Ev
Welcome!
Hi Evv, and a warm welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you have enjoyed editing as much as I did so far and decide to stay. Unfamiliar with the features and workings of Wikipedia? Don't fret! Be Bold! Here's some good links for your reference and that'll get you started in no time!
- Editing tutorial, learn to have fun with Wikipedia.
- Picture tutorial, instructions on uploading images.
- How to write a great article, to make it an featured article status.
- Manual of Style, how articles should be written.
Most Wikipedians would prefer to just work on articles of their own interest. But if you have some free time to spare, here are some open tasks that you may want to help out :
Oh yes, don't forget to sign when you write on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~~~~. This will automatically add your name and the time after your comments. And finally, if you have any questions or doubts, don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Once again, welcome! =)
getting things right
Yeah, i realised that was what he meant, just thought I'd do a little creative quoting. Seriously though, if the intro ends up just the way it is now, that's fine by me. I really just think that if there's a little compromise, things will settle down. In retrospect, using the term 'contested' is probably pushing it a little - after all, all parties involved signed up to UNSCR 1244. It just bugs me when people refuse to discuss compromise, although this is no doubt due in large part to the lengthy and annoying argument which seems to have gone on long before I even knew this article existed.
As a side note, however, I really do think there's a moral responsibility to get things right in wikipedia, especially now that it's creeping up the rankings for google searches on just about anything. Of course, who determines what's right is going to be another interesting issue... Happy Wednesday to you too.Davu.leon 14:15, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
laskaris
yes, they should. but, as long as there is no article about the dynasty, i would let it go to Theo II. Maed 22:26, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Ferick RfC
I've posted a user-conduct request for comments on Ferick following his latest bout of edit-warring - it's time to put an end to it. Please feel free to add your comments at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Ferick. -- ChrisO 01:15, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
Arbitration request on Kosovo
Dear Editor, since you have been involved in editing the Kosovo article in the last months, and that article has been the subject of long ongoing edit wars, your name is listed in the Request for Arbitration on this matter. You can make a statement here: Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Kosovo. Due to the large number of editors involved, however, I would to ask you to keep your statement concise and to the point. If you feel you have not been substantially involved in the disputes surrounding the Kosovo article, please do not remove your name from the Arbitration request, but rather make a short statement there explaining why you feel you have not been involved enough to be part it. To understand my reasons for requesting Arbitration, please read my statement on the Requests for Arbitration page. Best regards, Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 10:12, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
This case is going to be a rather complex one due to the large number of users involved. I would prefer to simplify the evidence-giving stage to make it easier for the Arbitration Committee - how would you feel about giving a joint statement of evidence? I'm happy to make a start on such a statement, which you'd be free to add to or modify as you wish. -- ChrisO 20:36, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- Good idea, go ahead with it. Evv 21:54, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Hello,
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kosovo. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kosovo/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kosovo/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Tony Sidaway 16:49, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
- I've just added the joint statement of evidence to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kosovo/Evidence. -- ChrisO 00:11, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Temporary injunction in the Kosovo arbitration
For the duration of this case, any of the named parties may be banned by an uninvolved administrator from Kosovo or related pages for disruptive edits.
You are receiving this message because you are one of those covered by this injunction.
