User talk:Afil/Archive 2

I ignore rude or anonimous messages.Afil (talk) 20:06, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

River Deletion Tag

The reason I tagged it was because we can't have an article on every river in the world. There should be some sort of notability criteria because there are millions of rivers and we don't want an article on every river on the entire planet. Thundermaster^TRUC 16:47, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No reason why we can't have a few million. Computer disk space is very cheap. One million rivers at 10 kB an article (which includes infobox and map) = 10 GB, about $10.00 total and going down rapidly. If there are in fact any on Mars, we can add them for that planet also. DGG (talk) 20:59, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dam articles

You've tagged a number of dam articles for speedy deletion, the reason you give does not really meet the criterion for speedy deletion. A joint WP:Articles for deletion discussion combining the problem articles would probably serve best. Or, if you believe this is an urgent hoax, a post on WP:ANI about it will allow fuller discussion. Christopher Parham (talk) 02:59, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit summary usage

Hi there. When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field. If you are adding a section, please do not just keep the previous section's header in the Edit summary field - please fill in your new section's name instead. Thank you. Ohmpandya (Talk) 23:13, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Fauna Barnstar
		For toughing out the above naysayers and making decent stubs about Romanian rivers anyway.Kannie \| talk 02:20, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion about river articles

Seriously, you are going out of your way with the river pages. It is nice that you contribute, but think of how many people will visit those pages like Ceptura River. you do not even have a length for it! This is my suggestion and I think it would give some chance of users to actually read those articles. First decide how to grou rivers (for example say [[Affluents of <inser river>]], say Olt) and then have a very detailed table with length, counties, etc, etc. I STRONGLY suggest to redirect ALL the rivers that have less than 100km to the main page (say Affluents of Olt). This wa, the notability guidile will be at least partially enforced. Thanks and I hope this helped. Nergaal (talk) 23:13, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

unfortunatelly you kind of missed my points. I am not aware of WP rivers and what was decided there. I was just saying that fey IF ANY people will ever get to visit most of the pages about river you are creating. I personally would be way more interested in a page where I can compare rivers that are in the same area, or stuff like that, and I am not sure anybody would care more than that for expample for the Ceptura river. as for the 100 km, it was a random ORIENTATIVE limit.

"The information about the rivers wil be gradually increased after the network information and the links indicating the tributaries of each river and the mouth of each river will be identified and included in the articles." like what information do you actually think will be 'gradually' added? seriously? I am going to give a personal example: I have created 11 articles on the metropolitan zones in Romania (not tenths as you seem to be creating). each zone has hundrets of thousants of inhabitants, of which some could contribute. unfortunatelly it doesn't really happen. and if for example the metropolitan zone of Bucharest, there are few people who add information, how many people do you think even know about Ceptura river in order to contribute??

all this was a suggestion to not spend your energy in vain on articles that don't even qualify for the notability guidliness that are required for the creation of articles. Nergaal (talk) 02:02, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Basa River

Why did you change the references back? Random Fixer Of Things (talk) 01:32, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, let's get them right from the start, otherwise it will become a mess. Presumably they are references that relate to the river, and as you only have a single sentence, so they should be relevant. See WP:CITE for the various referencing styles. Random Fixer Of Things (talk) 01:38, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I came across this article via "Random article", but what difference does that make? Just because others are wrong, doesn't mean that we shouldn't fix this one, does it? Random Fixer Of Things (talk) 01:47, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Bella River

An editor has nominated Bella River, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bella River and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 02:14, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mânăstirea River (Bârlad)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Mânăstirea River (Bârlad), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Mânăstirea River (Cerna). It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 23:56, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Smile!

Kannie has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

It appears that your article will be kept! --Kannie | talk 02:10, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Image:Altman-akhmatova.jpg

Hi!
I had placed Image:Altman-akhmatova.jpg to Commons with all the descrition, that you had published in en-wiki project. But Phrood doubts whether George Mitrevski, whoes letter you were citing, do really own the copyright on this artwork. Whould you be so kind as to explain the metter there, as Phrood had requested for the image deletion. Thanks in advance --MaryannaNesina (talk) 21:55, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Expand Tags

