User talk:Alaexis: Difference between revisions

Hello Alaexis! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! —Khoikhoi 03:03, 28 September 2006 (UTC) Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects Getting your info out there Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy Getting more Wikipedia rules Policy Library Getting Help New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions Getting along Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Wikipedians Conflict resolution Getting technical Cleaning up vandalism Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

From Ldingley

Hmm, interesting, since you became a member of Wikipedia, you only focused on Abkhazia. Interesting. Ldingley 21:57, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Great user box of "united" Ossetia. Now i have an assurance of your NPOV stance for Georgia related articles. Keep up with the good work :) Cheers. Ldingley 21:37, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

==Viktor Boudianski==

Thanks for your research, i'm confused when i creating the article. I can't find source he is Russian and use his born place in stead. Matthew_hk tc 03:24, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

from GnomeG

"atlichni" babilon--Gnome(G) 21:03, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

List of foreign Serie A players - Boudianski

Hi, I'm the creator of the list, I see you are moving Boudianski to Russia, and I keep reverting :-P I appreciate your collaboration, really, but I need a source proving he is playing for a Russian nft. I trust you, but I'd like to see it with my eyes. Sorry for the edit war, it wasn't my intention. And keep collaborating, your work is welcome. P.S.: you can answer here, I'll read. --87.3.55.125 14:42, 24 January 2007 (UTC) (ex-Necronudist)

Well, let's ask the Russian and Ucrainian wiki-ambassadors 2 questions:

1. Is it clear from Victor's interview that he has played several games for Russian junior team?

2. Is it clear from Victor's interview that he has Russian citizenship?

Alaexis 15:00, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, you were right. You can modify it when you want. Please update me if he'll play in a U-21 or major Ukrainian nft. Thanks again for your contribution. --87.3.55.125 12:09, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Disruptive edits

Davids edits on the S. Ossetia page are harmful. I support your right to use the S.O. republic term as per wiki guidelines even though I oppose its independence,. Please contact me if he disrupts this again and I will support your reverts. Buffadren 18:48, 1 February 2007 (UTC).

I agree

I agree, the use of the words ' Self Proclaimed' is diplomatically meaningless even if somewhat incorrect given every country in the word is self proclaimed. bar few such as Hong Kong. One must use the correct political and legal termonology of De-facto Independent republic. And yes it should be used elsewhere too. If you ask me to support that well yes I have to agree with it from a legal position. Regards Buffadren 09:30, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

De Facto

Well if someone entered a house tonight and held the family at gunpoint, they would be in de-facto control of the house. However, the home owner is the de-jure controller owner of the property. The same applies. The legal status internationally speaking is not established fully and leans towrad Georgia. Would you prefer to use the words. De facto governance or de-facto government? It really depends on the cotext. I prefer control but won't revert if you really want to change it. Buffadren 10:51, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

When a country or region is subject to a territorial dispute such as this case, it is essential to explain the de-facto and de-jure situation. If you change it expect a flood of efot warriors. For now we can make better edits elsewhere in the article. Buffadren 11:28, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Cyprus

Standarization is nice i like that, but who agreed to that? For sure nobody asked me Aristovoul0s 14:50, 3 February 2007 (UTC) Another issue my dear friend is that you can not fit the same definition to different situations. The turkish community is not a de facto independent republic. it is heavily based on Turkey.

