User talk:Nyenyec

Welcome!

Hello, Nyenyec, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If 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. Again, welcome!  --Lst27 19:14, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Hi Nyenyec,

I'm sorry for the possible confusion I created by reverting and then un-reverting Talk:Uralic languages, where User:Antifinnugor directed some comments at you which were completely irrelevant for the discussion. Thought you should know. Keep up the good work and stay cool! Kind regards — mark ✎ 17:18, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hi Nyenyec,

Thanks to your adding the NPOV warning, the article on Finno-Ugric languages now reads: "The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see its talk page." This is completely false. This page has been under attack for the past few weeks by a troll, who knows nothing about this subject and whose only source is something published on the Web by a crackpot named "Dr. László Marácz" (I bothered to read it and, as a seasoned historical linguist, I guarantee you it has no scientific basis whatsoever). There is absolutely no serious scientific dispute about the status of the Finno-Ugric language family. You have done a disservice to the Wikipedia by elevating this troll to such high status. Pasquale 21:31, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)

pasquale, this proves (again) your complete incompeteness. Dr. Marácz is a linguist, and not a software translator nobody, like you. Just for your information. Antifinnugor 16:30, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

---

Thanks for your reply. I just answered you on my talk page. But, frankly, I am getting a bit weary of all this. I don't know where some people get all their energy. Ultimately, and thank God!, it makes no difference to science what the Wikipedia says! Pasquale 21:41, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hi, how did you find the Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Critic_of_Finno_Ugric_and_Uralic_language_Groups page? Nyenyec 20:55, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC) why are you asking this???Balf 19:15, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I'm colorblind too. Thanks for the stylesheet. --Alterego 05:36, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

hi Nyenyec — I appear to find myself on another sort of linguistic crusade... I invite you to vote here (some background is here and here). dab (ᛏ) 10:33, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

btw, will you put your Linguistics & Politics writeup into article space soon? I think it will make a great 'see also' from the FU article (and also, we can delegate mention of this Masacz character to this article, where he is more at home). cheers, dab (ᛏ) 10:37, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

About the ling/pol writeup. I need to dig up a lot more references to finish it properly. It's not easy, there aren't many good online references about this topic. Also it will be a prime target for Hungarian nationalists. The flamefest you see in the English pages is only the tip of the iceberg. I've been labeled "Anti-Hungarian", "defaming", "hatemonger" for that page. :(

To tell the truth I'd like to leave this all behind me and go back to my favorite topic: military history.

Nyenyec 16:20, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

yes, I think not much new will come to light now, anyway. At least the rfc seems to have reduced afu's zeal in editing the actual articles, though. I think we should leave it, for now, and if he returns to article space as an edit warrior, take him straight to WP:RFAr. I feel sort of responsible for this case now, because it has annoyed me too much to just forget about it, and because I seem to have drawn afu's ire particularly. I still will not open an arbitration case unilaterally, but if you or somebody else supports it, I will ask for arbitration, and hopefully end this sad chapter. dab (ᛏ) 19:07, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

You write:

• because it has annoyed me too much to just forget about it, and because I seem to have drawn afu's ire particularly.

Join the club. ;)

Let's see how the RFC ends. BTW, I don't think AFU's zeal is dwindling a bit. (Remember, what you see on the English pages is a walk in the park compared to hu:wp). But if this issue can be resolved here, either with compromise, mitigation or some other way, it will restore my faith in the Wikipedia process. I'm hopeful, since he's not the first of his kind in the English Wikipedia and Finno-Ugric debate is not the first "hot" issue. In HU:WP we still lack the proper procedures and culture in the community for dealing with issues like this. So I'll wait and see. Nyenyec 20:38, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I am glad I don't have to put up with the situation on hu:, and I feel for you. This is also a reason why I won't just walk away from the case, hoping that a sane outcome will also be a boost for sanity on hu:. I do note, however, that afu does not seem to make any more article edits, at the moment. But, for all I care, why not include an external link to this Maracz article. There is so much linkspam on WP that it will not matter if there is one more crank linked. If that is enough to stop the dispute, I am willing to link it, maybe with a 'controversial' qualifier. dab (ᛏ) 11:31, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Hi, Nyenyec! I've just seen your post in es.wikipedia.org. Even if I'm not an expert in the field, I have a deep interest on it (my ancestors were Euskaldunak == plural of Euskaldun == those who speak Euskara == Basques). On the other hand, one of my "hobbyst" activities is studying the peoples and civilization of the Central Asian steppes, which includes the Huns. It's the first time I notice that theory, but many speculative theories on Basque origin exist. Most of those are more or less esoterical, and with little or no ground on actual facts. What I can point out around this issue is:

