed somehow surprised. Fine, no problem.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:43, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I was wondering if you'd do me another favor. Could you create a subpage of this deleted article for me? (I asked the deleting admin, but he hasn't responded and his talk says he doesn't edit regularly.) Thanks. I will post speedy delete and let you know when I am done. μηδείς (talk) 19:39, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Medeis/List of Ultraman Mebius monsters--Ymblanter (talk) 19:54, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I see this is going to be a more complicated project. Is it a problem if this page sticks around for a week or two? I think the best course is to create a single article for all monsters in the ultra universe, starting with the creator's notability and relation to godzilla. That will take a bit of integration and cutting. Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 20:11, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is definitely not a problem for me.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:23, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DOH SarahStierch (talk) 22:04, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As per your closing note at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lingdian can you please revert close. The close is counter to WP:DAB first paragraph and WP:RS sources mentioned in the AFD. There is a bit of trolling going on at the penultimate section of the discussion too. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:18, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid if you want someone to close a discussion differently you would have to take it to DRV. However, a much more productive way would be to create another article, wait for some time so that it does not get deleted, and recreate a dab which at that point would be a perfectly valid page.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:23, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is not really that productive an approach. WP:DAB is quite clear that that approach is incorrect. If it is correct then WP:DAB needs to be changed. Rather than constantly be creating forks, the more productive approach is for guidelines to be followed. So if you don't mind, and pleased don't take it personally, I will take it to WP:DRV. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:02, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I never take those things personally. We obviously disagree how the first paragraph of WP:DAB applies to this situation, and DAB looks to me like a reasonable way to get third opinions.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:14, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've requested a move of Lingdian (band) to Lingdian. Since you participated in the AfD for Lingdian, you may be interested in this discussion. --BDD (talk) 20:31, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:00, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:11, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:26, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(Zhuyuxiang (talk) 08:24, 27 November 2013 (UTC))[reply]

Hi~ Ymblanter

I created the Wiki page of Milan Zeleny, introducing American economist of Czech origin, currently a Professor of Management Systems at Fordham University.

You have help me edited this page by deleting the materials on my original page because of the copyright issue.

Right now, I am rewriting the page and rearrange the contents. But I have meet one problem about how to add this economist's previous publications?

This economist has a great amount of publications and these publications has been already displayed on a book written in honor of him.

Could I just select a few of publications from different research areas and then refer this headline topic "Publishing activities" to that book (specify the pages on that book)?

I am not quite sure~ Thanks

(Zhuyuxiang (talk) 08:24, 27 November 2013 (UTC))[reply]

The best is to select the most important publications. Just look at the articles on some other scientists or social scientists. In any case, the publication list is not copyrighted, there is no concern here.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:36, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for your advice. I got you. Contact me any time if you find problems on my page of Milan Zeleny, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milan_Zeleny

Your advice helps me improve the quality of the page~

(Zhuyuxiang (talk) 09:06, 27 November 2013 (UTC))[reply]

In the deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chen Zijie, I could only presented evidence of official to prove they were playing in the fully professional leagues, which was deemed as self-published document by the nominator. Finally, this discussion was closed by you and all articles were deleted. However, Chinese Super League is on the list of fully professional leagues. Geng Jiaqi, whose page was deleted in this discussion, is a Chinese footballer who is playing for Chinese Super League club Shanghai SIPG. He had played in a 2013 Chinese FA Cup match against another Chinese Super League club Qingdao Jonoon on 10 July 2013. Source:[22][23] According to WP:NFOOTBALL and discussion, this page is notable because this match was between two teams that both came from fully professional league. So I ask for permission to re-create this artical. Thanks. --Alexchen4836 (talk) 04:37, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My point is that AfD is not suitable to determine which league is fully professional. I suggest that you open the discussion and eventually add the leagues to Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues, and, if this is done by consensus, please ping me subsequently, and I restore the pages.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:57, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I opened a discussion in its talk page in October. However, proofs from the regulations and official website of the league were deemed as self-published sources. And I could not provide more convincing evidence. Among the articles at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chen Zijie, Geng Jiaqi is notable according to current rules. He played in the Chinese Super League, which was already in the list of fully professional leagues, and he played in a FA Cup played between two Super League clubs. I re-created and was deleted again. In the Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_105#Geng_Jiaqi, the administrator said that I needed to approach you and asked for permission to re-create. --Alexchen4836 (talk) 15:50, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid if you recreate it will be deleted again (not by me). But you can try of course.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:17, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If Geng_Jiaqi played in the Chinese Super League, I do not see problems to recreate it.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:20, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's the problem. I recreate the page of Geng Jiaqi, showing the proof, but it was deleted and the administrator said that I needed to ask you for permission to recreate his page. See Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_105#Geng_Jiaqi. --Alexchen4836 (talk) 04:08, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I userfied the article, User:Alexchen4836/Geng Jiaqi, please edit it so that it is obvious that he played at least one game in the Chinese Super League (right now it lists zero), reference it, and then move it to the main space.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:52, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Hope you're well. Can you translate this from Russian and expand? Not sure the spelling is correct Rumovsky I'd have thought would be better.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:37, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will have a look, though now and fore more weeks I am almost full-time busy at my real time job.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:08, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just read thru the ANI that you were just involved in, and wanted to tell you that I completely disagree with Nick Thorne's suggestion that you consider leaving the en.wikipedia, simply because of a minor language barrier. He had no business suggesting such rash action for such a minor incident. You are clearly an asset to this project and I, (along with others here, I'm sure) hope you stick around. In the meantime, if you're still concerned about the incident with HiLo, why not try some of the other dispute resolution methods available? Good luck - ^theWOLFchild 20:54, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I actually started with the Editor assistance, left a request there, and it did not get any attention. Now I saw that Diannaa left a message at the Hilo's talk page, and I unwatched 2014 Winter Olympics anyway, so I guess for the moment I am fine. But it was obviously a pretty unpleasant experience. Thanks for leaving the messages, here and at ANI.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:59, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Gabriel's Sex/Gender section on Gabriel talk page for more information.

