User talk:Miyokan - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by NuclearVacuum (talk | contribs) at 10:45, 5 May 2008. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 10:45, 5 May 2008 by NuclearVacuum (talk | contribs)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Soviet Intervention in Afghanistan article

I agree with the criticisms you posted in the Soviet-Afghanistan article.

Mark Urban wrote an excellent book about this war...it is comprehensive and objective. I wish this book could be referenced in the article. The title is "War in Afghanistan" (1988).

Please contact me on my discussion page with any comments, etc. Kenmore (talk) 20:44, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

3rd deletion of Guardian reference

May I bring to your attention the following: Talk:Russian_presidential_election,_2008#Election_fairness:_deletions_of_criticism_by_User:Miyokan. You have deleted the same material 3 times. Could you please re-instate the deletion or I will ask an adminstrator to follow this up. Thanks. Pgr94 (talk) 02:14, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

With all due respect, I believe that Miyokan has a good point in this case.

The author of an article in a media source can make any outlandish, unsupported claim he/she wants without needing to validate the truth of their claims. This is acceptable in journalism, but it is not an acceptable way of footnoting encyclopedia articles. Just because an author asserts that something happened does not necessarily mean that the referenced event did indeed take place. The source of the author’s information needs to be considered in these cases.

Many assertions in Misplaced Pages articles are footnoted in grotesque and irresponsible ways. This kind of referencing makes a mockery of truth and research, even on an amateur level. The poor footnoting of these articles would make them unacceptable even as college undergraduate papers, never mind using them for an encyclopedia.Kenmore (talk) 17:01, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Ronald Reagan edits

Out of respect (which I actually have for the strength of your edits, esp. in the Kosovo article), I waned you to know that I reverted the larger part of your edits because I think they should be discussed. I have found through hard experience that having a lot of agreement (read: consensus) is the best way to preserve the integrity of the edits you are adding. A little time spent in gathering consensus through discussion beforehand is a lot better than spending a lot more time dealing with tendentious editing by miffed people who felt they "needed" to be consulted before such changes were enacted. As someone who has worked that particular article a lot, I have seen this mentality appear, and would prefer that your time would be better spent securing those edits before their placement. Please do not read any disrespect into my revert. :) - Arcayne () 20:39, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I know you feel like Hap and Biophys are ganging up on you, but remember to take the higher ground, and only address the edits, and not the editors. Your arguments are strong ones. Stick with them. :) - Arcayne () 14:48, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

reverts

Please stop reverting all of my edits. And by the way, the sourced information on Ukrainian nationalism is not a theory at all, its a fact. Perhaps inconvenient, but a fact nonetheless. Ostap 02:27, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Your frustration of being stalked

Best to ignore stalkers as much as possible. If someone is so obsessed about you as to scrutinize your edits, please be calm. It maybe a short incident with a good editor getting too upset about something. As for consistent stalkers, laugh this off. Think about it. How pity one's life must me if the person has nothing better to do with their time than follow you around and study your edits! And do not ever respond in kind. See also here. Seek help or confront stalkers only if there is absolutely no choice. --Irpen 09:59, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Poltava

I'm sorry but you can't overwrite the previous numbers of Swedish casualties because they are supported by a source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Irtehprwn (talk • contribs) 21:51, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, but what is the credibility of that source? Many Misplaced Pages articles are supported by citations from non-expert sources, fringe academics, etc. These kinds of citations lack authority and they should not be used to establish the verity of a purported "fact" in a Misplaced Pages article.

I am not Miyokan (as someone suggested) but I do agree with his reasons for editing some Russian history related articles here.Kenmore (talk) 22:39, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Question

Hi, can I ask why did you lie here? The description of the image clearly states that the unit was made up of multiple nationalities, yet in the caption's description you chose to (wrongly) single out one group. I would like to ask you why you did so?