Ofcourse Turkey says that, and only Turkey since it is a dependency of Turkey and Turkish made. A puppet regime, a subordinate local administration, not a defact independent republic. Two different things. Aristovoul0s 15:13, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

here Cyprus related UN Resolutions Aristovoul0s 15:24, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Alaexis, it is factually wrong to state that the Turkish Comunity is is a de facto independent republic, because it is not independent even de facto. From de facto that you add the Turkish Community in the Republic of Cyprus would fall under "Some of these entities are in effect internally self-governing protectorates that enjoy military protection and informal diplomatic representation abroad through another state to prevent forced reincorporation into their original states" namely Turkey. Even de facto it is not independent. It is dependent heavily on Turkey in all aspects. I could agree with your version and stick with it if there is a minor change to your phrasing. Im sure you will see that it is minor change to what you are suggesting. like so:

The Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) (Turkish: Kuzey Kıbrıs Türk Cumhuriyeti) (KKTC) is located in northern Cyprus within the internationally recognised borders of the Republic of Cyprus. Its de facto declaration of independence was deemed legally invalid and recognised only by Turkey.The United Nations recognises the sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus over the whole island.

what do you think? Aristovoul0s 13:43, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Did you just asked me for proof for the proposed changes? Aristovoul0s 13:55, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Alaexis there is difference between de facto and de jure declaration. De jure declaration means that the country/state whatever declaration is internationaly acknowledged. i understand your concern for english lets rephrase then like so,

The Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) (Turkish: Kuzey Kıbrıs Türk Cumhuriyeti) (KKTC) is de facto located in northern Cyprus within the internationally recognised borders of the Republic of Cyprus. Its declaration of independence was deemed legally invalid and recognised only by Turkey.The United Nations recognises the sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus over the whole island. feel free to read through resolution 541 stating

• Deplores the declaration of Turkish Cypriot authorities.. of part of the Republic of Cyprus (note that de facto independent republic is not mentioned anywhere.
• Considers the declaration as legally invalid and calls for its withdrawal.

for protectorate read this: (from Loizidou vs Turkey

"In 1996 the European Court of Human Rights ruled 11 to 6 that Turkey committed a continuing violation of the rights of a Greek Cypriot woman by preventing her from going to her property located in north Cyprus. The ruling reaffirmed the validity of property deeds issued prior to 1974. The Court also found in this case that "it was obvious from the large number of troops engaged in active duties in northern Cyprus that the Turkish army exercised effective overall control there. In the circumstances of the case, this entailed Turkey’s responsibility for the policies and actions of the ‘TRNC’". In July the Court ordered Turkey to pay the woman approximately $915,000 in damages and costs by October 28. Initially Turkey declined to pay the damages awarded.

Now provide proof for your version please Aristovoul0s 14:18, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Well not really. "De facto independent republic" is repetition of the word de facto which means "in fact legally or illegaly". Defacto does not mean illegal which in this case it is illegal as proved above. Look i am only removing two words from your variant that i am still waiting for proof. Like so:

The Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) (Turkish: Kuzey Kıbrıs Türk Cumhuriyeti) (KKTC) is de facto located in northern Cyprus within the internationally recognised borders of the Republic of Cyprus. Its declaration of independence was deemed legally invalid and recognised only by Turkey.The United Nations recognises the sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus over the whole island.

Aristovoul0s 14:46, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

agreed? Aristovoul0s 15:03, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

No Alaexis, It is de facto = in fact located within the Republic of Cyprus. It is not "de facto independent republic". Where is it refered as such? Please provide proof for those 4 words. Aristovoul0s 15:28, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

You asked for proof

See how the ECHR refers to what you say "de facto independent Republic". It refers to it as "subordinate local administration of Turkey" and finds Turkey responsible for actions of TRNC as a protectorate/subordinate administration here Read the case through points 47-52 pasted below

47. The Turkish Government submitted that, in essence, the present case did not concern the acts or omissions of Turkey but those of the "TRNC" which they claimed to be an independent State established in the north of Cyprus. As the only Contracting Party to have recognised the "TRNC", with whose authorities it has close and friendly relations, its

role before the Court was limited to that of an amicus curiae since the "TRNC" was not itself able to be a "party" to the present proceedings.

48. For the applicant Government, it was not open to Turkey under the Rules of Court to change its status in this way and to appear on behalf of an illegal regime which had been established in defiance of international law and which has not been recognised by the

international community.

49. The applicant for her part considered that the Turkish Government's position amounted, in effect, to an objection ratione loci.

