User talk:K. Lastochka

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archives User talk:K. Lastochka/Archive 1

Contents 1 Hey! 2 Double redirects 3 Hope you're doing fine 4 Benny Goodman 5 Biru 6 On the word STOP (exact capitals) 7 Answer 8 Why is that a perfectly good category 9 Thank you 10 Massacre 11 KKP 12 Commons 13 Összeesküvés :)

[edit] Hey!

You archived your page! I was wondering when you would do it. ;) But ask all the rest of my friends and they'll tell you I can't resist a blank page. :P Maybe I'll put something else here… —  $PЯINGrαgђ  17:10, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I can't resist a blank page either, that's why I put Wikipe-tan mopping up the mess. :) (I get a kick out of her--how many other encyclopedias have mascots?!) Any music-related stuff I can help out with? I'm kind of bored. Köszönöm for the cookie...K. Lásztocska 17:53, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Now I know what Köszönöm means. ;) And I like her too. Most anime (or manga—I don't know the difference) I don't like, but Wikipe-tan is really cute. Maybe I could incorporate her into my horribly cluttered talk page… —  $PЯINGrαgђ  00:09, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Double redirects

Hi, just a quick reminder to check any redirects when you move a page, I've fixed quite a number for Emomali Rahmonov and other articles you've moved about recently. -- Nick ^t 22:39, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Biruitorul, you must be some Serb or Greek really mad with Turks in particular and Turkic people in general. What is your problem? What's with the talk like you are for continuous dictatorship in Turkmenistan? I wish you elaborated on that. You really sound like nationalistic pro-Slavic christian fanatic.

Yeah, and fix the template at the bottom, will ya? Biruitorul 02:38, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, that one is not my fault. Yesterday morning, all I did was delete a few "ov"s from his name, I then moved the page which was promptly undone (with good reason, I later found out.) I didn't touch the template, I have not edited that page since. I'm no fan of Tajikbashi, but since you asked so nicely.... K. Lásztocska 13:07, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. Anyway, the situation is still in flux, so we need not worry about that too much. By the way, would you like to weigh in here? We do refer to the Hungarian-perpetrated Ip and Treznea massacres as massacres, even though at least one killed fewer people. So I think a massacre happened at Fântâna Albă (more importantly, so does the historiography), even if that one was committed by the Great Liberator of Peoples, Joszif V. Sztálin, and the other two by the eeeeeeevil fascist Miklós Horthy. Biruitorul 01:16, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Interesting, because I also used that line here a couple of days ago. Great minds think alike. Anyway, thank you for the support. I've got to be careful in what I write on-wiki, so let me just say I'm glad to have someone on the same wavelength as I. (Although I support continued dictatorship in Turkmenistan, but that's a different matter.) Biruitorul 22:08, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Of course, he was kind of fun. Granted, I'm saying that from a safe distance, but you know, he wasn't really evil, maybe just semi-evil, quasi-evil, or even a one-calorie Coke of evil. He only had a handful of political prisoners (though arguably the whole country were his prisoners), and he abolished capital punishment. Biruitorul 22:14, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Maybe the other spelling was more common - anyway, do we move the page?
By the way, a suggestion on Turkmenistan: some 40% of the "history" section covers the last couple of months, which is a little unhealthy. Granted, Turkmenbashi's death is important, but not every detail is. What I suggest doing is making a smaller article to cover these developments. After all, if we have a 25-page article on George W. Bush's second term as President of the United States, then surely one on "Gurbanguly Berdimuhammedow's term as President of Turkmenistan" would not be amiss.
Indeed. But again, there are worse: just look at Nazarbayev and and Karimov. By the way, what do you think of Turkey? I think they should join the EU, so as to wreck it, and while I'm not a huge fan of Islamic theocracy, I so despise the secularist Kemalist state that I await an Iranian-style revolution there (and also half of Turkey going to Kurdistan, Armenia and Greece). Biruitorul 23:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

In Wiki-time, yes, it's April 1st.