• No serious Basque scholar supports that theory;
• Basques were well established in their territories way before the arrival of the Huns to Eastern Europe;
• There is no evidence at all of the presence of Huns (or other turcomongol peoples) in the historical basque territory
• Euskara (the Basque language) is unique, i.e., not related to any other living language, and has no relationship with the group of languages that could have been spoken by the Huns and their confederates.

As a preliminary conclusion, the theory relating Basques with Huns has no grounds. If you need any additional info, do not hesitate in contacting me. Cinabrium

Well, I've just read your question en spanish wikipedia, and (if you want) i offer you information about Spain and Basque country. urko1982@hotmail.com --Urko1982 01:12, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

yes, I suppose I would be glad for your help in compiling an 'evidence' page. We can base it on the evidence already collected for the rfc, but I think the chronological development should be made more clear, i.e. what was afu reacting to when he called people perverts etc. while the rfc is about afu's behaviour exclusively, in arbitration, as it should be, both sides will be judged. regards, dab (ᛏ) 07:20, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Sorry Nyenyec, I only saw your note just now. Of course I know not every expat is a raving nationalis :o) If I may impose on your time even more, could you maybe talk to Gubbubu? I think he is really having a hard time making himself heard -- I do suppose he is serious, but he comes accross as simply absurd. I suppose this is a language problem, and I don't want to anger him unneccessarily. As for Afu, maybe you would have the best hope of pointing stuff out to him now. I suppose "one article per topic" is a corollary of NPOV: If your article is NPOV, there will be no need for a second article (which, necessarily being NPOV too, would just state the same things). Therefore, of course Maracz could be mentioned on the main article, but not without also adding that 99% of linguists think that his views are a load of baloney. Also, please see my talk page; I think I'll compile an evidence page for arbcom, and I would be glad for your help. Only if you have time of course, don't feel bullied into working for me, here :o) dab (ᛏ) 20:08, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Hi, Nyenyec, I don't know if you've seen my message on dab's page or the paragraph that I've just added to the "Statement of complaint" on RfAr/Antifinnugor. I think it's appropriate to show that we have tried to help afu navigate the labyrinths of process, and of course it's mainly you that have done that. I've drafted a new version of my evidence section on this page, could you take a look at it, please, and put in any additions you think proper? Please feel free to edit both that and the "Statement of complaint" thing any way you like. I'm planning to put the Evidence text on the live page in an hour or so from now. Of course you could always edit it later as well.--Bishonen | Talk 15:26, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Cool. Given the state of the servers right now (Status: Being experimentally poked at with sticks), I don't know if you've seen my updating of the live page, which is a little briefer and tighter. I just put that in a few minutes ago. Regards,--Bishonen | Talk 18:32, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

---

Thanks for your comment on my pictures. Thundercloud 23:26, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Hi Nyenyec -- I wonder if you can tell me anything about this, or get some information from hu: editors: I am looking for information on the type of shield depicted on Image:Gladiatoria_113.jpg: this 15th century German drawing (see Gladiatoria) is the only source I have, and the commentary calls it a "hungarian shield" (in fact, it calls it "ungrisch", but I don't know what this could mean except "ungarisch"). Do you know of any indication that this type of shield, fastened to the lower arm, may have been common in medieval Hungary? regards, dab (ᛏ) 13:45, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