50. The Commission maintained that Turkey appeared not as an amicus curiae but as a High Contracting Party to the Convention.

51. The Court does not consider that it lies within the discretion of a Contracting Party to the Convention to characterise its standing in the proceedings before the Court in the manner it sees fit. It observes that the case originates in a petition made under Article 25

(art. 25), brought by the applicant against Turkey in her capacity as a High Contracting Party to the Convention and has been referred to the Court under Article 48 (b) (art. 48-b) by another High Contracting Party.

52. The Court therefore considers - without prejudging the remainder of the issues in these proceedings - that Turkey is the respondent Party in this case.

also from point 62 when Turkey objected that TRNC is not liable to Turkey the court describes it as "subordinate local administration"

European Court of Human Rights says that Turkey is liable for all actions not TRNC.

Going a step further TRNC is dependent upon Turkey for its economy, Economy of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus "The Turkish Cypriots are heavily dependent on monetary transfers from the Turkish government. Under the 2003-06 economic protocol, Ankara plans to provide around $550 million to the TRNC". This protocol is one of the agreements you were looking for for that "formally agrees (voluntarily or under pressure) by treaty to enter into an unequal relationship with another, stronger state, called the protector, which engages to protect it (diplomatically or, if needed, militarily) against third parties, in exchange for which the protectorate usually accepts specified obligations, which may vary greatly, depending on the real nature of their relationship"

You provided only the definition of wikipedia saying what a protectorate is. You did not provide proof saying that TRNC is "de facto independent Republic". That is what you need to provide.Aristovoul0s 16:02, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Bagram Battalion

I provided a link on the talkpage that says it was active in Russia. Can I revert, keeping the category Kober added? KazakhPol 08:25, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Abkhazia

Shalom Alex. Well, why should I trust Russian sources and why should they be excluded from pro-Russian POV? Russia is directly involved in the crisis and she has one major interest, swallow the Georgian territories. Therefore, quoting Russian sources is also one sided, especially some dictionary of 1800s. I don’t think that Islamic Dictionary article by Vladimir Minorovsky is a neutral source. Again, Russia and Russians have direct involvement in this problem and therefore they represent the conflicting side. Kolbaia is not an author of your quote but Tedo Sakhokia is. He only uses his quote in his book. Where does your Russian and Islamic encyclopaedia take their census of the demographics in Abkhazia? Don’t give me the Russian links please; they are overly idiotic when it comes to their Georgian orthodox brethren and their history. How about we try to look for them in neutral sources, which does not include Russian, Georgian and Abkhaz? I think it would be more appropriate and will be most helpful. Ldingley 22:02, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Wow your sources are great. Specialy this one [1] and especially "Народ еще далеко отстоит от культуры" well based on my poor Russian, its not really a nice comment about the Abkhaz. Unfortunately i don’t understand many things in that text but that was funny. I guess the Russians considered everyone in Caucasus “uncultured”, even their future allies :) hehe. Cheers mite! Ldingley 22:09, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Well i dont want to disapoint you but here: [2] my demographics chart has the following description: These census figures are disputed on a number of grounds including the way in which ethnic groups have been defined. It is true. The Mingrelian and Svan groups are not separate from the Georgian ethnic group, they are sub-ethnic group of the Georgian people. Therefore to separate their population in Abkhazia is senseless. Ldingley 23:09, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Alex, do you need photo of Abkhazians? Ldingley 18:23, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Ethnic Cleansing

The answer is this. The use of the words 'ethnic cleansing' are a violation of legal rights under international law. Firstly, it is clearly sub judice and secondly, it consitutes a breach and clear infringement of the principal of Due Process. Well-meaning as Ldingley may be, his edits could be used in defence evidence presented by those in The Hague. Regards B. Buffadren 19:11, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