Formal warning[edit]

Note: I added this section to your talk page to fulfill the Wikipedia policy requirements in-case we cannot agree on a fair comprise and therefore end up having to go through additional options for dispute resolution. Discussion on non-user conduct issues, including article content disputes, should all be listed on the article’s talk page.

Please do not remove article content that is currently under dispute, especially when it has already been marked with in-text dispute tags. Removing content that is actively under dispute is disruptive and vandalistic, as it’s removal can be seen as a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. The in-text dispute tags are there so people know the content is being disputed on the article’s talk page.

Your interpretations of Wikipedia policies and guidelines are not the only correct interpretations. If they were, there wouldn’t currently be an active dispute over article content. Moreover, consensus isn't reached just because a few people agree with you. Wikipedia:Consensus and Wikipedia:Closing discussions state this very clearly.

Additional attempts to remove or revert the article content currently under dispute will be reported on the Edit Warring Noticeboard. Edit warring isn’t necessary so let’s just please avoid it.

If we still cannot reach consensus after the 30-day RfC period has expired, we can always file disputes on the 1. Neutral Point of View Noticeboard, 2. No Original Research Noticeboard, and 3. Reliable Sources Noticeboard. I hope that some compromise can still be reached, but if it can't, at least we still have additional options available.

I’ve done my best to respond to your comments, all I ask is that you provide me with the same common courtesy. Wikipedia’s dispute resolution policy specifically requires discussion for a reason—accusations alone are not the same as discussion. Nothing will ever be resolved with accusations alone. I’m simply asking you to please follow Wikipedia’s dispute resolution policies, including Wikipedia:Consensus and Wikipedia:Closing discussions. Crice88 (talk) 07:23, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My only edit in the article is this and fully conforms with the policies.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:26, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable Sources Notice[edit]

Hello, This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Gabriel’s Sex/Gender. Thank you.

Neutral Point of View Notice[edit]

Notice of Neutral point of view noticeboard discussion[edit]

Hello, Ymblanter. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Hi,

I own the copyright to image File:Judge_Vaughn_Walker_official_portrait_United_States_District_Court_by_Scott_Johnston.jpg which you removed from Vaughn Walker's Page. I was commissioned by the Federal Government to paint it, which I did, and I photographed it as well. Please return it to the page.

Thank you, ScottScott Wallace Johnston (talk) 20:32, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I own the copyright to image File:Judge_Vaughn_Walker_official_portrait_United_States_District_Court_by_Scott_Johnston.jpg which you removed from Vaughn Walker's Page. I was commissioned by the Federal Government to paint it, which I did, and I photographed it as well. Please return it to the page.