glad to hear it ;) I used to use firefox on kde, but my linux box just broke down (the laptop screen, that is), and I'm mostly using firefox and safari on os x now, and firefox on windows (98!) when at my girlfriend's... regards, dab (ᛏ) 19:05, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Szia! Teljesen igazad van, jobb lenne újraírni, de én a nyelvi részén túl nem sokat tudok. A finnre van nyelvészeti bizonyíték (de azzal nem ez a cikk foglalkozik), történeti bizonyíték már talán kevesebb, genetikai meg még kevesebb – tudomásom szerint. Annyi bizonyíték szerintem a törökre sincs, mint ahogy a kolléga beállítja (ha jól emlékszem). Sajnos ebben nem érzem magam kompetensnek. Viszont vannak jó források erről, ha van kedved búvárkodni: History of Hungary#Encyclopaedia Humana Hungarica (1–5) (Nekem nem akar odaugrani a böngésző, de az idézett lap alján lévő linkekre gondolok.) Magyarul: Emese álma : A magyar őstörténet és az államszervezés kora -- Üdv és köszi, ha netán belemászol, Adam78 19:20, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for posting me a link to the Hungarian conversation with Angela! Yes I think our situations, at hu: and at sv:, are a bit different. We have three or four bureaucrats and lots of admins, and there is no clear "leader". Brion Wibber started the Swedish Wikipedia, but he didn't talk Swedish and I think he left as soon as we managed on our own (this was before my time). We have had problem users for a long time, and tried to deal with them without so much written guidelines. Decisions have mainly been taken by voting, and also people have sometimes been pointing to the English documents. I still do that, sometimes, but I realise that if the person I am talking to is not so good at English then this is unfair! as they can not see if they agree with my interpretation. Also - as Angela says - we are not necessarily forced to do things exactly the way it si done here at English WP.

The ones I point most at, is How to create policy and How to hold a consensus vote. The Swedish Wikipedia tradition has put a fairly large importance on voting. Personally I find that a bit unfortunate; voting as a method to take decisions works well only if there are very easy questions to ask, and you can answer yes/no. If there are more alternatives than two, it quickly gets messy. Unfortunatly, the situation is often more complicated than you would like. Voting hasn't always been well prepared, and then more suggestions come up during the voting etc. I keep saying consensus; maybe people are getting tired of hearing me saying that word...

No, I don't know about discussions on the subject on any mailing list. As Angela has pointed from hu: to sv: and vice versa, I think our two Wikipedias are probably the only ones currently struggling with this issue. (Actually, I was very glad to learn that there was a similar situation somewhere else. I don't know if we will have any real use of each other, but it's just good to know!)

Regards /Habj 29 June 2005 07:42 (UTC)

You were listed in the Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Hungary page as living in or being associated with Hungary. As part of the Wikipedia:User categorisation project, these lists are being replaced with user categories. If you would like to add yourself to the category that is replacing the page, please visit Category:Wikipedians in Hungary for instructions. JesseW 22:20, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I registered myself. -- nyenyec ☎ 17:13, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The wiki owl released used on Wikinfo is based on an image owl.gif which was released into the public domain by its creator. User:Proteus http://wikinfo.org/wiki.php?title=User:Proteus modified it and created the wikiowl.gif by adding Wikinfo next to the image. I would rather you did not use that as it is our logo with the word Wikinfo on it. I suppose Proteus has the copyright on it as it is today. It originally came from http://www.123spot.com/clipartmis4.htm "Free Animal Clipart at 123spot!". Author Angela Miller, but that website is no longer up. She owned a kennel. I emailed her once (no reply) but she does not resolve by Google now. Fred Bauder 23:57, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

thanks for your comments on the ID forum. what upset me is that they removed my POV tags three times.

Its not that I was demanding to change their text or vandalize them, all i wanted was to place a POV tag. I explained it, and placed it. They removed it and would not even allow the article to be disputed. after i placed the tag 3 times (to have it removed each time) they threatened me with an IP ban over the 3rv rule what can you do? they have their page, and no one is going to even dispute it, yet alone change it cant even POV it