That's me

I'm really Alaexis here and there.Alaexis 10:34, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

regarding Georgia

Can you provide any sources that will support your false statistic? In addition, wikipedia has the policy called that you cannot just blank the paragraph, which you did when you removed the statement telling about the diversity of Georgia's population. Please see WP:Vandalism and 'discuss before editing something. This is an academical discussion rather than a POV-war. Take care, SosoMK 19:05, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Dear friend, it is weird some of the sources say opposite things. For example according to BBC, [[3]] total populations of S. Ossetia and Abkhazia are 250 + 70 = 320 thousand and Georgia has approximately 240, 000 IDPs. So you figure that Georgians did make the majority in both regions, counting all the people who died in the conflict as well, especially in Abkhazia. However, that does not matter, diversity is the strength of Georgia and that's what the article says. In addition, those territories are historical parts of Georgia. You might know that even Sochi used to be a Georgian city before the Red Army invasion of Georgia. 19:47, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

So the simple math says that Georgians used to the majority. In addition, not all the minorities were Abkhaz, there were Greeks, Ukrainians, Jews and etc. SosoMK 19:51, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

take a look at Abkhaz people SosoMK 19:52, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

My friend, it really does not matter if we say 45% or majority, there are no differences between them: 45% was the majority, I guess SosoMK 19:58, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, good researchSosoMK 20:07, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

BTW, do you come from Sokhumi? SosoMK 20:09, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, nice to meet you and Good luck improving the articles. SosoMK 20:13, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry Tiger

My error Sorry tiger !! Buffadren 18:24, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Your subpage User:Alaexis/Abkhazwogallery

The subpage shows up in two categories: Category:Unrecognized or largely-unrecognized states and Category:Abkhazia. Could you please remove it from those categories. Thanks. --Xeeron 17:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

ביצ'וינתה

Hello Alexis and shalom

When I translate from english thiere was no abkhazian name. so I put the georgian name. פיצונדה is russian name. Are you positive that the rosian and abkhazian name are the same? Geagea 21:52, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Yuri Nikiforov

Hi! Thanks again for watching my works! He was born in Ukraine and he played for Ukrainian nft, so he can be considered Ukrainian. If a footballer played for his native national team he can be considered as a representer of the nation where he was born. I don't give importance to the number of games played for a national team or another. However I can be wrong... Nikiforov was born in Ukraine and played for Russian and Ukrainian nft, do you think he can be considered Russian? Ukraine win 2-1 (place of birth and national team versus national team with more games played) :-) I'd like to know your opinion. --necronudist 09:42, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Mmm...I think it would be better keeping him on Ukraine list and adding a note. Or maybe in the Russia list with the note, but I think that if a player played for his major native national team should be listed under his nation of birth. --necronudist 14:41, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to avoid players listed twice, it's better to make a decision and explain the controversie with a note. --necronudist 20:21, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, there are no arguments, like for listing twice. In this cases I just do what the creator of the article want (see Talk:List of foreign MLS players). Simply, I'd like to avoid repetitions of informations, notes are usefull in this cases. If it isn't enough for you, I don't know what to say. --necronudist 08:57, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I don't talk to people that don't want to understand. Do what you like, I don't want double-infos. --necronudist 12:41, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Абхазские имена

Привет! я кажется усовершенствовал транслитерацию с Абхазского на Английский. Теперь бы мне найти карту с абхазскими названиями или список оных где-нибудь в интернете! --Üñţïf̣ļëŗ (see also:ә? Ә!) 09:29, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Кстати, Пицунда, судя по дорожным указателям, действительно одинаково будет и по русски, и по абхазски.... --Üñţïf̣ļëŗ (see also:ә? Ә!) 09:29, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Church

