User talk:Yandman/Archive0
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Hello Yandman. At [1] via this edit you posted and I posted this reply:
- I see. But, User:Yandman, all of your comment does not address the article, nor any article. All of your comment is addressed to a singular topic which has nothing whatsoever to do with any Wikipedia article. WP:NPA (No Personal Attacks) is official policy and states: Do not make personal attacks anywhere in Wikipedia. Comment on content, not on the contributor. This is the third instance of a personal attack, User:Yandman. My future actions are spelled out by WP:PAIN. Your future actions are your own responsibility. I shall place this same posting on your user discussion page. Terryeo 10:03, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
[2] No discussion? Terryeo 14:17, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- Your edit to the Wikipedia definition of NPOV not-so-subtly introduced "nor in opposition to published information.". I do not agree with this, nor with the other changes you made to the definition, so I reverted them. Yandman 14:25, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
the edits reverted are true - juan martin is john martin from shoreham by-sea
i shall re-revert them,check it out for yourself - because it sounds ludicrous does not make it untrue - i assure you,John Martin has kept his early years very much a secret,and in guitar circles this is a well known fact.Notice that knowhere does it say where juan martin is/was born- his first tablature book mentions his early years in spain - it doesnt say his age or where he was born. Please,this is true!
- Juan Martin was born in Malaga, Spain. So say the Encyclopædia Britannica, the Quid and his own site. A googlegroup page in which someone states the contrary is not sufficient to start disputing this fact, let alone replace it. You state that "There is a Brighton evening argus piece about this". First check that the date was not the first of April, then try to scan it. Then, and only then, could we even start to discuss your version of Juan Martin's history.
why the April fools remark>? Do you really think i would start this if i didnt know otherwise. I have contacted Paco de lucia for confirmation,and flamencovision to confirm that Juan Martin is a stage name. Please, i am just interested in reporting fact - because you cannot belive it is not the issue - i will scan an article or 2. Sit down,take a deep breath and wait -this could be true you know [i know it is].
I have cited the most verifiable source for the info regarding Juan Martin - please stop vandalising the article - if needs be get a moderator involved.Ukbn2 17:05, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi, could I suggest you remove the information added by Ukbn2? I am busy tomorrow morning, but could find time later on. Thanks, Addhoc 21:16, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
See the image use policy. They must give you permission for free use of the image or GFDL or Creative Commons licensing. The communication must be in writing with contact info for the person giving the permission. this communication should be posted on the discussion page of the image. See Image talk:Zebra finch.jpg for an example. -Nv8200p Nv8200p 16:11, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Sorry about that Yandman, but I just wanted to let people know when the last time the article was edited. Is there some other tag that I could use for that?
- All edits are listed under the history tab at the top of the page, along with who made the edits, and the time/date and changes. It is also could practice to describe your edits by filling in the "edit summary" box when you submit your changes. However, there should be no reference in the article itself to who wrote what when. Have fun editing Wikipedia... Yandman 09:54, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks dude.--Darkskedar 09:57, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Yandman thanks for the tipoff of the vandalism to my user page. I appreciate it. Nuview
- Please don't use {{bv}} straight away on a first time offender. It is incredibly hostile and can sometimes anger someone into vandalising even more. Start off with {{test1}} or {{test2}} and work your way up to {{test4}}. {{bv}} is reserved for someone who has made 3-4 vandalism edits in a row without warning or has done something incredibly offensive. WP:AIV will not block anyone who hasn't been adequately warned. Please see WP:UTM for a full list of warning templates you can use. Thanks, Netsnipe ► 13:23, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
- I only use "blatantvandal" when edits are obviously not innocent. Yandman 11:31, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
I just checked: My comments apply to the two articles (PageRank and IF), not to their talk pages. Kdammers 09:14, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
- Errr....Maybe so, but you should not put comments where readers can see them, nor should you sign them with your username. Yandman 09:39, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
- Now I see what you mean. I don't know why/how I put it there. Thanks for removing it. Kdammers 11:34, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm eager to come to an understanding as to why you removed my addition of the word "prominent". Exactly why did you do this? Was my edit in some way inaccurate or unwarranted? As far as I know, Brock was considered a racing pioneer and his successes were highly regarded. Please reconsider your reverts, especially when using popups.