The description from the image is provided below:

Warsaw Ghetto Uprising- Photo from Jürgen Stroop Report to Heinrich Himmler from May 1943. The original German caption reads: "Askaris used during the operation". Two Askari or Trawniki guards, peer into a doorway past the bodies of Jews killed during the suppression of the Warsaw ghetto uprising. The unit trained in village of Trawniki was made up of Ukrainians, Russians, Belorussians, Poles, Estonians, Lithuanians, Latvians, ethnic Germans, Kazakhs and Tartars.--Riurik 05:23, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Please don't assume bad faith and accuse me of lying. The uploaders description says "Two Ukrainian members of the SS, known as "Askaris," peer into a doorway past the bodies of Jews killed during the suppression of the Warsaw ghetto uprising." Furthermore, did you even look at the source?--Miyokan (talk) 05:25, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

My fault on the bad faith. No, I did not look at the source. I see it now. Do you know the original source on which the website is relying to make that identification?--Riurik 05:47, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

It says "Photo credit: Polish National Archives".--Miyokan (talk) 05:48, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I saw that, but that only refers to the actual source of the photograph, not the statement that the two militiamen are "Ukrainian." Do you happen to know what was the source used by the Florida Center for Instructional Technology when they created the Teacher's Guide?--Riurik 05:55, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Of course if it says that they got the photo from the Polish National Archives they would have got the caption from there too.--Miyokan (talk) 05:57, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. The PNA provided the photograph, but only on the Florida Center for Instructional Technology website are we told that the militia are specifically Ukrainian, which is not substantiated anywhere else that is why I was asking about it. We do know that they are both Askari; their nationality could be any of the nationalities that were trained in the village of Trawniki: The unit trained in village of Trawniki was made up of Ukrainians, Russians, Belorussians, Poles, Estonians, Lithuanians, Latvians, ethnic Germans, Kazakhs and Tartars. I suggest we describe them accordingly, pending future clarification.--Riurik 06:10, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Verifiability, not truth, unless you can find a source of that photo that says that they weren't Ukrainian that is what we go by. "The unit trained in village of Trawniki was made up of Ukrainians, Russians, Belorussians, Poles, Estonians, Lithuanians, Latvians, ethnic Germans, Kazakhs and Tartars." - besides the fact that this is not in the source, this is describing the unit that they were part of, not the photo.--Miyokan (talk) 06:29, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

You are making the claim of nationality, and need to fist establish that they are XYZ before shifting the burden of proof. To do so you argue that their nationality is claimed by a website (Florida Center for Instructional Technology), which got its content from the PNA. One of the requirements of the Verifiability policy is the reliability of sources, which the website does not fulfill in light of the fact that Askari were made up of multiple nationalities, so who says that they were "Ukrainian"? What I am saying is that the website got the photo from the Polish National Archives, which it explicitly credits for the photo. It also disclaims that The original German caption reads: "Askaris used during the operation.". It does not say that these were of a specific nationality. So I argue that the wikipedia's caption should be Two Askaris rather than two "nationality"--Riurik 06:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

In fact the source mentions the German caption and says that they were Ukrainian, there is no contradiction, please see verifiability, not truth, unless you provide a source of that photo that says they were some other nationality that is what we go by.--Miyokan (talk) 06:56, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