For the arbitration committee. --Tony Sidaway 17:55, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi Evv,
I just noticed a new series of reverts had started on Kosovo. Although I understand your good intentions, I think it is better not to revert too much at the moment. The abitration is still going on and more people than regularly are therefore monitoring Kosovo. Just let them for now, there is not much harm it that. Best regards, --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 12:03, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- I know, thanks for mentioning it anyways. :-) I wasn't going to revert a third time, and was instead opening the Kosovo talk page (in a new attempt to ask Dardanv & Kushtrimxh for discussion instead of reverts) when I saw that orange "new message" notification. Thanks again. Regards, Evv 12:15, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- DardanV is doing the same thing he tried on in April. See my latest statement at the workshop. Regards, Asteriontalk 19:10, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Reply
That section has been reworded.. On the other hand I am new to Wiki and haven't followed the discussion page about this issue.. On the other hand, pls also note that the section talks about the stumbling blocks in the candidacy of Turkey to join the EU; human rights and Cyprus are mentioned in the accession reports, where as this isn't.. There has not been a formal demand from the EU and the European Commission in the candidacy process, and thus it would not be considered as a stumbling block since the EU has not made such a formal demand. I am not beating around the bush, it could be considered as such in other issues, but not the one about Turkish-EU relations (please note that the EU is a seperate identity than the states that compose it, therefore the section is named as such, not Turkish-European relations).. The same goes for proximity to the Middle East and poor economy.. These are not found in any of the EU accession documents.. They talk about market reforms, yes, but not a poor economy.. Same goes for Middle East, what is the proof that it is a stumbling block in the accession process? I know that it is a factor in the sense that there are issues arising from it, but it is way too much of a blanket statement to be included in that part.. Cheers! Baristarim 21:09, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not taking a stand on this issue, it can be mentioned in other articles, but here it is not appropriate, it gives the impression that recognition of the Armenian Genocide is a prerequisite of Turkey's adhesion to the EU, whereas it isn't.. Some people might want it to be so, but until there is a formal demand from the EU, it is not the case... I will also like to mention that the resolution in question was non-binding.. Baristarim 01:15, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
The edit war over the inclusion of the genocide in Turkey-EU relations seems to be continuing. Could you help us reach consensus? Yandman 08:11, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
- You can contribute to the RfC at Talk:Turkey#Request_for_Comment:_Sanitization_of_Turkish_history. Yandman 07:56, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Detector
Hello detector. How you know thate it was Hipi Zhdripi [1]? Who gives you the right to write something in name Hipi? ChrisO? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hipi Zhdripi (talk • contribs) 05:11, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
- Much to your credit, Hipi Zhdripi, you don't deny being the one making those comments, quite the opposite: you often sign "Hipi" and let other people answer addressing you so.
- I attributed the comments for clarity, as stated in WP:SIG:
- Signing ... posts on talk pages ... is not only good etiquette; it also facilitates discussion by helping other users to identify the author of a particular comment, to navigate talk pages, and to address specific comments to the relevant user(s), among other things. Discussion is an important part of collaborative editing as it helps other users to understand the progress and evolution of a work.
- Regards, Evv 15:15, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
Italics in Cyrillics
Is there any agreement on removing italics from Cyrillics, or is it just your personal preference. If latter, please add them back - style issues like that need to be agreed in advance. Zocky | picture popups 02:04, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
- It's just my personal preference (in Greek too). I didn't found anything in Wikipedia:Manual of Style (text formatting)#Italic type, nor consistency in the articles, so I decided to be bold and "increase readability".
- You're right: I'm stopping and raising the issue in:
- I will revert everything if it results in adopting italics for Cyrillic & Greek. - - Regards, Evv 02:21, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
This case is now closed and the results have been published at the link above.
For edit warring, personal attacks, and other disruption, PerfectStorm/C-c-c-c is banned from editing Wikipedia for one year. For edit warring and incivility, Bormalagurski is banned from editing Wikipedia from one year. For edit warring and disruptive use of sockpuppets, Dardanv under any username or IP, is banned from editing Wikipedia for one month.
Hipi Zhdripi is limited to his one named account, Hipi Zhdripi. All edits by Hipi Zhdripi under another account or an IP address shall be treated as edits by a banned user.
Ilir pz, Hipi Zhdripi, Vezaso are banned for one year from editing articles related to Kosovo. Relation to Kosovo is to be interpreted broadly so as to prevent gaming. Either may be banned from any related non-article page for disruptive editing. All articles related to Kosovo are put on Article probation to allow more swift dealing with disruption. Editors of Kosovo and related articles who engage in edit warring, incivility, original research, or other disruptive editing, may be banned for an appropriate period of time, in extreme cases indefinitely.
ChrisO is warned not to engage in edit warring, and to engage in only calm discussion and dispute resolution when in conflict. He is instructed not to use the administrative rollback tool in content disputes and encouraged to develop the ability and practice of assisting users who are having trouble understanding and applying Wikipedia policies in doing so. .
Dardanv, Ferick, Laughing Man, Osli73, and Tonycdp are placed on Probation for one year. Each may be banned from any page or set of pages for disruptive edits, such as edit warring or incivility.
Ilir pz, Hipi Zhdripi, Vezaso, Dardanv, Ferick, Laughing Man, Osli73, and Tonycdp are placed on standard revert parole for one year. Each is limited to one revert per article per week, excepting obvious vandalism. Further, each is required to discuss any content reversions on the article's talk page.
For the Arbitration Committee. Arbitration Committee Clerk, 03:38, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
A friendly little reminder
When you reverted to Shugo255's version of Poland you actually restored some vandalism, since Shugo255 is as much a vandalism account as Racejr. Scobell302 17:26, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
- Oops. That's precisely why I should avoid multitasking. Sorry, and thanks for bringing it up. - Evv 17:36, 24 October 2006 (UTC)