Actually, I like Turkey too. But here's how I look at the religion question. 99% of Turks are Muslims (since earlier generations of Turks killed off/drove out the Armenians and Greeks), so I think it wouldn't hurt for them to have more Islamic law, at least to a reasonable degree. Morocco, for instance, has a secular government, and the few non-Muslims live in relative tranquility, but one can wear a headscarf in schools too (and almost all women do). I just think that when almost everyone belongs to a particular religion, it doesn't make that much sense to separate it so completely from the state as Turkey does. Maybe an Iran-style solution would be bad, but the middle ground between Turkey and Iran is quite large. Plus, they persecute Alevis, etc.

Any thoughts on the latest Curse of Turan edits? It seems a bit implausible that Hungary was Muslim and Jewish at the time, or at least I'm not convinced. Biruitorul 00:54, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, yeah. Did you see the current FA and DYK? I like the penguin. Biruitorul 01:01, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Vaguely, but not really. Biruitorul 01:06, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Ooh, sophisticated. I think we'll see lots of vandalism in the next 24h. Biruitorul 01:16, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, it was nice knowin' ya. Szia! Biruitorul 01:19, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I know some people just itching to start an RfC against you... Biruitorul 01:28, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

That Slovak, or Czech, or German. I forgot his name. And then a Serb, a Romanian, couple others. Biruitorul 01:30, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Or how about this VinceB character? Biruitorul 01:31, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, look here, then you can revert by using the edit summary rvv and give me a stern vandal warning. Biruitorul 03:06, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hope you're doing fine

I've watched your metre fluctuate, and if you ever need anything, just tell me. —  $PЯINGrαgђ  04:31, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

You know, KL you need a meter that goes to 11 ;-) István 04:44, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Insane mood swings...hey, I really am an authentic Hungarian! :) You guys are really sweet. :) My personal life is in shambles in real life, and I'm in a blind panic about receiving my most important acceptance/rejection letter from conservatory....maybe I should make a meter that goes to 12. Again, it's very nice to know I'm among friends here, thanks. :) I'll try to not be such a basket case though...K. Lásztocska 14:28, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Benny Goodman

Why have you changed Benny Goodman's page? I am reading Ross Firestone's book "Swing Swing Swing" and it says Goodman's parents were from Warsaw and Lithuania. It mentions his birthname as Benjamin David Goodman. Please provide a better reference or revert your edits. --SeanO 20:09, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I think the links you provided are based on older versions of Wikipedia that contained the error. I'm going to reference Firestone's book and put a note on the talk page. --SeanO 07:41, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Biru

I can prove each of my statements with quotes from Biruitorul's comments. no personal attacks.Anonimu 19:13, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it's right to discuss with a groupie about biru's attitude.. i don't like to talk people behind their back.. unlike some of our common acquaintance.... Anonimu 19:31, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

"Groupie"? LOL. :) K. Lásztocska 21:17, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I can mail you a t-shirt to that effect. Biruitorul 21:20, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, I'm not too good with graphic design, so it hasn't actually been printed. I was thinking maybe an Arrow Cross and Iron Guard symbols joined by a chain, but I know you wouldn't wear that (though you probably could go outside like that since I doubt people would know what it meant). Other than that, I guess just a Wikipedia symbol with some inscription about me. I'm open to suggestions, though, since I know I have a large fan-base eager to get these. Biruitorul 21:27, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your support, though I don't mind personal attacks at all. Jesus (it is Holy Week, after all) was attacked far more severely for His teachings. There is, by the way, a small Unitarian church centred in the Székelyföld. ♠♣♥♦ sounds like a plan to me! Biruitorul 21:51, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks; same to you! Illegitimi... Biruitorul 21:57, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Nah, just a groupie - though you denied it! Biruitorul 22:42, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

ApOlOgy aCCepteD (--˚˚:--˚˚––:) Biruitorul 01:49, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