You can't hide behind "verifiability, not truth" if the source is not reliable and if that same source does not say what you say (which is that the two askari are Ukrainian). Source #1 is the website which claims nationality. Source #2 is the original source that was presumably provided by the PNA and is the German original caption. The second, or the original source, identifies the two men as Askari. The first source attributes nationality to them, but has no basis for it and does not substantiated this claim. It is not a reliable source and hence does not fit the Verifiability policy. I think I have expressed my opinion clearly on this and you seem to have expressed yours as well. The Misplaced Pages caption has to reflect the original source, which says "Two askari". I will make the proper edits to reflect what we have at hand.--Riurik 07:07, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Please stop trying to whitewash this. The website source got their caption from where they got their photo, which is the Polish National Archives, you are assuming that they didn't get the caption from where they got the source, see WP:V. Even if they didn't write where they got the photo from, it doesn't matter per WP:V unless you provide a different source of the same photo that says that they weren't Ukrainian.--Miyokan (talk) 07:11, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I think there is too much noise here over nothing. This pic does not give much info that can be helpful for this article anyway. All it shows are two men who took part in atrocities. They may have been Ukrainian but even if they were, there is nothing more to this picture that (even if the caption is authentic) adds to the fact that Askaris took part in the pogroms and the Ukrainians wre among them. There is nothing on these men that identifies them Ukrainian or illustrate the Ukrainian part of collaboration in any way. The pro-Nazi parades by nationalists in Lviv with Ukrainian regalia, nationalist priests' public blessings to the collaborant formations, recruitment posters for Waffen-SS Galician division with the Galician Lion and Swastika next to each other, yes. Those would illustrate the topic. But not two thugs kicking out some door in some house, Ukrainian or not. --Irpen 07:17, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Whether the picture gives much info is neither here nor there, you can't argue "you can't prove that they weren't Ukrainian", one of wikipedia's cornerstone policies is verifiability, not truth, if that wasn't the case then you can say about hundreds of photos here that you "can't prove they were X", we have a source here that says the were Ukrainian askari, now unless you can provide a different source of the same photo that says that contradicts this then we go by the source. Please don't attempt to whitewash something you saw that you didn't like with invalid arguments like "you can't prove that they were Ukrainian".--Miyokan (talk) 07:22, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

What is that "I don't like"? What am I trying to "whitewash"? Please choose your words more carefully. I replaced the image with much more fitting the article and I will add more if you give me more time. As a general note, please slow down a little. You are a hard-working contributor and I spoke up when you were unfairly treated not once. Do not jump the gun and accuse fellow editors like that. And please try to seek the compromise more often. --Irpen 07:52, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

If that comment offended I apologize. So you don't have comment on the substance of what I wrote? I don't see the potential for any compromise here, we either say Ukrainian askari as the source says and per WP:Verifiability, or we don't.--Miyokan (talk) 08:56, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

And that puts an end to this discussion .--Miyokan (talk) 11:12, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Miyokan, I resent your arbitrary choice with words, for example when you wrote that I am trying to whitewash this. All I was trying to do here is to make sure that whatever the claims made on wikipedia are backed up with reliable and verifiable sources. When you make a statement and back it up with an unreliable website, YOU WILL BE CHALLENGED until you produce a reliable and verifiable source.

The Florida Center for Instructional Technology was verifiable but it WAS NOT reliable (as the WP:Verifiability requires in the 1st sentence). Encylopedia Britannica is a whole different story. So in the future think twice before accusing others with crap like "whitewashing."

Whitewashing is denying that there was a nuclear explosion at a power plant for days while radiation was spreading, or that the tragedy of Kursk submarine was due to minor difficulties. It is not a challenge of unreliable sources.--Riurik 18:39, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Once again I apologize if I offended. This is not to say that I think my argument or "whitewashing" analysis was wrong, the Flordia Center for Instructional Technology is indeed a reliable source, it is an educational institution and part of the University of South Florida, certainly a reliable source. I hope we leave this with no hard feelings.--Miyokan (talk) 00:57, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Reconstructed grozny.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Reconstructed grozny.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:29, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the edit to AK article

Please see my comment to Nick here.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:43, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Crime in Russia

Hi, just to inform you about the article Crime in Russia that I have divided the article into nine sections i.e. History, Drug trafficking, Human trafficking, Arms trafficking, Poaching, Homicide, Corruption, Crime statistics and International comparison. Please review the article and since you are a member of WikiProject Russia, I will tell you to please assess the article for the project. I want opinion of Russian editors for the improvement of the article. Any suggestion from you for the development of the article regarding style or NPOV will be appreciated. Thanks. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 03:31, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Anti-Russian sentiment

You keep reverting my corrections to the Anti-Russian sentiment. In particular I corrected that it far from truth that each and everyone in South-East of Ukraine is dreaming of joining with Russia. You keep reverting me in violation of WP:EW and on the werge of WP:3RR. This is a warning to stop and review your actions. --Greggerr (talk) 08:50, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Travniki men

