User talk:harej

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is a Wikipedia user page. This is not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Harej.

Welcome to my talk page!

• Please add all messages under its own header on the bottom.
• If you need an urgent response, email me.
• If you leave a message here, I will respond on your talk page. I expect you likewise to make your follow-up response (if applicable) on my page, and so forth. The exception is for trivial responses (like "ok" or "thank you") and if the messenger is not registered.
• If you sent me a message and you want me to reply on this page instead, I will do so.

Archives

• November 26, 2004 - August 31, 2006
• September 1, 2006 - November 15, 2006
• November 16, 2006 - January 22, 2007
• January 23, 2007 - April 11, 2007
• April 12, 2007 - July 2, 2007
• July 3, 2007 - September 3, 2007
• September 4, 2007 - April 13, 2008
• April 14, 2008 - February 15, 2009
• February 16, 2009 - Present

Contents 1 2008 South Ossetia war 2 Meran 3 Children of the Anachronistic Dynasty 4 Your bot 5 Bagram Air Base → Airfield 6 Yoghurt →Yogurt 7 RFA nomination 8 Ojibwa→Ojibwe 9 MFD 10 Yoghurt 11 User:Full-date unlinking bot 12 CfD nomination of Category:Relisted AfD debates

[edit] 2008 South Ossetia war

Where exactly do you see consensus for such as move? Note that such moves should be decided not by you, but by consensus, and that unfortunately simply does not exist. I'll have to ask you to please withdraw your "decision", as it is clearly against WP:CONSENSUS. Offliner (talk) 20:04, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Second that, particularly as "War in South Ossetia" was not even taken into account, which together with "South Ossetia War", has as many results as "Russia-Georgia war". Unfortunately, we can't use War in South Ossetia, as this is a disambiguation due to the 1991-1992 war. Hence, why it should be at 2008 South Ossetia war, and even moreso as Offliner is correct in saying that there was nothing near consensus in the move request. --Russavia ^Dialogue 20:16, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I have decided to respond right on this talk page to keep the discussion centralized. I went with what arguments were made. The most prevalent argument I have seen is that we should go with the most common name. Almost all of the objections had nothing to do with naming the page, but a procedural objection; "we had this discussion a few months ago" is not a reason to not move a page, but a reason to not have a discussion. The oppose votes which were relevant to the name of the page did not catch on. As a result, the most popular argument, the one that gained the most consensus and echoes what is written on the naming conventions guideline, is that we should go with the most common name.

That is my interpretation of the discussion. It's definitely possible that I went about this the wrong way, and I am willing to do a "revote". This time, however, I only want to see arguments that have to do with the page title. Furthermore, I would like to organize it differently so that each reason for having whichever title is a subsection, and also, please try to be more collegiate about this. As entertaining as it was to read your nastiness, it's not necessarily convincing. (Thankfully, it did not factor into my decision making, as I lost track of who was being nasty to whom). After I post this, I will change the result of the discussion and set up the structure for a new one. No excuses this time. —harej (talk) 20:32, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Meran

And where, in Talk:Meran#move?, do you see consensus for the nineteenth-century archaism Meran? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:35, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry to be dealing with it badly; but I've been watching these same editors misstate our policy and come up with fraudulent evidence far too long. Enough. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:46, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Children of the Anachronistic Dynasty

Hi there. I nominated three albums by this group for deletion, Dog.House (album), Fingernails (album), and Peace Day (film). Someone then nominated the band itself for deletion. Somehow (a result of different people voting for each nom) the band was deleted, but Dog.House (album) and Fingernails (album) were not - it was decided to merge them into the band's page. But then the band's page was deleted. What should be done now? Obviously albums by a non-notable band are also non-notable (well, at least in this case). Should I renominate them, or can they be speedily deleted? Thanks. Conical Johnson (talk) 22:07, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Your bot

Your bot just blanked the Honduras coup talk page. i reverted it. Thanks, SqueakBox talk 04:12, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

The same happened at Talk:Neuengamme just now.[1] Jafeluv (talk) 05:43, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Bagram Air Base → Airfield