That could be tricky. sdpr6560 at yahoo dot com can help, if you're still stuck by tomorrow Biruitorul 03:13, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, I do too, but there's an added dimension in my case; plus, you could use an e-mail pseudonym. Anyway, the code was random and meant nothing. Biruitorul 03:19, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Dangerous? To say the least! The protests you've been seeing in Hungary are just a picnic compared to what's coming for Romania :) Biruitorul 03:24, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Reply given. Biruitorul 19:15, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

One more reply - that should about cover it, though see Anonimu's latest allegations on the FA talk page! Biruitorul 19:34, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

See the article's talk page. Now i have to answer to you for everything i do?Anonimu 14:47, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] On the word STOP (exact capitals)

What do you mean STOP. And what have I done now. I have commented only about the discusion, and on the harsh wording said by PANONIAN. I don't know what have I done wrong since the last warning. -- Imbris 23:56, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

If you mean to say that calling someone a radical in Serbia is an insult, you should check what is going on in all of Serbia. Radical party is the bigest party in People's Assembly of The Republic of Serbia. Some of those elements can be seen especially in the part of Fruška Gora in Syrmia. Nowdays no one is safe from propadanda, belive me I am not a propagandist. No one in the country I live is interested in historical debates, you can count on the fingers of one hand a few radical thinkers in this country. The problem with PANONIAN is that he has an easy temper. Where did I say the things he is talking about. Where? Please do not go beyond the warning (!) you sent, but since the warning. I admit that in the past of this discusion we have both said some harsh wording, but this i bound to happen when we have such different sources. You said that notting could be done in such cases, but I hope to achieve the full truth. I will not satisfy myself with some books, I will go to the bottom of this, go thruoghout the whole process in Wikipedia and prove my case. I could do this much faster only if I stop answering to his provocations. I will do that. Just STOP, as if his mal doing does not exist. Hopefuly you will not delete this communication from me to you. I will use this communication as a reference tool when someone says "Why did you not answer to him". I will say User:K. Lastochka said so. But I will not back down. This must be cleared. As for the terrorists see this. Breafly. In Novi Sad there is a funny coalition between radicals and democrats and Miloshevitch socialists. and the towns-mens and wommans have decided to call two streets by the names of those who burnt a country in the neighborough. Imbris 00:24, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

You did not said those things? You even now saying those things with insulting statements about inhabitants of Fruška Gora and Syrmia. And this is proof who is right and who is wrong in our discussion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PANONIAN/Sources And I do have bad temper, but what you expect from me when you provoke with such statements about Vojvodina? PANONIAN (talk) 11:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

And about xenophoby I say this. Panonian doesn't allow other users to say anything because everything hurts the feeling of the majority in Vojvodina. This is not the truth. No one is insulting he or his family of his nation. He is just telling those thing's to attract attention and to draw them into discusion about that topic. See how he is luring the victim here. Imbris 00:32, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

And you insult me right now too. PANONIAN (talk) 11:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I am not harrasing anybody. Quite the opposite. Am I bothering someone who is not interested in communicating with me. NO. I have just written about a topic I care a great deal about. Must a person be dispersed in many topics to be seriously understood. I don't know, but judging by your remark about my short history in this encyclopaedia, I say that I am not beeing seriously understood. Why I say so. Because someones merits ought to be judged by the amount of the objectivity and I think that no matter ones greatness (in the nummbers or quantity) every encyclopaedia is worth only by the ammount of before mentioned objectivity. Have I said that Panonian is not a good cartographer - no. I object to the usage of not documented terms, to colouring that is false, to the borders that are falsely painted broader than it should. I do not push a pollitical point of view, but only respond (better yet responded) to false accusations and false informations posted by this author. I am very much offended by the question raised that it is a pollitical conflict. On my part it is not. I forgive and forget it this instant, but please do not question my integrity, unless the same is questioned in the same length and width with the other side. I do not see why Panonian thinks he is obligated to respond. I have ordered information to be delivered to me and arbitration is unavoidable. I hope that you will volunteer at least as a character wittnes and hopefully as an unbiased bystander of this story who can tell the auditors on the credibility of sources that will be supplied. -- Imbris 03:52, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