That web site is not NPOV and actually does not represent church in Abkhazia. Also using Galina Starovoitova article is unacceptable for NPOV article. I know very well about her writings and activities, which i can rate as hysterical ultra-nationalism against Georgians, Ukrainians, Azeri, etc. Therefore, you should use more neutral source of any kind. If you want a real authority of the Abkhaz church, why not use Georgian orthodox Church link than? Even Russian church recognized Abkhazian as part of Georgian Autocephaly. Euskera 18:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I know very well who she is. And her work is not suitable for NPOV article. I have read her views on Georgia and Ukraine and was astonished by her nationalist rhetoric. Therefore, that article by this author (who has bad history of Georgia bashing) is not suitable for that article. Euskera 18:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

That link is by POV author Alaexis and it has no place on that article. She is a cheuvenist and racist if you ask me. In the book A Question of Sovereignity: The Georgia-Abkhazia Peace Process, J Cohen, her speech is recorded. She is calling for desolving the Georgian state and only leaving "Kutaisi highway" for the Georgian people. If you publish her work, than i dotn see nothign wrong with publishing georgian authors which call her fascist. Euskera 14:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Transnistria

I understand that you don't accept the introduction, but why you revert all the other changes which I discussed in talk from 27 March and no argument was raised against them. With some of the changes you agreed in talk, but you still reverted (http://conflict.md link for example).--MariusM 20:13, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Christianity in Abkhazia

Hi. I just had a quick look through that article. There are some passages which are really evenhanded, but I spotted quite a few pieces typical to modern Abkhaz mythology.

Поэтому, из первых Абхазских католикосов известен только Евдемон I, который упоминается в духовном завещании Абхазо -Имеретинского царя Давида - Возобновителя (1089 - 1130).

Eudemon I was a Georgian bishop in Bichvinta (modern Pitsunda) and did not possess any independent power, but was a subordinate to the Georgian Patriarch. The title of David the Builder is another mystification. He was the King of Georgia traditionally titled as King of Abkhaz, Georgians, Armenians, etc. The author of this essay carefully omits the fact that after Abkhazia (Abasgia) seceded from the Byzantine Empire, Abkhaz nobility and church adopted Georgian as a language of culture and literacy. Note that most of the churches in Abkhazia from that time are decorated with Georgian inscriptions and frescos, and manuscripts copied there are also in Georgian. Also, the terms “Abkhazia” and “Abkhazians” were used in a broader sense in the Middle Ages and denoted western Georgians as well as Abasgians, the ancestors of modern Abkhaz. (you can roughly compare the situation with that of Grand Duchy of Lithuania which encompassed large Slavic regions)

Абхазская церковь, как автокефальная, была представлена на Никейском вселенском соборе в VIII в. (787) в лице Пицундского епископа, католикоса Абхазского.

Gosh! The church of Abkhazia autocephalous?? I wonder whether the author of the essay has even seen the lists of autocephalous churches? Even the legitimacy of Georgian autocephaly of that time was sometimes disputed and was a subject of the famous heated epistolatory debate between the prominent Georgian monk George the Hagiorite and the Patriarch of Antioch in the mid-11th century.

Стало уже чувствоваться давление со стороны Грузии на церковную независимость Абхазии.

Sigh!

Вот, благодаря этому обстоятельству, аб¬хазцы только в XIV в.(1390) вновь избрали себе католи¬коса, Арсения, который жил в Пицунде.

Arseni was not "elected by Abkhaz", but he was installed by the King of Imeretia as a Catholicos of Abkhazia and Imeretia. The name of the catholicosate was frequently abbreviated as "Abkhazian" because it was headquartered in Bichvinta, but the residence was later transferred in Chkondidi (Mingrelia) when the Turks took control of Abkhazia.

В таком роде должно выразится наше пожелание в переустройстве нашей религиозной жизни, и определения положения, нашей мно¬гострадальной церкви в свободном Российском Государстве.

O!