This move simply needs to happen. As it is now it is providing misinformation on the name of the installation. I don't think this can be argued under the common name ideas as every person on this installation (which makes up a very large number that I can't relay) call it Bagram Airfield -- more than any Google search will show. Not only that, people who have been here before call it such. The human count of people who call it by its proper name or the shorter version, BAF, outnumber any other count I imagine one could gather. I'm a bit annoyed as I really would like to see accurate information here.. and I'm really disappointed that this is considered OK as it makes me curious if other articles are named incorrectly because of a misconception too. With that I'm also taking a look at WP:Ignore_all_rules which makes me believe I might need to if I want this article named properly. Whats your view? -JE (Let's talk) (My contribs) 08:16, 6 July 2009 (UTC) Replied on my talk page -JE (Let's talk) (My contribs) 08:41, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Again, replied on my talk page. Also, I've contact Public Affairs in an attempt to see why they're calling the page "Bagram Air Base" yet every reference made to articles and images is "Bagram Airfield". -JE (Let's talk) (My contribs) 15:40, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Yoghurt →Yogurt

The result of the move request was page not moved. There is not enough consensus over the idea of Google tests overriding the regional variant ceasefire. I think this idea should be discussed at a larger scale. Of course, the page name debate for this article can be revisited a while from now, when there may be more consensus over whether or not this article title should have an 'h' in it.

First, thank you for helping with the backlog at WP:RM. However, I'm thinking this one might have done too quickly... did you read the entire discussion? Whether google tests override the regional variant ceasefire was not the only issue presented, by far. The following issues were also raised:

1. This move has been proposed multiple times since it was moved from its original place at Yogurt. While there has never been a clear consensus to move it back to Yogurt, there has never been a clear consensus to keep it at Yoghurt. There were several good arguments presented for why this pattern will probably stop, and can only be stopped, by moving the article back to Yogurt.
2. The MOS states that, ""Wikipedia tries to find words that are common to all varieties of English." The h-variant is not used in many varieties of English, the no-h-variant is used in all varieties of English, therefore the no-h-variant meets the MOS guideline while the h-variant does not.
3. A reliable source was cited that discusses the point that usage of the h-variant is disappearing even in the U.K.

In short, attempts to achieve a ceasefire by leaving the article at Yoghurt have failed miserably. It's time to give Yogurt a chance.

Thank you. --Born2cycle (talk) 17:31, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

You wrote: "I don't see it as wise to rename the article until there is a lot of support from people from countries that traditionally add the 'h'." " That's an incredibly unreasonable and impossible standard to satisfy, and ignores all of the arguments made in favor of moving Yoghurt to Yogurt. It also violates WP:NPOV. People from countries that traditionally add the 'h' are likely to be biased and emotional about protecting their tradition. This is not a case of where one variant is used in one area, and another variant in another area. I repeat, the no-h variant is commonly used and easily recognized throughout the English speaking world. The h-variant is only selectively used here and there, and it's usage is diminishing even there. --Born2cycle (talk) 17:39, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] RFA nomination

Regretfully I must inform you I have declined the nomination - detailed reasoning is on the RFA subpage. Exxolon (talk) 18:06, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Ojibwa→Ojibwe

Not all possible participants have taken note of the article move vote. However, when the bot removed the "request for move" notice, it removed the entire page. Undoing bot removal. Will take the notice to next wider group. CJLippert (talk) 21:49, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] MFD

I take that RFCBot has not yet undertaken removing closed discussions from MFD?--Aervanath (talk) 04:35, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

It has not. I am still trying to think of the best way of carrying out archival. —harej (talk) (cool!) 04:39, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Ok. No rush. :)--Aervanath (talk) 02:57, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Yoghurt

Discussion is starting up again in the talk page trying to form justification to move the article. Essentially it seems to me like a third RM. Is there a way we can take the discussion to another level while it's at a point which I think is fairly undramatic? I really think this situation merits the attention of an admin experienced with the spirit of the national variant section of the MOS. - BalthCat (talk) 00:52, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] User:Full-date unlinking bot

Thanks so much for your thorough and prompt initiation of the next step! I think the RfC should have a watchlist notice. Do you think you can apply for one? Dabomb87 (talk) 14:12, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] CfD nomination of Category:Relisted AfD debates

I have nominated Category:Relisted AfD debates (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 15:01, 9 July 2009 (UTC)