User talk:Jo0doe

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1 Welcome
2 Fair use rationale for Image:Arableland ukr.jpg
3 Fair use rationale for Image:Ukrrailwto.jpg
4 Citing sources
5 Fair use rationale for Image:1926censusmapping.jpg
6 Fair use rationale for Image:1926-censkuban.jpg
7 Your question
8 English Dictionary Definition of ARMY
9 Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Ukrexpimp19281934.jpg
10 Please choose you words carefully
11 Orphaned non-free media (Image:Radgosp.jpg)
12 NPA
13 Orphaned non-free media (Image:Ukrratio.jpg)

[edit] Welcome

Hello, Jo0doe, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Irpen 05:03, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Arableland ukr.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Arableland ukr.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 07:47, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Ukrrailwto.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Ukrrailwto.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

[edit] Citing sources

Please do not forget to cite the sources of the information you are adding to Holodomor. The sourcing of the articles on such controversial topics are especially important. Thanks, --Irpen 08:04, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Some of sources cited here [1] but all of them in Ukrainian or Russian, some of them ordered for print in quantity of 500- 1000 -3000 - 10000 pcs. Jo0doe (talk) 15:17, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

There is nor requirement for the sources to be in English, neither that they are printed in large numbers. Sources that are Russian, Ukrainian and rare are acceptable if they are reputable, reliable and verifiable. Your sources are certainly good to use. I am just asking that you don't forget to site them.

On the side note, I am asking you to refrain from commenting on the contributors like you have done at Talk:UPA. Please stick to the commenting on the content. People go over the great effort of going over your edits and improving the writing (your English is not so good which is nothing to be ashamed about) rather than just revert your edits because much of what you write is supported by the sources you cite. This is a good practice. Disparaging your contributors is not. Finally, if this is easier, you can respond to me in Russian or Ukrainian. Regards, --Irpen 02:39, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:1926censusmapping.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:1926censusmapping.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:1926-censkuban.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:1926-censkuban.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

[edit] Your question

OK, I will look at the articles you asked me to but I cannot give you any guarantees wrt to the time frame. One thing, though. You've got to change at once the style of your comments in the part where you discuss the opponents. I worked with Faustian and it has always been a pleasure. His views are different from your (they are also different from mine) but no way in hell he deserved the epithets you are giving him. Not only this does not help you to resolve the content disputes but it may get you blocked. The fact that you source your edits and bring many unknown to others sources to the Wikipedia is appreciated but you've got to tone it down. Feel free to respond in Russian or Ukrainian if English is difficult for you. --Irpen 02:21, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, all clear for me. So I can't call falsifications as falsifications, demagogy as demagogy and propaganda as propaganda?

So could you please advice me how to handle issues with "maskirovka units" of MGB and "police divisions" of Germans? If cycle is not triangle - were to get WP:V source for this. Thanks for your your advice.Jo0doe (talk) 09:20, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I sprosila krokha – chto takoe xorosho – chto takoe plokho

also see [2] bottom

and [3]

I assume that’s good

your unreferenced claims and speculations, as typical Faustian
Your poor grasp of the English language is obvious. So much so that some of your comments *and edits make little sense Faustian
you lie by ommission. Faustian
That's just your POV Faustian
Your claims. Faustian

I assume it’s bad

Demagogy as is - isn't?

Please provide ref for more broad list of bad – which should I omit in order to avoid blocking.Jo0doe (talk) 11:12, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Your set of quotes are rather selective, but yes, some of them are objectionable. I asked Faustian to be a little more considerate. But your comments to him were frequently rather rude as well. Look, instead of discussing who uttered worse comments, let's concentrate on avoiding more of that sort. Please. --Irpen 00:44, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] English Dictionary Definition of ARMY

a: a large organized body of armed personnel trained for war especially on land
b: a unit capable of independent action and consisting usually of a headquarters, two or more corps, and auxiliary troops

Army as in Continental Army Army as in Confederate Army

Bobanni (talk) 21:52, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Ukrexpimp19281934.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ukrexpimp19281934.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:37, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. --Irpen 02:45, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Please choose you words carefully

You have developed a habit of labeling various edits as "Vandalism"

You may be interested in the following section from Wikipedia:Vandalism

Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. The most common types of vandalism include the addition of obscenities or crude humor, page blanking, or the insertion of nonsense into articles. Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. Even harmful edits that are not explicitly made in bad faith are not considered vandalism. For example, adding a personal opinion to an article once is not vandalism — it's just not helpful, and should be removed or restated. Not all vandalism is obvious, nor are all massive or controversial changes vandalism; careful attention needs to be given to whether changes made are beneficial, detrimental but well intended, or outright vandalism.