The mistakes above are not just "according to my opinion." You can check them in the books by leading Western and Russian historians of Georgia and the Caucasus (David Marshall Lang, WED Allen, Cyril Toumanoff, Vladimir Minorsky, etc). I generally dislike both Georgian and Abkhaz mystifications of history and I hate when Georgians respond to Abkhaz mythmakers by the invention of new myths. I understand your political sympathies and antipathies, but the church history is a very sensitive area and please don’t let pseudoscience mislead you. --Kober^Talk 08:26, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Privet Alex. I was just reading a chapter from Archaeology at the North-East Anatolian Frontier by A.G. Sagona, and I found another reference to the Georgian-Abkhazian religious unity in the early Middle Ages: “Religious unity between east and west Georgian states occurred when the Abkhazian church severed from Constantinople, and acknowledged Mtskheta, the capital of Kartli, as the spiritual centre of Christianity in the region.” (pp. 93-94)--Kober^Talk 18:48, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Transnistria

We have a serious problem on the Transnistria page, short term The new editors have a policy of making Transnistria look like an ungovernable hell. Not good Buffadren 13:10, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Please take care at 3RR.--MariusM 13:27, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Privet

Слушай, помоги улучшить статью Terek Cossacks, а также загляни на talk page. --Kuban Cossack 15:20, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi!

Please beware of Wikipedia:Three-revert_rule. --Des Grant 08:36, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Recommendation

I'd recommend calming down a bit. I'm seeing lots of reverts from you and lots of talking through edit summaries. Please do not do that if at all possible. It only leads to angry users. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 10:41, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

USSR coat of arms

Sorry, I didn't quite understand you. Are you going to nominate for deletion the USSR coat of arms vector picture? And if yes, why? Alaexis 05:02, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

No, I nominated for deletion the JPG version. There's already a version of it with a transparent background (should also be deleted, but we'll wait). The SVG version should be the only one in use. — Alex^(T|C|E) 06:46, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

3RR violation

You have been blocked for 24 for violation of 3RR. Yes, in spirit, not truly in actuality, but you were already warned about 3RR (after you had committed a fourth revert in 24:04). You have now reverted 5 times in 30:14 on List of sovereign states. Please give it a break for a while. Wikipedia will not rush out to "the print version" while your back is turned. Lexicon (talk) 16:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

On second thought, it's only 12 hours, since I believe you will learn from this quickly. I have also not reverted your final revert. Lexicon (talk) 16:19, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. If you disagree with what's written in the Transnistria article post your issues on the appropriate talkpage.

ps. Please beware of Wikipedia:Three-revert_rule --M-renewal 13:53, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Это опять я можешь мне помочь?

Помоги мне избавится от никчёмников, а? Agof[K.P.2] §§§

In reply to your mail, you are not blocked. See instructions below.

Economy

Because what I wrote about the economy of Georgia is well-written and documented. In addition, it was copy-edited by the administrators and I really do not want anybody to reword or rewrite it. So, please leave that alone, alright, buddy? SosoMK 21:33, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Bonaparte

Taken care of. Khoikhoi 04:00, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks a lot for editing and fixing errors, i appreciate it. Ldingley 17:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Another article to keep an eye on

Anti-Russian Sentiment, could use your expertise. --Kuban Cossack 19:22, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Alex should i remind you of 3RR? Ldingley 15:48, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Any time bro (actually you made 3RR). BTW where are your lovely anti-Georgian user boxes? They suited your user page so well. Ldingley 15:52, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

de facto independent

Hello,

I would like to ask you whether you support de facto independent republic phrasing to describe Chechnya?

Personally, I don't like it, but, as long as it is used for Transnistria, Abkhazia and South Ossetia, maybe it should be used for Chechnya as well.Dl.goe 21:26, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to jump in, but did you read the actual article on Chechnya? It WAS de-facto independent, and so it is stated here. It is also called a country and a republic there. --Illythr 21:56, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Errrm, "Following the bloody First Chechen War with Russia,[...] the republic gained a de facto sovereignty, although only the Afghan Taliban government recognised it in January 2000". So uh, what was the problem with the word "sovereign" for Transnistria again? It seems to be okay for Chechnya... --Illythr 22:04, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Alaexis, thank you very much for your help in articles about localities in Transnistria. :Dc76 18:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