I'm not too sure what your talking about. I haven't tagged any stub pages have I? Dustihowe Talk 16:57, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

river infoboxes

I'm not sure whether you have Mureş River on your watchlist, so I'll write it again on your talk page. I don't think the present contents of the infoboxes in Romanian river articles are how they should be. Are all the mentioned villages notable (BTW I wouldn't call Târgu Mureş and Arad villages)? Are all the mentioned rivers really major tributaries? If we really want to give all this information, I think it should go into the main text of the articles, and only the really important places (e.g. population over 20,000) and rivers (e.g. length over 50 km, or average discharge over 5 m³/s, or more than 20% of the discharge of the main river) into the infobox. See also: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (infoboxes). This probably goes for more articles about rivers in Romania, I just stumbled upon this one. Markussep ^Talk 22:08, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please respond to my questions? Markussep ^Talk 09:24, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am still compiling the data on rivers. When I will get all the basic information in place I will sort it out. The figures you indicate cannot be applied identically to all countries or all rivers. The size of the tributaries cannot be the same for the Mississippi and for the Mureş, neither can the localities. There are also other criteria for which rivers might be important, except their discharge. Just give me time to finish. I have not yet worked on the discharge data.Afil (talk) 17:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Afil, thanks for answering. I'm not asking you to create perfect articles at once. My point is that the infoboxes for the main rivers of Romania look horrible right now. In the Mureş article, I have to push "page down" 6 times to see the bottom of the infobox. Infoboxes "are designed to present summary information about an article's subject" (quote from the Manual of Style I mentioned above). See for instance Volga River. If a reader wants to know what are the main cities on the Mureş, and what are the main tributaries, he/she will go to the infobox. I'd say 5-6 cities max. (probably Târgu Mureş, Alba Iulia, Deva, Arad and Szeged), and also 5 right and 5 left tributaries max. (right: Arieş, left: Niraj, Târnava, Sebeş, Strei). I can help, of course. Markussep ^Talk 18:07, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I edited the Mureş article the way I indicated above. I think this a better format for the larger rivers (Prut, Mureş, Olt, Siret, Ialomiţa, Someş, Argeş, Jiu etc.). Markussep ^Talk 14:34, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gherpălocul Mare River

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Gherpălocul Mare River, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 17:59, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talna

While patrolling, I saw you had quite a few pages on Romanian rivers. Good work! Basketball one ten 23:27, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm half Romanian, and went to the Talna when I was nine. Basketball one ten 23:30, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you a member of the Romanian WikiProject? I've been marking all of the river articles with a RO template. Basketball one ten 23:33, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bica River

it was a redirect to the name Bicu River, you moved the page to the other title. If you think the redirect is wanted, just tell me and i will undelete it. DGG (talk) 20:50, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Urlătoarea River (Pănicerul)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Urlătoarea River (Pănicerul), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Urlătoarea River. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 23:41, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ilişoara Mică River

Rude messages deleted. I ignore messages which are impolitely worded. Gene Nygaard (talk) 01:04, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some explanation might help: the template {{DEFAULTSORT}} is meant to correct category sorting for letters with diacritics, like ä, ß and ş. If you don't use DEFAULTSORT, or use it improperly like you (Afil) did, the ş and the ă come after the z, for instance. That might be normal sorting in some languages, but for the average English-speaking user it's unusual and counterintuitive. Common practice within wikipedia is to "strip" characters of all diacritics in the DEFAULTSORT template, see Wikipedia:Categorization#Other_specifics. Remember the "incorrect" stripped version isn't shown anywhere (except in the editing box), so it doesn't "hurt". Markussep ^Talk 08:46, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it won't give you normal sorting in any language, unless you limit your character set to about one percent or less of those used on Wikipedia. Gene Nygaard (talk) 08:48, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And, in particular, almost all of these rivers which get missorted in their categories under the English sorting rules applicable here would also be missorted under Romanian sorting rules applicable in the Romanian Wikipedia, absent an appropriate sort key either on placed each category entry with vertical-bar piping or applicable to all without contrary piping through the DEFAULSORT magic word. Gene Nygaard (talk) 08:58, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Romanian rivers

Consider adding {{river}} and {{WikiProject Romania}} to the rivers' talk pages. Basketball 110 _{the pages I've messed up completely} 01:43, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Salcia River (Timiş)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Salcia River (Timiş), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Salcia River (Ialomiţa). It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 19:40, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

STOP missorting IMMEDIATELY

Gene Nygaard (talk) 15:42, 21 February 2008 (UTC) Rude messages deleted. I ignore messages which are impolitely worded.[[ User:Afil|Afil]] (talk) 16:21, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First, consider that it isn't just me, but also the explanation from User:Markussep above. Then here is the reply I posted on my talk page as well:

You might start by just looking at the categories, where you can see with your own eyes that they are not sorted properly, when you have put in those improper sort keys.

Then try Wikipedia:Categorization#Other specifics, which incorporates by reference Wikipedia:Categorization of people#Ordering names in a category

Punctuation, such as apostrophes and colons (but not hyphens) should be removed, and accented letters and ligatures should be replaced by their unaccented or separated counterparts.

See also numerous discussions at Wikipedia talk:Categorization and Wikipedia talk:Categorization of people and their archives, and Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#Alphabetization, etc.