ahh well, i like wiki too much to risk getting banned. thx tho Marshill 21:06, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Azért írok neked, és még két-három magyar wikipédiásnak, mert szeretnék vmi szervezkedést elindítani a magyar történelemmel illetve a határon túli magyarsággal kapcsolatos oldalak ügyében. Úgy látszik, apró eredmények eléréséért is nagy harcokat kell vívni a szomszédainkkal, akik rendszerint sokkal jobban szervezettek, felkészültebbek és öntudatosabbak nálunk, így a történelmünket érintő cikkek vagy gyatra minőségűek vagy elfogultak vagy egyszerűen elhallgatják a nekünk kedvező tényeket. Kicsit fáradt vagyok már az állandó magányos csatározástól (bár a legérzékenyebb témákat eddig elkerültem) és jól jönne néha a segítség. A wikipedia azon az elven működik, hogy a sok-sok szerző egymást állandóan javítva, korrigálva, egymással vitatkozva jobbítja a cikkeket. Úgy tűnik, mi túl kevesen vagyunk ahhoz, hogy ez természetes módon, tudatos szervezkedés nélkül működjön. Ha van vmi ötleted vagy csak néha benéznél egy-egy felforrósodó topikba, előre is köszi! Üdv. Zello 02:57, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I figured as much. I figure you also wouldn't mind if I used rollback on what was a non-vandal edit, just this once. -Splash^talk 02:23, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you mentioned that you are colorblind and wondered if you could evaluate this image (Image:Municipalities in Lithuania.png) which is used on a candidate for featured list. Thanks. Are there any recommendations to mapmakers listed on Wikipedia? Rmhermen 22:28, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed(?) the colors. Now it does not look that cute, but it should work for all people. I have tested the image with http://colorfilter.wickline.org/ and the only time there might be some problems is when a person would have tritanopia (but suposedly it is uncommon). Also, on grayscale they should be able to separate counties, but not identify them by the legend. Please let me know if you still have difficulties, and thanks for the input! I haven't really thought about such problems. That's is something new for me. Renata 01:59, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice pics, thanks! - MPF 13:16, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What do you know about the correct attribution of the removed quotation? Adam78 20:13, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So just delete the damned thing, for crap's sake. I've been helping out on Wikipedia for about a month and have done an absolutely extraordinary amount of work in that small time. I muts be close to 1,000 edits already and most of them are full-lenght artciles on excrucialingly difficult topics. I'ìve had to learn HTML, Latex and Wikification formatin along the way. All I get in return is some ridiclous nonsense about this ridiculous photo not being GFDL and the rest of my talk page is almost blank. Just delete the damed thing and stop clog--Lacatosias 09:40, 29 January 2006 (UTC)ging up my talk page unless you have something serious to say.[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Dbachmann

hi,i see your article in a one page about Turanian magazine publishing in the USA..tell me about this, how can i found this magazine, becoue when i hear the Turanian word i become very excited becouse all the prooves show that Hungarians-Finns-Estonians-Bulgars-Turks has a big connection in the past--hakozen 08:24, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hakozen, I'm not sure I know which page you're thinking of. -- nyenyec ☎ 17:37, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:RFAR

Hi,

If you're modifying the article with new facts (in these case, claimed rapes and looting), please consider adding your references at the bottom of the page. Otherwise, your changes might be reverted.

Thanks in advance. grafikm_fr 16:02, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It may interest you to know that I've added cases to the Wikipedia:Arbitration_policy/Past_decisions page. --David.Mestel 16:54, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

from your comments on the red scare. What the hell are you talking about? There was no scares in europe? You must have been a very brainwashed pinko! and put down uprisings? You mean freedom fighters. Apparently you didn't put down the polish one in 1920 when the Poles (with US help) BEAT UP THE SOVIETS!! LOL! or the hungarian revolution when bella kun was put down. Too bad. Learn to be a little more realistic! RomanYankee(24.75.194.50 17:25, 10 August 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Hello, and good day to you too! :) I have a vague feeling that you're talking about my comment here: [1]. I don't quite understand though what you're trying to say and how it relates to my comment. But I do see, that you're very angry. :) Care to enlighten me? -- nyenyec ☎ 19:31, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

yeah, if you believed all the propaganda that was fed to you by the soviets, I think I should be let down. You talk as though putting down the uprisings were a good thing. When they weren't. RomanYankee(68.100.231.160 02:25, 14 August 2006 (UTC))[reply]

I wasn't fed too much propaganda, I'm not old enough for that. :) Even if I thought that supressing the uprisings by soviet tanks was a good thing (which I don't), how does my personal opinion matter to Wikipedia?