In the meantime I am going to reinsert the term until you can provide justification to the contrary. I'll be happy to discuss this with you, but really, I'm not here to pick nits.
I am an established editor, not a vandal. TydeNet 09:22, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
- My apologies, I was correcting vandalism with popups, and didn't see all the more recent edits. Yandman 09:36, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
When using certain template tags on talk pages, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:test}} instead of {{test}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. It also prevents a user talk page from inclusion in a category. Thanks. BaseballBaby 08:39, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi, the wording may have been done poorly on my part. But what I am worried about is editors doing original, speculative research to characterize the reception of a work of art or music. Instead of a "critic" (which is = prominent expert, you are right), one could argue that in order to present the reception history of, say a piece of music, what you need is a statement from a prominent historian/musicologist that represents the consensus view on how piece "x" was received by the public. .........What I am worried about is this (hypothetical): "N'Sync was the most-loved and cherished boy band of the 1990s throughout the world" (POV, Original research, no source). However, I think the following (hypothetical) line would be OK with Wiki standards: "According to John Smith, editor of the Cambridge Guide to Pop Music and the author of Boy Bands in the 1990s, N'Sync was the most influential boy band in the teen listener market in US and Western Europe in the mid-1990s.<re >Smith, John: Boy Bands in the 1990setc....<re >Nazamo 17:49, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Why do you keep reveting the information me and my classmate are putting on "NORTH ROWAN HIGH SCHOOL"?
- Because it reads like an advert: I've replied in more detail on your talk page. And please refrain from removing content from my talk page. Yandman 07:16, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi - I'd be happy to help revert, if it's needed. I just saw the guy's ranting edit summary come up on my watchlist, took a look at the edit, and decided to revert. john k 17:38, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the vandalism revert. He was already one step away from being blocked as a vandalism-only account. OhNoitsJamie Talk 08:18, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi Yandman, The essay "New Look for Islam" is my personal writing but not really a personal essay as such. It contains solid verses from the Quran and modern interpretations for those verses supported by a great Islamic scientist like Dr. Hassan Al Turabi. I do hope you'd reconsider it and do whatever editing you feel would shape it up for publishing on the renowned Wikipedia. Best Regards.
- Hi Wessam, you can publish your essay on your user page (the best is to create a sub-page in your userspace, and link to it from your main user page). However, this is an encyclopaedia: we don't accept non-notable and opinion articles. What you could do is use your knowledge on the subject to help out other editors in the relevant articles. Have a good day. Yandman 13:42, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
- I will also like to mention that the resolution in question was non-binding.. You have said that the removal of a cited fact is vandalism, but I also would like to remind that use of citations that don't back up what is written is called original research.. The fact that Turkey must recognize the Armenian Genocide is not in any of the accession documents, please see talk page.. The EU (EU is a different entity than the states that compose it) has not made such a formal demand to the present day.. Baristarim 00:34, 24 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...Baristarim 01:06, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- I apologise for my somewhat strong worded edit summaries. These were aimed at Netzgurl. And I agree with you that "proximity to the middle east" should be removed. However, the paragraph descibes stumbling blocks, not brick walls. I agree with you that the resolution is non-binding, however the fact is that Turkey's refusal to recognise the genocide (why is this a "blanket statement"?) is seen as a problem, so much so that the EU parliament has produced a public document showing it's disapproval. This could make Turkey's bid fall, hence the term stumbling block. Yandman 16:55, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- You see, that's exactly what I mean by agenda pushing.. RfC is used to invite people who are not familiar with the subject so that they can give their opinion.. It is not used to ignite a debate among the usual contributors by saying sanitization.. May I ask why did you leave messages for everyone about the RfC that you knew would get hyped up over this?? And now you expect me to believe that you are acting in good faith and that there is no agenda-pushing going on?? If you were so interested in the article getting to a futured status, address two posts that I put yesterday and two days ago, they dealt specifically with what needed to improve in the article.. Please try to be more constructive and try not to turn certain talk pages into battlefields.. Baristarim 18:09, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