For the other guys, soveregn=statehood. So, just look at the Constitution of Russia, and at the treaties between Russian and the former autonomous republics, e.g. Tatarstan, to see whether there is a mention there of statehood. I believe there isn't, but you can check. E.g. in Germany, Bavaria is sovereign, while the other lands are not. The problem with sovereign Chechnya is that only the Taliban said so. That frankly speaking does not make it sovereign. For example, I, do want Chechnya to be independent (honestly), but I can not recognize it without interfering in the internal affairs of Russia (and I'd rather not declare war on Russia for the cause of Chechnya - it is like Serbia with Kosovo, only Russia is more powerful), b/c Chechnya does not have the formal right to secession. It does not impede me to support Chechnya's srtive for independence, but I wish, I can not make it independent. Only Russia can. (or military conquest of Russia, which is totally absurd) BTW, I do not support Kosovo's independence, personally I believe it should be devided 50-50 between Serbia and Albania, despite ethnically being 10-90. Somewhat on the same tokken, I believe the security fence is the true and only solution to the middle east conflict - when palestinians will give up terrorism, they will get that as their international border. no more and no less.:Dc76 18:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Кто тут вступает в Internet troll squad без моего разрешения? :-)

Я не понял курсант, кто Вам выдал погоны? :-) Ознакомься с моими погонами и трепещи!!! :-)

Добро пожаловать в Internet Troll Squad! Неужели Biophys теперь добавит Моссад в свой славный шедевр - Internet brigades? Vlad fedorov 13:36, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

C Праздником!

File:Red-flag-on-Reichstag, another angle, no smoke..jpg

НАШЕ ДЕЛО ПРАВОЕ — МЫ ПОБЕДИЛИ
-Kuban Cossack

Trip

Hello, I didn't really intend to focus on my trip's purpose so much. But I can tell you that the situation there has dramatically improved in every sphere. The issues on the ground do not match the issues on the Transnistria page which is mainly Moldovan outdated position balanced by some proTransnistrian stuff too. House prices have risen 50% in one year, German cars are everywhere and the shops are more fancy and better stocked. The educational establishments have improved somewhat and the Hospitals are not far off western standards. The banking system is tightly controlled and money laundering is impossible. There are downsides, The freedom of the press is still an issue. as is Sheriff's monopoly in the mobile phone market mainly, and as government funds deplete Russia gains more and more control over enterprises etc. The customs regulations are considered by everyone to be an economic blockade to ecomomicaly cally collapse the country and it the interim hurt those not remotely interested in the political fight. The young people are more anti European than ever which is utterly depressing. Tiraspol is extremely safe even to walk the streets late at night. That's about the height of it. As for Wiki there are those like Marius that believe the onlly way to solve anything here is to ram them into the ground. Sadly this is having the opposite effect but its pointless trying to change him and his friends, to them it is a policy of destruction of PMR reputation regardless of impact to real folks there. I am unable to assist those here so for now the Black Propagandaists hold the day.Buffadren 12:19, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

RE: Georgia

Hi there! I hope you're well. Given recent edit warring, I have submitted the following report; please feel free to comment. Thanks. Corticopia 23:06, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

RE: Abkhazia

You've already made 3 reverts. Please beware of WP:3RR. (PaC 19:36, 13 May 2007 (UTC))

talk:Transnistria

I made a confusion, and I appologized. :Dc76 21:07, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

My crossings were made in bad faith - I assumed Marc Street was Mauco - therefore it was only natural to immediately reverse them and appologize for them once the mistake was discovered. I don't see a problem to express regret for a 2-hour inconvinience coused by me even to someone (Marc Street) whom I regard as a proponent of PMR's propaganda. It is his controversial POV edits that are a problem, while his presence on WP - that is noone's right to infringe upon as long as he did not brake any serious rule. I hope he won't keep a grudge on me for the 2-hour incident.:Dc76 13:22, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