All I wanted to say there, that writing or suggesting that the US and the West were scared of the reds while the Soviet bloc was relaxed and assured that their rule is safe was misleading.

BTW, If I want to discuss what I think about history or politics and want to hear random people's personal opinions about these subjects I go to some other site. Wikipedia is not a political discussion board (contrarty to what you see on a lot of discussion pages).

Cheers, nyenyec ☎ 14:45, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, obviously, dude. The soviets were a totalitarian regime. We are not. They had complete control, who would worry about freedom if you were a controling communist? The west had to be on its guard. RomanYankee(24.75.194.50 17:02, 14 August 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Igen, Gyurika képe tényleg nem Public Domain. Hogy elmennének a fenébe. Írtam a Miniszterelnöki hivatalnak, de nem adják oda a képet (biztos rosszat tenne az imidzsének, ha a Wikipédián normális kép lenne fent róla, nem valami low-res gagyi). Azért raktam PD-be, mert eleinte bíztam benne, hogy odaadják (logikusnak tűnt..). Mindegy, biztos mikor az IQ-ért kellett sorbanállni, megunták a várakozást a Tisztelt Hivatalnokok. Msoos 13:48, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I write them another letter. If nothing positive happens, I will update the tag. Msoos 14:52, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Frankly speaking, it's been quite some time since I uploaded the Image:Turanm40.jpg and its' version on the Polish wiki has already been deleted since it's on commons, so I can't check who uploaded it there and ask him for a proper license or source info. //Halibutt 23:47, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thought about it to ask User:ForestH2 to help. We'll see. Anyway really thanks for the improvements, the report became great! :) NCurse _work 06:09, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nyenyec,

can you please write something about the elections in the section which you commented on? I don't really understand how the voting process works, but it would be nice to have something there. – Alensha  ^talk 21:16, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nyenyec, User:VinceB again deleted the description of Fidesz as a nationalist party. After skimming the sources he provided, I believe that they are misinterpreted in the same way as before (MIEP is listed as a nationalist party, so VinceB thinks that MIEP is the only nationalist party in Hungary). Unfortunately, I have not enough time to deal with that article right now. Do you think you can help protect it against this repeated POV pushing? Thanks. Tankred 19:40, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have you ever been to the southern hemisphere, click here to reply.AstroBoy 01:46, 11 November 2006 (UTC) Deadline for entries is December 15th[reply]

Jó a bloggod. A véleményed a wikipédiárol fején találja a szöget! [2] --Öcsi 14:04, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hogy miért nem írok a magyar wikipédián? Hébe-hóba régebben is irogattam (javítgattam), de épp amikor el akartam kezdeni rendesen beloggolni magamat, éreztem hogy kezd elmenni a kedvem az egész wikipédiától. Én is ugyanarra jöttem rá mint te, hogy itt nem jut az ember egyröl a kettöre, mert mindenki mindenáron megakarja védeni a saját kis véleményét - mert hát azt a cikket/mondatot/szót ÉN írtam :) - és nem engedi hogy a másik, nemhogy javítson, hanem még azt sem, hogy véleményt nyilvánitson. És az is baj, hogy az ember elkezd elszakadni a valóságtol, "rögeszmés" lesz, nem tud már rendesen kommunikálni, és nem türi a másokat a kis "cikk-birodalmában", és nem csak politikai témákban, hanem másokban is, de föleg politikában.

Hála az égnek még idöben észrevettem azt, hogy ez az egész egy Sziszifusz(Sysphus)-munka: amint felgörgetném a követ a emelkedö tetejére, legurul.

És hát kell ez nekem? Nem.