I think you can find some info from IMT usefull for some articles Jo0doe (talk) 15:18, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Grozny pictures

Hey can you drop me an e-mail about them?--Kuban Cossack 15:05, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I added one modern pic to Grozny. If more is needed, let me know. I received an email permission from a Russian journalist to use his pictures under cc-by-sa. --Irpen 20:10, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Russian template warning

I am giving you a fair warning. I do not wish to call your work "vandal," but this needs to stop.

We already agreed on three cities that you can click on to enlarge, and you went against this again. You removed the abbreviaions, witch makes the article very runny and uneasy. There is a reason that abbreviations were made for countries, because their full name may be too big to put in a letter. Please do not alter this, this is a universal agreement. And the toolbox on the bottom is a very important part of a template. It helps to make the article easier to reach from the parent article.

I am giving you a fair warning. Please reframe from removing the images, abbrieviatons, and the toolbox from this and all other templates. If this continues, I am either going to get an administrator involved or form a WikiProject to officially standardize these templates. — Nuclear Vacuum 18:07, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I am letting you be aware that I have brought this issue on the administration of Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Cities, witch does look and agrees with standardization of these templates. And for you and your past deletions and unnecessary edits (witch I am argued with many on your talk), I have brought your behavior upon the knowledge of administrators. I have given you fair warning and you choose to not even acknowledge them. And now if you continue to undo my corrections of your edits, I will bring it on the board of possible blocking you from Misplaced Pages for 24 hours. Please acknowledge this and read my warnings. I am not trying offer you the information so you are not considered a vandal on Misplaced Pages. If you wish to be branded one, just keep it up, it won't be long. — Nuclear Vacuum 01:29, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I may not own it, I never said I did. But I have experience in these templates and that means I have some say in the argument in them. I agree with your edits to this templates, but there are many flaws on the. Writing the whole name makes the template too big and runny, very "unpolished." This is why I choose the mailing code, it helps to make it easy to read and perfect for these templates. And for the two pictures, you already agreed on making them two in the agreement of changing Novosibirsk's picture. Why are you changing this on your edits. And please stop altering your statement on my talk page.

If you can find me five templates, that are part of the same project, I will take back my statement on that all templates are standardized. — Nuclear Vacuum 01:47, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:Birch forest Siberia.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:Birch forest Siberia.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section I3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only," "non-derivative use" or "used with permission," it has not been shown to comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content. , and it was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19, or is not used in any articles. If you agree with the deletion, there is no need to do anything. If, however, you believe that this image may be retained on Misplaced Pages under one of the permitted conditions then:

state clearly the source of the image. If it has been copied from elsewhere on the web you should provide links to: the image itself, the page which uses it and the page which contains the license conditions.
add the relevant copyright tag.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on ] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Polly (Parrot) 02:20, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:Moscow city march 2008.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:Moscow city march 2008.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section I9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.

Replaceable fair use Image:State duma.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:State duma.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Misplaced Pages articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Polly (Parrot) 02:22, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:Moscow Kremlin Wall River.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:Moscow Kremlin Wall River.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section I3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only," "non-derivative use" or "used with permission," it has not been shown to comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content. , and it was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19, or is not used in any articles. If you agree with the deletion, there is no need to do anything. If, however, you believe that this image may be retained on Misplaced Pages under one of the permitted conditions then:

state clearly the source of the image. If it has been copied from elsewhere on the web you should provide links to: the image itself, the page which uses it and the page which contains the license conditions.
add the relevant copyright tag.

3-revert warning

You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule on Template:Russian cities. Please cease further reverts or you may be blocked from editing. 3 reverts in under 22 hours: ; ; . Please read the talk of the template.

Please do not make false claims about me, or threaten what you want for rules on Misplaced Pages. — Nuclear Vacuum 10:45, 5 May 2008 (UTC)