Then, just for good measure, go read Wikipedia:Redirects and Wikipedia:Disambiguation to learn various other things you should be doing, to keep your efforts from being hidden away in oblivion where nobody will find them. Gene Nygaard (talk) 00:26, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles such as Bălăria River are every bit as much deliberately missorted by you as those you created earlier. Stop it immediately. Gene Nygaard (talk) 01:02, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You know how to had the DEFAULTSORT magic word, and have done so thousands of times. You also know that leaving out DEFAULTSORT is exactly the same as what you had been improperly adding as DEFAULTSORT, with the very same results. What is completely baffling to me is,

why in the world would you even want to create all of these articles, when all you do is

Deliberately hide them away in the wrong place in category listings, so that nobody can find them.
Hide them away from people using the Wikipedia Search box or any other search engines by refusing to create the appropriate redirects to them.
Hide them away from people using the Wikipedia Search box or any other search engines by refusing to create the appropriate links from disambiguation pages.

A John Wayne character's quote about "Life's tough" seems quite applicable here. Try to look that up. Does being a "Virginian" explain the problem? Glad it wasn't contagious, since I lived there for a while. Gene Nygaard (talk) 01:29, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Romanian rivers

Basketball 110 _{what famous people say} has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

What would you say the importance for these articles are for WikiProject Romania? Basketball 110 _{what famous people say} 19:05, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What I meant was (I hadn't realized that I worded it that way) was: {{WikiProject Romania|class=stub|importance=''what goes here?''}} ::if you could fill in the blank at "what goes here". Is it "low" importance, or "mid" importance. Thank you for the info, though. Basketball 110 _{what famous people say} 19:35, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The infobox

Afil, I interpret this edit as indication that you have accepted info being moved from the infobox and into the article, thus making the former manageable and the latter readable (and, in so doing, be consistent with WP:MOS). I remeber that when we last discussed this issue, there was a lot of hubbab over it, and I was accused of all sorts of things that did not even make sense. Since my initial proposal was not to remove info (as was understood by some), but to place it in the article, thus avoiding the infobox turning into the article, I'm glad to note you came to see it my way. I hope you will consistently edit in this manner in your future contributions, and that perhaps you will revisit some of your earlier ones. Cheers, Dahn (talk) 18:31, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, since I could not help but notice the debate you're having with Gene Nygaard: Gene is obviously right here. Sorting names without replacing accented letters/letters with diacritics with their simple equivalents only creates a problem, as specified in the links that Gene pointed out to you.

For one, wikipedia is programmed to sort all letters with diacritics not after their non-diacritic equivalent, but after the letter Z. Take the word "Dâmboviţa", and picture that it is in the same category as the word "Dzungaria" - if you do not add script telling the program to view it as "Dambovita", it will show up in the category after Dzungaria, and not after or among words starting with "Dam". Please note that, if you tell the program to sort it as "Dambovita", it will show up among the "Dam" words, but it will have visible diacritics. So, you see, nothing is lost and all is gained by dropping the diacritics in categories. Dahn (talk) 18:45, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but that is just absurd. Gene has indicated that there are rules and has quoted them. See for instance WP:CG: Letters with accents or diacritics should generally be avoided in sort keys, because they are sorted incorrectly by the Mediawiki software. For example, the software sorts "á" after "z", which is not correct in any language and certainly not in English. For this reason, articles with accented characters in the title will almost certainly require an explicit sort key instead of relying on the default "sort by article title" behavior. For example, the article about the Hungarian town of Ács uses Acs as its sort key. Remember that sort keys are not displayed, so the article title will still show up with the correct spelling in the category page. Wikipedia is not a place for experimentation, so, yes, you will have to comply with them. Either that or present an alternative to the people who manage this project, wait for it to be adopted (if ever), and then start enforcing your new rules. Dahn (talk) 22:50, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I can read on this very page the links he gave to the guidelines, and I have quoted one of these myself just above. I do not actually take an interest in the conflict between you, what sparked it, and how it is being dealt with. My point is that his position happens to be right: there should be no diacritics in defaultsorts, for the sake of the reader, for consistency, and in accordance with the guidelines; also, wikipedia is not a place for experimentation (WP:POINT). You not wanting to create redirects to your articles or disambigs is okay - I cannot hold that against you. But (re)adding diacritics to defaultsorts is unmotivated and, as long as it is done over and over again, disruptive. Dahn (talk) 23:09, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what you mean by "defaultsort statement". If you mean the defaultsort itself, then I repeat that nobody wants to remove it: we just take the diacritics out of it. If you do not agree with this and proceed in reading diacritics to defaultsorts, then you may be reported for disruption. I repeat that this is not a place for each user to create his or her private database - if you disagree with the policy, try and change it, but, as long as it is there, you'll have to comply with it. I respect that you may not want to discuss things any further, but this I am telling you, not negotiating' with you.

Btw: one of the reasons why "ş" will never fall after "s" and before "t" on English wikipedia is the fact that not all languages that have it do not place it there. Another one is that there is no set order of what characters with diacritics are to one another (no language has all diacritics), so what wikipedia is using now is a sort of universal default. Dahn (talk) 23:56, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]