Mindenesetre: Boldog karácsonyt, na meg BUJÉK! :) --Öcsi 16:21, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image deletion warning

commons:Image:Hitlerjugend.jpg has been listed at commons:Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you! العربية | dansk | Deutsch | English | español | français | galego | Bahasa Indonesia | 日本語 | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | polski | português | русский | suomi | 中文（臺灣） | 中文（中国大陆） | Commons:Template:Idw/lang

--DaB. 14:32, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I counted myself, and it would be impossible for a tool to distinguish between a factual statement and the intervals relaying the facts. I'm pretty good at counting, though. You can expect about 0~ 5 miscounts for large sections. (Wikimachine 21:31, 13 February 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Hi, SB uses WP:AWB and some regular expressions. I will publish the regular expressions shortly and let you know. Rich Farmbrough, 11:58 21 March 2007 (GMT).

copied from your user talk page on Wikimedia Commons

Image deletion warning

Image:Statue of Balto in Central Park.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you! العربية | dansk | Deutsch | English | español | français | galego | Bahasa Indonesia | 日本語 | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | polski | português | русский | suomi | 中文（臺灣） | 中文（中国大陆） | Commons:Template:Idw/lang

  — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 23:36, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I noticed your involvement on U.S. South-related articles, categories and WikiProjects, and I wanted to let you know about a bid we're formulating to get next year's Wikimania held in Atlanta! If you would like to help, be sure to sign your name to the "In Atlanta" section of the Southeast team portion of the bid if you're in town, or to the "Outside Atlanta" section if you still want to help but don't live in the city or the suburbs. If you would like to contribute more, please write on my talk page, the talk page of the bid, or join us at the #wikimania-atlanta IRC chat on freenode.org. Have a great day!

P.S. While this is a template for maximum efficiency, I would appreciate a note on my talk page so I know you got the message, and what you think. This is time-sensitive, so your urgent cooperation is appreciated. :) Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 07:33, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heló Nyenyec!

Köszi, hogy felajánlottad a segítséget. Már megírtam nekik, hogy az én angolom annyira szegényes, hogy nem tudok részt venni ebben az Arbitrációs dologban, de Coren -kérte, hogy vegyem fel veled a kapcsolatot. Ezért írok. Mondjuk elég bonyolult ez az egész ügy. És az a helyzet, hogy még magyarul is nehéz ügy, ha vádolják az embert. Hát még angolul. Képtelenség az, hogy mindezt megmagyarázzam, nem foglalkozhatok állandóan a wikipédiával, mert tanulnom is kell. A konfliktus tárgya a International Churches of Christ szócikk illetve szerény személyem a gyenge angolommal és a gyenge erőlködéseimmel együtt. :(

A magyar cikk egy elég semleges szócikk és kiderül belőle, hogy miért van az ICOCal szemben sok egyház mely szembe áll vele és tenni akar a tevékenysége ellen. Tény, hogy az ICOC-al kapcsolatban van számos kritikai oldal, melyek mögött számos olyan hitvédelmi szervezet és egyház áll melyek számára az ICOC mint a leg gyorsabban növekvő egyház régóta veszélyt jelent. A kritikai oldalak főként más (konkurens) egyházak által üzemeltetett hitvédelmi oldalak. Ugyanakkor az ICOC-al szemben azért is kritikusak a hagyományos egyházak, mert az ICOC azt tanítja, hogy a hagyományos egyházak tagjai nem élnek igazán keresztényként. A kritikai oldalak sokszor egy teljesevangéliumi egyház és egy ortodox egyház álltal ex tagokbó szervezett csoportra hivatkoznak. Az extagok erős kritikuságának fő körülméynei: Annak fényében, hogy az ICOC –tagok sokat fektetnek a kereszténységbe, (időt, pénzt stb.) hisz az igazi, radikális kereszténység ezt várja el az embertől, érthető, hogy valaki miért kritikus, ha végül valamilyen oknál fogva ott kell hagynia az egészet. Míg ezzel szemben egy olyan egyházban pl. evangélikusoknál, ahol semmit nem várnak el, Az egyház elhagyása nem sokat változtat és nem jelent túl nagy változást egy ember életében nyilvánvaló, hogy nem lesz olyan kritikus, hisz nem fektetett bele, és nem áldozott annyit az egyházért.

Lényeg: Az angol wikiben 2007 Augusztusában Xiaphias –lecserélte a korábbi verziót egy újra. Én ezt kifogásoltam, ugyanis nem látok olyan szabályt a wikipédiában, hogy a részletek megtárgyalása nélkül cserélünk le egy egész szócikket, ezt vandalizmusnak hívják. Választ nem kaptam. Lásd: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:International_Churches_of_Christ Egyéb problémám volt a semlegesség.