But how can I "communicating with you" when you constantly trying to deny works of numerous respectable historians claiming that all they are stupid and that exactly YOU is the one who is called to offer interpretation of archive documents? I am sorry, but those historians are much more competent than you to offer such interpretation and they did so in their books: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PANONIAN/Sources And, yes, this is political conflict, because you said that your goal is to separate Vojvodina from Serbia and therefore you want to remove word "Serbia" from the historical name of Vojvodina. It is bright as a day. PANONIAN (talk) 11:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

To User:K. Lastochka: Have I speaked to the very ofencable character of our counterpart in this. No. And I will not, but you better instruct that side to quit and STOP as have you instructed me. This is not fair. And I think that our beloved counterpart is not able to let anybody but our beloved counterpart to have a last line in any debate. Our beloved counterpart is very much mistaken if think that this is going to pass here and by me. I will defeat only the sources and false interpretation but not our beloved counterpart who is an instrument in the hands of historians who took ideology into their's minds and forgot all about documents. Documents must prevail over some recent editions of books that in majority do not have topics concerned about that period in time. -- Imbris 17:46, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

There is no way that you can "defeat" all those sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PANONIAN/Sources Trying to "defeat" them, the only thing that you will actually "defeat" is you. And I will repeat, the historians who wrote those sources are more relevant to present interpretation of any documents than you are. PANONIAN (talk) 20:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Documents stored in archival collections (named fonds) need not any interpretation. Archivists obey the norms set by International Council on Archives (specialised agency of UNESCO thus UN). The norms state that the name under which an institution did its business longest is the name of the fonds. Fonds must be citted. Eg. Document No. xxx from the fonds No. xxx - name of the fonds. This must be an official name, not an alias or some other referenced name. This few sentences are enough to confer to all of your Sources. All of your Sources surely do not state that Voivodship of Serbia is official name, and your D. Popovic used it once, and in the correct way of stating that it were not official. -- Imbris 23:24, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Forget D, Popović, you have almost 60 sources there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PANONIAN/Sources In another words, if all those historians used name Voivodship of Serbia, then archive obviously have documents with that name and since two names exist in archive documents then those historians are people who should decide which of the two names should be used. If you think that you are competent to "defeat" their work, then prove that you are competent for that: tell us your name, surname, level of education, your scientific awards if you have any, recognitions of scientific community that you are competent to judge about this, etc. If you cannot provide this, then you have no right to try to "defeat" work of numerous respectable historians who gained scientific awards for that work. Also, I have to remind you that purpose of Wikipedia is to PRESENT information from sources not to "DEFEAT" such information based on personal opinion. In fact, such personal attempts for "defeating the sources" are officially called "original research" and ARE FORBIDEN BY THE POLICY OF WIKIPEDIA. PANONIAN (talk) 14:40, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

I will not forget D. Popovich because this is a clear example of how this person (who I am not talking to) does his business. Wikipedia is about objectivity as well an staying neutral. And a person that is infected with only one angle is not neutral. You speak about DEFEATING. I will try and hopefully succedde to defeat the dis-information which happened in this case by the use of only one angle, and by the use of not official sources. This is nothing orriginal but a very normal thing called the objective, neutral and open minded information providing. If the policy of Wikipedia is to give the greater meaning to some books written by a handful of "historians", and not to give the greater meaning and look objectively to the source of documents and archives then this policy has to be modified. By the use of a few sentences from the Archives of Vojvodina who decided on the bassis of the documents and the official character of them, and by the sheere nummber of documents and if they gave priority to the official name - Wikipedia will too. And not forgeting the character of folk songs and etnology and antropology that can be mentioned in the article about Serb Voivodship and Tamiše Banate. --- Imbris 18:00, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Please do not continue this argument on my talk page. Take it to your own. K. Lásztocska 21:39, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Hehehe, of course, you are absolutely right, K. Lásztocska - I apologize for my behaviour (I certainly would not like that somebody use my talk page like this). It will not happen again. :)) PANONIAN (talk) 21:27, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Eh, no problem, don't worry about it. :) K. Lásztocska 21:29, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Answer