- I saw your other posts.. If you have joined Wiki to try to experiment with igniting gang wars, than go somewhere else.. saying sanitization of turkish history is not a constructive way of doing things.. You could have said this is a dispute about whether the armenian genocide should be mentioned bla bla. please feel free to pass the message on?? please, there is no agenda-pushing , right?? talk about good faith.. Baristarim 18:17, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
- Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Yandman 19:06, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
- Are you stalking me? Anyway, if you saw my other posts, you would have noticed that "sanitization" was not my term, and that I do not edit articles only relating to one subject, as opposed to some. You'll also notice that I spend most of my time correcting vandalism and rewriting articles so they conform with NPOV, which is how I came across the Turkey article. Yandman 19:06, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
- who was stalking you? I said i took a look at your posts where you pasted there is an RfC please take a look, only in the pages of people who you knew would get hyped over this, why didn' you leave the same message in the pages of other Turkish users.. Don't assume that there is some kind of Turkish conspiracy going on, see good faith.. And please see personal attacks policy again, there was nothing in what I wrote that was a personal attack, I was only pointing out to you that the way you approached this matter was not constructive.. Don't be this impulsive.. You are assuming that there is some sort of conspiracy whereas there isn't one, I have explained a great deal in the talk page and elsewhere about this subject.. The article is way too long as it is, none of the other country articles are this long.. You are comparing things in a way that is offensive to people, see the talk page for my reply to what you said about China, turkish human rights and China is not even comparable.. Every issue is considered in a case-by-case basis, pls don't make inappropriate comparisons.. There is no Ctrl-F test for NPOV, that's way too politically correct: That article still needs a lot of work, other articles about turkish history and republican history are not complete, the controversy surrounding this issue needs to be mentioned but not in a way that half the Turkish-EU relations section gets imbroiled in it.. History section will soon be trimmed as well.. Baristarim 21:39, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
I was only referring to the fact that you have posted the RfC notice to the talk pages of people whom you knew would get hyped up over this, why didn't you notify other Turkish users who have contributed greatly to that article?? That was not constructive and comprised the prejudice that all Turkish users of Wiki were into this great conspiracy or something.. That's all that I was referring to, it was someone else that had notified by e-mail that you posted the RfC notice to other people's talkpages and later on I checked to see if it was true.. That's it, I was not stalking you or anything, believe me.. :)) In any case, there is no reason to.. You are assuming that there is this big Turkish conspiracy cabal going on, but it is not true.. In any case.. Have a good day :)) Baristarim 16:49, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Please see WP:OWN and stop referring to Wikipedia as our encyclopedia, advising others to learn about contributing to our encyclopedia and telling them that we don't accept something - instead of pointing them to the appropriate guideline or policy. Prefer formulating such sentences as inclusion/exclusion of that info might be contrary to WP:etc.. Please also see WP:Bite and refrain from giving the impression to newcomers as if there is some sort of cabal in wikipedia by implying that wiki has owners.. regards Baristarim 22:56, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
- What edits are you talking about? I've got a funny feeling about this... Yandman 18:54, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, you mean about the other notice I put on your talk page about WP:OWN.. :)) Well, it was just an advice, seeming that you liked to police around a bit, I just tried to show you how it would feel like :))... In any case my comment was legitemite, don't refer to Wiki as ours and we, it would deter newcomers from giving the impression that they are them and others are us.. It is not good style, that's all.. Baristarim 16:52, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- I think you're referring to the standard warning templates I use as an RC patroller. Yandman 07:07, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