Az, hogy olyat nem olvashat senki még a Jehova tanúi szócikkben sem, meg sehol, hogy valaki azt írja: „is a controversial Protestant sect which splintered from the mainline Churches of Christ “ –. (állt Xiaphias verziójában) A semlegesség szerint olyat lehet írni, hogy pl: vallásos hitvédelmi szervezetek szerint, és a sajtóban megjelent cikkekben írtak róla úgy mint szekta, de hogy egy encikliopédia megállapítsa, hogy mi szekta és mi nem az semmmiképpen sem semleges. Aztán később összeolvasztottam a két verziót. (12 September 2007) És a nem semleges részeket próbáltam kijavítani. Ugyanakkor megpróbáltam mindkét oldal nézőpontját valahogy megmutatni. Toleráltam a külső hivatkozásokban lévő számtalan kritikai oldal jelenlétét és ebben e verzióba külső kritikai oldalakra való referenciákat és a kritikai szekció jelenlétét is. Viszont azt tapasztaltam, hogy nagyon nehéz keresztül vinnem ezt az egésszet, mert szinte csak olyanok vannak a vitalapon akik elfogulta kritikusak az ICOC ellen és így nem lehetséges mindkét oldal nézőpontjának bemutatása, (az ICOC-é és a kritikusoké is.) mert ők csak egy kritikus verzióval hajlandók megelégedni, lecserélni a szócikket, melyet ha visszaállítok akkor végül én vagyok a vandál. És ez lett a vesztem, mert többször visszaállítottam a lecserélt verziót.

A másik, az, hogy 2002-ben válltozások történtek az ICOCban. Számos válltozás történt azóta Mely megváltoztatta az ICOC kapcsolatát és megítélését is egy csomó más egyházzal kapcsolatban. De a régi 2002-előtti kritikák fennmaradtak az interneten, és nincs élesen különválasztva a szócikkben, hogy mi az, ami a múlté és történetileg említendő és jelentőségteljes. És mi az ami mára változott. Így lehet a régi kritikákat is a mai egyházra vonatkoztatni, és használni ami viszonta mai egyházra vonatkozóan téves információt adhat. Amúgy én valóban tagja vagyok az egyháznak, de azt gonolom, hogy akkor is az a semlegesség ha mindkét oldal bemutatásra kerül és egyikhez sem áll oda egy enciklopédia, hogy annak van igaza.

Amúgy nincsenek illúzióim, mert hiszem, hogy ahogy Krisztust üldözték és megölték a vallásos emberek, később vitatottnak és felforgatónak tartották a radikális első századi keresztényeket és a gyülekezeteiket, akik küzül sokakat üldöztek és megöltek és mártírok lettek, ezért kell, hogy Krisztus modern kori mozgalma is, vitatott, hazugságokkal vádolt és üldözött, legyen. Csak azt gondoltam, hogy ez egy enciklopédia és itt lehet valami kicsit más, mint a többi honlapon.

De egyébként sem hiszem, hogy az én gyenge angolommal és ennyi ellenség ellenére el lehetne érni a szócikk semlegességét. Amúgy ha semmit sem tudok elérni akkor legfeljebb majd akkor visszatérek ha majd jobb lessz az angolom.:)

Belátom, hogy belebuktam az ICOC wiki cikkbe a gyenge angolom és az időhiány miatt nem tudok eleget és elég színvonalasan érvelni, és ezért nem bírtam eleget vitatkozni a vitalapon.

Még rengeteg dolgot tudnák írni, konkrét válszokat az engem ért konkrét vádakra melyeket szintén túl nehéz angolul megfogalmaznom, de magyarul sincs túl sok időm minderre de gondolom neked sincs....

Azért köszi, a segítséget. És a véleményed is érdekel. Mit gondolsz? --TransylvanianKarl (talk) 11:52, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Non-exclusive ethnic group, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Non-exclusive ethnic group. Thank you. Slrubenstein | Talk 16:07, 21 November 2008 (UTC) .[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]