Thank you, ScottScott Wallace Johnston (talk) 20:34, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Would you please send the permission to OTRS (as detailed at that page), once it gets reviewed, they would restore the image. Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:47, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Contacting OTRS is unnecessary according to the fact that I took the image myself and it hasn't been previously published (and there is no other copyright involved) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scott Wallace Johnston (talk • contribs) 21:10, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is no proof that you are the artist as you are writing this at my page. I understand that there is 99.9% chance that you are not an impresonator, but we can run in such a trouble if you were, that OTRS was set up as a legal way to deal with such images. I am not an OTRS member.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:16, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Frankenstein, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Paul McGuigan (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) 09:09, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to ask why you considered no consensus when none of the keep !voters actually showed evidence of WP:PERSISTENCE, just a report that hasn't been released yet. LibStar (talk) 07:14, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The keep voters have valid arguments which can not be discounted. You are welcome to take it to DRV of course.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:00, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of 2013 Saltsjöbanan train crash. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. LibStar (talk) 23:04, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Прошу помочь в разрешении спора. ИМХО товарищ перешел уже на принцип "не пропущу информацию в статью, будь там хоть 100 Аи." Vyacheslav84 (talk) 11:02, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

К сожалению, не вижу там никаких перспектив с Вашей стороны.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:02, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Но ведь Горбылев кандидат исторических наук и японист с цитированием в других научных трудах. Плюс теперь и потверждение в ВВС новостях. Vyacheslav84 (talk) 12:16, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

У меня, во-первых, нет уверенности, что Вы понимаете, что написал Горбылёв, во-вторых, практически нет уверенности, что Вы владеете предметом (и скорее есть уверенность, что Ваши оппоненты им владеют), и, в-третьих, что Горбылёв представляет собой мэйнстрим. Это очень здорово, что он президент федерации карате, но больше я о нём ничего найти не могу. В этой ситуации я не полезу в обсуждение предмета, в котором заведомо ничего не понимаю.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:19, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.dissercat.com/content/kult-gor-v-srednevekovom-mirovozzrenii-yaponii-na-materiale-pamyatnika-kontsa-khii-v-sedzan- Vyacheslav84 (talk) 12:21, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Я знаю. Не любые взгляды и не любого кандидата наук следует добавлять в статьи.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:27, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ну он еще старший преподаватель института Азии и Африки МГУ - http://www.msu.ru/science/dissert/1999/cand3.html. Допустим не в текст статьи, а в список литературы можно? Vyacheslav84 (talk) 12:35, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Теоретически, можно, но практически я не вижу, зачем. На английском полно литературы по теме. Если бы было переведено на английский и издано авторитетными издательствами, можно было бы что-то обсуждать, а так не вижу.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:49, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, please read: 1, Thanks. --88.235.135.8 (talk) 23:25, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is from July. The death has been since confirmed in multiple sources, including those which you were trying to remove from the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:35, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Info requested on the Draft namespace.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:24, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Здравствуйте. У нас в РуВики появилась новость о том, что в ЭнВики введено новое пространство имён mw:Draft namespace. Было бы крайне любопытно узнать о функционировании этого пространства. Можете ли Вы что-нибудь сообщить, если, конечно, Вам что-нибудь известно об этом. Я не знаю, какие у Вас здесь есть флаги, но не знаете ли Вы кого-нибудь в ЭнВики с флагом, кто явлется ещё участником и РуВики? Идеально было бы, если бы это был участник РуВики, но имеющий флаг администратора в ЭнВики. Есть ли хотя бы один такой? --OZH (talk) 09:07, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Вот RFC, вот объявление о включении (обещали сегодня). Проблема там была в том, что имеется проект Articles for Creation (AfC), в котором могут создавать статьи незарегистрированные участники. Этими заготовками долгое время мало кто занимался, и их накопилось очень много, а статьи из AfC, которые не были перенесены в основное пространство и полгода не редактировались, подлежат быстрому удалению. Недавно группа участников развила большую активность по рабоде над старыми статьями оттуда, и RFC стала следствием этой работы. Будут ли в новое пространство имён перенесены собственно заготовки из AfC, пока никто не обсуждал. Русскоязычных администраторов тут не более десятка, я по памяти могу назвать пять, включая меня, никто из них не является активным участником русской Википедии.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:24, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Отметим для протокола, что участник за 10 дней даже не счёл необходимым сказать спасибо (что заняло бы куда меньше времен, чем я потратил, пытаясь найти ответ на вопрос). В следующий раз, соответственно, с такими вопросами к кому-нибудь другому.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:08, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Carol of the Bells. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:10, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, also best wishes to you.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:20, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Happy holidays, Ymblanter. I think the photo you took of the Babson-Alling House in Gloucester, MA, is actually of the White-Ellery House. See also the MACRIS entry for Babson-Alling, which shows a rather different house. Magic♪piano 03:13, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This might be, there were indeed no signs in this part of the town, and no house numbers, so we just calculated that it should have been on the correct side of the street. I knew there should have been two listings in the area, but was only able to find one. On the other hand, I am not 100% sure it is White-Ellery House. What should we best do? I am sure the coordinates I corrected for the building I took the picture of.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:26, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My theory, based on Google Street View, is that Babson-Alling is the house to the right of White-Ellery and its barn, behind wooden fencing. It's at least got a gambrel roof, but it will take a field visit to check out other features. Your photo pretty clearly matches other images of the White-Ellery I've seen. (And, of course, even the presence of house numbers is no guarantee of having the right house. See my talk page for a discussion of one problematic house, Caleb Willey House.) Magic♪piano 13:43, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, now I see that on my photo there is actually a sign, and it says White-Ellery House. Let me then rename it and do the cleanup.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:20, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Think "less than that" means that she was wearing less than a bikini when photographed for Stern... AnonMoos (talk) 10:58, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see, thanks. Please feel free to revert / reformulate.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:59, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@AnonMoos: SOrry to jump out of nowhere, but, I saw this on my watchlist. First, this needs a source urgently -- to the point I have removed it, as lacking German knowledge, I was unable to source it, and, second, it is easily misunderstood, and could benefit from less clunky wording. Courcelles 07:18, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Sue, also best wishes to you.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:35, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Желаю вам всего самого наилучшего в новом году! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:42, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Спасибо, и Вам также.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:36, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just FYI, the user who was repeatedly adding the disputed material has (after implying I am an illiterate liar) apparently decided not to edit there anymore so the protection probably is not needed anymore. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:04, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I have seen this yesterday night. I will check the situation now (my early morning) and unprotect if there are no other issues. Thanks for pinging me.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:27, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Дорогой Славочка! С Новым годом и много-много радостей в этом Новом году! Спасибо за помощь и поддержку. И - как сказал один наш замечательный общий знакомый, - сбыта всех мечт! --Lawrentia (talk) 14:27, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Спасибо, Вам тоже всего наилучшего.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:31, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Privet Yaroslav!