I noticed that many Turkish editors communicate in Turkish on the articles' and their own talk pages??!! If you will notice, I communicate in English with most Turkish users.. But for most Turkish users, English is their second language, therefore it is more efficient to communicate in Turkish sometimes.. I or other users don't have to ask permission from you of any kind to to use a particular language, especially our native languages, when we are talking between each other, all the edits and nearly all discussions in the talk pages are made in English and that's all that matters.. If you will notice, all Greek, Arab, Iranian, French users also communicate between each other in their respective languages.. All my postings in the talk pages are English, and you have no business to ask others to use a different language when they communicate between each other.. If you will notice I also communicate in French with other French users, and that is also none of your business.. Are they entitled to communicate in the way they want???!! Well I know a lot of French users who might feel extremely offended about what you just implied as if we needed to ask you for entitlement of some sorts.. If you want to understand what Greek, French, Turkish, Arab etc users are saying to each other, please go learn those languages so that you can understand.. What is your problem with Turks?? You could have easily said I noticed that many editors communicate in their respective languages on the articles' and their own talk pages - why did you single out only Turkish users??? Gees, then you ask me to assume good faith on your part, well you have a lot of nerves.. If there is some particular thing you didn't understand and that you would like to understand, you can ask me and I will be happy to translate it for you (as long as you don't ask me to translate pages and pages of posts).. All you needed to do was ask.. Baristarim 17:08, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- Calm down, Barış! He didn't insult your mother ;-) --Tzekai 17:20, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- I asked the question "Is it appropriate for me to ask them to speak english?" so as not to offend anyone by making sure it was good witiquette. However, as you stalked my edits, you managed to be offended. Please calm down, stop stalking me, and take a well deserved rest. Yandman 07:07, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
No, u r still taking things out of context: what resonates before anything when Turkey is mentioned are being Muslim (the big daddy of all), economical problems (the real big daddy in the eyes of people who truly rule EU), human rights, Cyprus, Kurdish rights etc.. Please see this article written by an Armenian political science doctor and historian and published in panarmenian.net [3] that proves this point. As for Turkish-Caucases relations, it would also take things out of context.. Everyone who follows global geopolitical conjecture would know that Turkish-Israeli relations, one of the main and most important axis of Middle East, is much more important than even Turkish-Greece relations.. But even that is missing from that section.. These can be fully discussed in foreign relations of turkey and history of turkey, the article is already way too bloated.. The way some edits were done made so that half the EU-Turkish relations were about the recognition of the Armenian genocide, that also damages the credibility of this article, that's all I am saying... In the light of what I said, I think that you will agree that some edits were nothing but agenda-pushing.. Baristarim 18:54, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- I thought Turkey was secular? And if being Muslim is a problem, I don't know how France stays in the EU...(joke). As for the agenda-pushing, I agree with you completely: some editors shamelessly push pro-Armenian crap, and some shamelessly remove anything that does not make Turkey look like paradise on earth (I had an encounter with 'NetzGurl' or someone like that). I really think that the armenian issue is an important part of what Turkey is for its neighbours. And I agree with you that those above us probably don't give a damn about it (or anything that isn't about cash...), but as a citizen of an EU state, what is discussed non-stop on the TV,radio, newspapers, is the genocide issue. Yandman 07:07, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
- Ok, I can agree with the fact that the Armenian Genocide would be more important in the eyes of the general public than the rulers.. If you noticed, I am still trying to improve the article by restructuring, prose and finding more sources.. As for agenda pushing on both sides, u r right.. Netzgurl, yep I know, he contacted me via email and we had an argument about it, don't worry, persnally I am not a fan of those people :)) Ah, as for the translation :)) Well it was a short text asking why we were not putting any photos from the east or southeast anatolia (anadolu in Turkish), and that said that Turkey was not only Istanbul or Izmir and were we ashamed of our own country etc.. There were some insults in it too, blaming us (the turkish users) of being elitist etc.. I am going to remove it because there are words like sons of bitches, f.. your wife etc in it.. Probably just someone passing through :)) Baristarim 16:40, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
- Ahhh, I wish all trolls wrote in turkish. Much harder to feed them that way (at least for those of us who don't understand a word of what they're saying). Yandman 19:28, 2 October 2006 (UTC)