K. Lastocha, I will archive my talk page as soon as I find time. Regarding user:Imbris, what arbitration you speak about? It is clear thar his goals on Wikipedia are trolling and provocations and this prove it:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PANONIAN/Sources

As well as this (just read the last sentence):

• http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image_talk%3ASerbia1918.png&diff=116452172&oldid=114846547

I really do not understand his attempts to deny work of numerous respectable historians (including Serbian, Hungarian and German ones). PANONIAN (talk) 11:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I mean, even the web site of LSV political party that support creation of Republic of Vojvodina use name Vojvodstvo Srbija (Voivodship of Serbia) as a historical name of Vojvodina: http://www.lsv.org.yu/?menu=11&smenu=1 PANONIAN (talk) 12:15, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, I do not know what can be done here. It is better not to tell you my previous experiences with admins in similar cases: last time when admin was involved in similar problem, he just protected disputed article from editing and several months ago when I had a big dispute with one other Serbian user who asked admin to help in solving dispute, the admin just said that since this is English Wikipedia the two of us should speak one with another in English, not in Serbian, so that he can read it. Therefore, I do not see what can be done here escpecially because user Imbris mainly edit talk pages and not articles and I do not think that Wiki policy against editing of talk pages exist. PANONIAN (talk) 20:15, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Eh, perhaps something can be done anyway? I planned to finish my work about municipalities of former Yugoslavia but I did not managed to do even a half of this job because I had to argue with user Imbris and to answering over and over to the same questions. However, the real reason why I do not think that arbitration is good solution is because in this case I would have to explain all this again to admin and that would take even more time from me, which is not good. Anyway, let just see how would he try to "defeat" (as he said) all those sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PANONIAN/Sources PANONIAN (talk) 20:38, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why is that a perfectly good category

Hey, Slavs is the name - orriginated from Hey, Slovak's. It is a Slavic anthem, not Serbian. It was Yugoslavian anthem, and falsely proclaimed Serbian by Miloshevich. Even the people of Serbia didn't accept this. Should every nation of Yugoslavia have a category in the article about that now pas anthem. -- Imbris 17:37, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Thank you so much for your support. I did not want to push it that far, but VinceB did not give me any other option. I appreciate even more all your previous offers of good offices and mediation. It did not work at the end, but I believe this was just an exceptional case. People like you make Wikipedia a sustainable community. Tankred 22:53, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Massacre

Hey! Of course, I can help. I haven't been able to read the whole talk page, so please give me one objective reference referring to the word massacre and I immediately rename the article. It's not a matter of consensus, but a matter of facts. NCurse _work 05:50, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Done. NCurse _work 18:17, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] KKP

LOL :D I wasn't here, since now I'm quite busy in huwiki (and real life) (take a look at hu:User:Alensha/Egyiptom, a list of my new Ancient Egypt-related articles :) KKP is my favorite political party. Check out their website, it's probably the funniest thing on the internet now. – Alensha ^talk 14:49, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Commons

Its a lost cause. If you can get to the AHF and get them to give a clearer disclaimer on the photos, or at *least* to amend their copyright statement to explicitly refer to the webpage and not every individual item, then that would help, otherwise its no use - they (commons) wont accept a phone conversation as bona fide evidence of anything. The picture *should* be allowed as fair use, either on the wikipedia itself, (and posted as a thumb on the article page) or you can get some help choosing the proper copyright disclaimer and info (we did not get much help, which probably says more about the commons than about anything else). Its a rough neighbourhood, the commnons. Dealing with them is like dealing with the Dept of Motor vehicles.István 23:45, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Összeesküvés :)

Valaki titokzatos személy arra kér, nézd meg a vitalapodat a magyar wikipédián. ;-) – Alensha ^talk 15:37, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Tudom, hogy ki az. Nekem rögtön gyanús volt. :) – Alensha ^talk 19:29, 7 April 2007 (UTC)