I want to propose a change to the lang-ru template, and I would be very interested in knowing your opinion, before proposing it formally. I've explained it on Ezhiki's talk page, although he probably hasn't seen it yet, as he doesn't normally read his talkpage during the weekend :)

It's here: User_talk:Ezhiki#Change_to_lang-ru

Cheers! Azylber (talk) 18:18, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will have a look.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:27, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:RaBOTnik :) Azylber (talk) 05:41, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great, I hope we will get some development. Unfortunately my understanding of bots is close to nothing, probably much less than that of Ezhiki.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:45, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a problem, I will code it! I've also chosen the name, I thought you'd like it haha Azylber (talk) 05:51, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've placed the request :) [[24]] Azylber (talk) 22:55, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've been working on task zero. I've written an update on what I've done and what I've found in the data that I've analysed, and also there is a little something I need help with, if you're interested :) Please take a look: User:Azylber/RaBOTnik/Task0/Question1 Azylber (talk) 08:53, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Azylber/RaBOTnik/Task0/Question1 :) Azylber (talk) 18:37, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I did it quite a while ago, but I will have one more look.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:38, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, no, sorry, I put the wrong link!! I meant to put User:Azylber/RaBOTnik/Task0/Question2 Azylber (talk) 18:41, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, started. Note than some of the entries are ambiguous, and some are acronyms and do not have an established stress.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:54, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, we should ignore the ambiguous ones. That's what the bot's going to do I suppose! Azylber (talk) 18:59, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there :) We need to finish question 2. If you guys are busy, perhaps you could suggest one more person we could ask for help? Thanks!! Azylber (talk) 12:56, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In November, I brought it to 9 occurrences (done some with 8, but by far not all). How far do you thing we should bring it down? 5?--Ymblanter (talk) 14:41, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've just taken care of 7s and 6s.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); December 6, 2013; 14:55 (UTC)

Yeah, when we met in October we said that 5 was a reasonable number. If you still think that's the case, then let's do the 5's and then I'll put the info in the bot and see what happens :) Azylber (talk) 15:02, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will try to finish it tonight.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:07, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've finished compiling the list of words, and I've almost finished writing the bot. Now I'm ready to start the real tests on the BOT's sandbox, so it's all good news!

I need help with a little thing. I've put the bot on a hosting account which is shared (hostmonster) and apparently the IP of the server is blocked, because someone a long time ago tried to abuse wikipedia from an account from that same hosting company.

So would you please be able to place an IP block exemption flag on RaBOTnik?

Thanks! Azylber (talk) 20:21, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, just done.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:39, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Azylber (talk) 20:43, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, now it works! The bot is now able to edit pages. Thanks! Azylber (talk) 20:55, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's really cool indeed.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:00, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it means now I can do the trial! Will keep you informed. Azylber (talk) 21:12, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Good news! Look here Azylber (talk) 19:30, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great. I guess now we are waiting for final approval.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:36, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet, unfortunately. There's been some feedback here (I'm not sure how to deal with it) Azylber (talk) 16:09, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]