If only there were more paid members of the KGB Internet troll squad. :-)--Hadžija 19:39, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm just a civilian sympathiser myself :-)--Hadžija 20:20, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

personal question

Do you mind a personal question? On your user page you write "... paid member of KGB Internet troll squad." Is this actually true, or just something you like to write on WP user page? (for example at least KGB is now FSB) Just for curiosity. I don't really care who you are in real life. Anyway, I also have a second question: what would be the aim of these squads from your POV, to fight against what? I mean examples, not abstractizations. I would have guessed something like kavkaz.org or chechenpress would be the target, but they are well up and running, so either KGB does not have means (hardly to believe) or does not want the public to see it doing this. The biggest dammage to them is by theselves: the first one is so pro-Palestinian and anti-USA that it discredits its comments from the start. The only thing about it is that in case something happens in Chechnya, only that site have details eveyone else doesn't. The second one appartently was at times run by people who sometimes don't care and did not update it for months at a row. And my last question, how do they pay, by hour, by number of specific tasks given, or by what? :-) :Dc76 20:40, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

:-) ok, so it's just a joke. The article on fedorov's user page seems quite real and truthful to me. Whatever. ok, it's not true, but just tell me how much do they pay you. :-) :-) :Dc76 20:54, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

A rase is more likely to happen. :-) ok, just tell me how they quatify your activity :-) Come on, you got me with "the concept of humour", I have to try to get you with something :-) :Dc76 21:05, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I meant "quaNtify", but have eatten the "N". It means "how/what do they count?" :-) :Dc76 21:14, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

(if we continue our discussion) in quotes, we can say that KGB would quatrefoil us in quatrains, and would commute us like quaternions to Lyubyanka, quadrupling their quantification of our files. :Dc76 21:29, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

"mother Russia" being a codename for "father Putin" :) :Dc76 21:34, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Nah, Putin's too young for such an important role. We've got grandfather Lenin, though...

Hey, Alaexis, how much does the KGB FinDep pay per month of Hardcore Stalinist Suppression of The Truth(tm) (see this as proof of my good evil work)? I think my paycheck is long overdue... --Illythr 23:04, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Alaexis. I am thinking at changing sides. My malefic plan to create a vacancy is going well. Can you please give me details about employment conditions? Do they recognize lenght of service in similar structures? I can provide recomandations about the quality of my work :-).--MariusM 16:31, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

The counter

Don't forget to up the counter! ;-) --Illythr 23:04, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Ethnic Russians in Ukraine

There is a very hot dispute there, can you give a hand or two? --Kuban Cossack 20:56, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Abkhazia

I believe I only made two reverts. The first one was a genuine edit. I must warn you however about WP:3RR. Be careful. (PaC 06:31, 19 May 2007 (UTC))

Hello Alaexis. You were wondering why I made those critical remarks on the Arbcom page regarding your reverting behaviour on Abkhazia and on List of sovereign states. Well, I looked into it again and I do see you revert-warring quite a bit. And I'm not counting the reverts of obvious banned-user open proxy socks (legitimate), nor those made against users like User:ARISTOKLES who were later revealed to be banned socks (even though those are not exactly exempted from 3RR, according to the letter of the law). Even when I discount all those, I see 9 reversions in the matter of the 1897 census figures on Abkhazia alone, between 30 April and 19 May, and I see 26 reverts on List of sovereign states between 13 April and 19 May, that is an average of one revert per day for every day the page wasn't protected. Don't you think that's quite a lot? And yes, I believe you did technically violate 3RR today on Abkhazia, just as Papa Carlo did. -- I think you are an intelligent contributor with a potential of making useful contributions even in hotly contentious articles, so I have no big desire of pressing charges against you in the Arbcom case, but I do think you ought to rethink your reverting style there. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:25, 19 May 2007 (UTC)