I've used terms mentioned Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of WikipediaJo0doe (talk) 14:59, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Since all my edits referred to articles which highly involved in political matters – I assume every facts has an significant importance. Moreover most of my edits based on WP:PSTS – primary sources (data/facts appeared before or shortly events) while my opponents predominantly used charged with propaganda, POV, sources with non reliable data or even not WP:PSTS sources. As vandalism I assumed emoval, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. My last usage of Vandalism was related by action of Riurik(discuss) - removal of ===Procurement practice === section from Holodomor by the reason of whitewash "subject xyz" by mentioning too many factors. I assume what every facts in history are important. Also as far as I know WP:NOT#SOAPBOX so it’s not right reason for removal. Especially if they described a higher demand for grain from some areas instead less demand from others. Mentioning the fact what such policy exist for a long time before makes questionable deliberately applied higher demand in the specific year, to use such as punishing factor (as mentioned in some POV and known for unreliable data sources).

I also apply this terms to edits by user Faustian, Bobbanie and Bandurist - blanking and change of content - deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. Jo0doe (talk) 18:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Radgosp.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Radgosp.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. 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 Wikipedia (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 Wikipedia 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) 07:00, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

FYI, I've fixed this so it is now listed as Public Domain in Ukraine. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 21:29, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] NPA

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Please no personal attacks on other contributors. This time Irpen removed them, next time please watch your language yourself or you might be blocked Alex Bakharev (talk) 07:40, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Please advice me what wrong with "My Dear" and mentioned clearly described facts of deception lasted in 1.5 year at WP without personal attacks

(I've not menioned editor name) - simply mentioned a proved by facts eventJo0doe (talk) 07:46, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Joe, the editor whose name you finally stopped calling, has been a real angel with you. If you had unleashed such a campaign against most any other editor, you would have been reported and blocked by now.

This is a good time for you to reconsider the style of your talk page entries. Otherwise, your editing career here may be greatly shortened. And I am not interested in your opinion about that (or any other) editor. So, please do not bother telling that. Some self-reflection is in order. --Irpen 08:00, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for info- I'll no more mention Y.Krochmalyuk 1973 and rest from most ever credible and more than angel editor.Jo0doe (talk) 16:22, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Recent citation from the angels songs: suspect you are engaging in a Scorched earth policy Faustian (talk) 16:42, 1 April 2008 (UTC) you are interested in disrupting the article rather than engaging in discussion?Faustian (talk) 14:09, 1 April 2008 (UTC) This particular editor has dismissed out of hand various secondary sources that contradict his original research. The particular editor either deletes information by these various secondary sources or cherry picks information from his original research throught he archives that seems to contradict what the secondary source says. The particular editor, in dismissing the various secondary sources shown above, then places POV tags on sections (or the entire article) that are thoroughly and well-referenced, apparently because he personally doesn't like the secondary sources. Conclusion: even here this “angel” can’t stop deceptions twisting and misusing of facts. I assume nobody care about WP:ASSOAPBOX ???Jo0doe (talk) 17:14, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Joe, the tone of your comments is unacceptable and you wore everyone's patience with them. From now on, I will be removing any of your comments from talk pages in toto if they are offensive. You harassed (and I am using this word intentionally) Faustian long enough. Regardless of who is right or wrong content wise, you have no right whatsoever to make comments aimed at increasing the editor's stress to make him leave Wikipedia. If this continues, you will be forced to leave.

I told you many times and I tell you again that the sources you bring in is a very useful contribution to Wikipedia despite their having to be worked into articles mostly by others. We accommodate editors with different level of English and the occasional incivility is often ignored as this is not a manner's salon and people do often have passionate feelings about content. But repeated outbursts are not tolerated and won't be. So, I warn you that from now on, each and every your entry to a talk page which is offensive will be removed in toto and you will have to rewrite it. I will no more edit your comments to make them acceptable. I will simply remove them. I hope you take this message to heart and we won't see any more of that. --Irpen 17:50, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Please mention which one is incorrect - I'll keep in mind to avoid so.Jo0doe (talk) 17:57, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Please advice - I assume that as a perfect example of civility - Of course the claims above are one particular editor's OR and words. And this particualr editor has been caught misusing sources in various ways documented in the article's archived talk pages.Faustian (talk) 15:30, 22 April 2008 (UTC) But I just would like to knew the aim of including data which does not exist in source (several time) and twist the mentioned in surce.

I've no plan to harassed anyone - simple would like to have an answers or explanations why (for instance) September itnterpreted as July Jo0doe (talk) 18:08, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Please, Joe, you are an intelligent person and can't demand an explanation what in your editing amounts harassment given their history. I will look at the issue though. Also, please care to format your entries. You should not be forcing anyone to go after you making your edits readable. --Irpen 18:12, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Ukrratio.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Ukrratio.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. 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 Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

See also ebooksgratis.com: no banners, no cookies, totally FREE.