User talk:Nabak/Archive 2

smaller signature

dear Nabak,
Can you please adapt your signature, as your square picture in front of your name is taking to much line spaces atm. Thx Ricodol74 (talk) 05:13, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ricodol74,

Not a problem! Just tell me what to do and where! --Nabak (talk) 19:16, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

[reply]

About categories

Please consider always COM:OVERCAT, when creating categories or modifying existing ones. Please never create categories which are subs of themselves. Please use appropriate sortkeys "Museums in Russia by city|Sochi" and not "Museums in Russia by city|Museums in Russia by city" or so. Please don't modify anything on Commons categories until you got familiar with Help:Categories. --A.Savin 23:31, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Alexander, thank you for you advice and corrections, that's how collaboration works!

. By the way, "domestic church" sounds just awful, that is why I have merged it with the existing category "Russian Orthodox churches in Russia", but this not a big deal. I have a more important question regarding category sortkeys, so, what you are saying, it would be incorrect to place a parent and a child categories together divided by a pipe as such, "paren|child", to order the priority of sorting?--Nabak (talk) 00:34, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I cannot understand your last question. But maybe Help:Categories would help. --A.Savin 00:43, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not manipulate discussions. We started here; so if you have sth. to reply than do it here. --A.Savin 01:30, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have cut off my last reply while starting a revert war, please don't manipulate the discussion yourself! I find your behavior unhelpful and rude for this usually very friendly place. By the way, what in hell "if you have sth" does mean? I read it as "if you have shit", is it correct? That's just crazy! May I please kindly remind you that all are equal here, in the wikiland, and those with authority should show an example of modesty and civility, but what I am wasting my time on, your are obviously not a good sport! --Nabak (talk) 01:49, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

[reply]

I wrote "if you have something to reply, you should do it here" [and not on my talk page or elsewhere], so you don't need to scream and insult me and you only need to answer if you *have* an answer on the topic. Your chaos with categories is not appreciated, but I've already stated it. EOD --A.Savin 09:36, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see that the likes of you are very good at crying foul, but how about, "you scream" and "chaos", aren't these the insults that you're looking for!

Why do you see the speck that is in somebody's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? It seems that in addition to double standards you also have a burn-out...how about taking a wiki vacation from this often chaotic and turbulent place? (I really doubt that anyone will even notice your absence.) And you yourself should do the things you advise other people to do, talk business instead of going around, and bossing and insulting other people. --Nabak (talk) 03:11, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Reading Rand.jpg

File:Reading Rand.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request.

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ Malti ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ தமிழ் ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Vera (talk) 15:20, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nice try the devil!

{{Seth Tisue}}{{Cc-by-sa-2.0}}--Nabak (talk) 21:57, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of the Year 2013 R2 Announcement

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open!

⧼Wikibase-terms/Archive 2⧽: Deutsch, Ελληνικά, English, ‎français, magyar, ‎italiano, македонски, ‎‎日本語, ‎‎‎русский, ‎‎‎svenska

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2013 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2013) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. The top 30 overall and the most popular image in each category have continued to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just one image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 7 March 2014. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2013/Introduction/en Click here to learn more and vote »]

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest. This Picture of the Year vote notification was delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:22, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Trams by route number

Trams by route number has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ತುಳು ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ไทย ∙ עברית ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ +/−

darkweasel94 20:02, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of the Year 2013 Results Announcement

Picture of the Year 2013 Results

In other languages: Deutsch, ‎español, ‎français, ‎日本語, Nederlands, русский, ‎svenska, ‎Türkçe, ‎українська

Dear Nabak,

The 2013 Picture of the Year competition has ended and we are pleased to announce the results: We shattered participation records this year — more people voted in Picture of the Year 2013 than ever before. In both rounds, 4070 different people voted for their favorite images. Additionally, there were more image candidates (featured pictures) in the contest than ever before (962 images total).

In the first round, 2852 people voted for all 962 files
In the second round, 2919 people voted for the 50 finalists (the top 30 overall and top 2 in each category)

We congratulate the winners of the contest and thank them for creating these beautiful images and sharing them as freely licensed content:

157 people voted for the winner, an image of a lightbulb with the tungsten filament smoking and burning.
In second place, 155 people voted for an image of "Sviati Hory" (Holy Mountains) National Park in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine.
In third place, 131 people voted for an image of a swallow flying and drinking.

Click here to view the top images »

We also sincerely thank to all 4070 voters for participating and we hope you will return for next year's contest in early 2015. We invite you to continue to participate in the Commons community by sharing your work.

Thanks,
the Picture of the Year committee You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest. Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:00, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Human experimentation claims

Hello, thank you for creating Category:Human experimentation claims to cover a subject area. However, I am concerned with the categorization that resulted for a couple reasons: First is that the title of the category gives no indication that you intended it to specifically cover claims of human experimentation within the CIA, as there have been many organizations which have had such claims (and some which have had such programs). Second is that you added Category:MKULTRA to this category despite this program having been declassified and an admitted human experimentation program for decades now rather than a claim. I did not check the other categories you subcategorized though. (talk) 12:11, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear djr13, thank you for your message. I agree with you that Human experimentation claims is not the best possible option, but the subject is touchy, since we definitely don't want Robert Eatinger to sue our *****s and I was having hard time while thinking out something suitable! Do you have any particular suggestions? We can use your categorization expertise here, as always, CIA is a mess! ;) Best, --Nabak (talk) 17:00, 14 April 2014 (UTC) P.S. By the way, do you have any suggestions for audio files such as File:Truth and Justice Radio (WZBC) - 2011-09-19 CIA complicity in the global drug trade - 04 Scott response 1.vorb.oga?[reply]

Having looked for any equivalent category on Wikipedia (can be quite helpful in constructing similar structures for media here) I think making it into a broad category would be best until that starts getting hundreds of images. Thus it might reflect w:Category:Human subject research. CIA-related human experimentation subjects then would be categorized both this and the CIA category. I'm not aware of any precedent covering "claims of" topics; the only exception I could quickly find is Category:Claimed territories of Antarctica.

For Robert Eatinger, I'd say if Wikipedia has well-cited statements of fact that he was involved in human experimentation, we can simply put him into a category as such to reflect this. Otherwise it would probably indeed be considered defamation, whether or not he could or would sue for it.

For the talk show recording, I'm not sure what you're asking. It seems to be named well enough I think, and it's consistent with the rest of the recordings in Category:Truth and Justice Radio. If you're asking what categories that recording should be in, I would assume the categories it has are fitting. djr13 (talk) 23:32, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly speaking, I don't like the idea of giving people no choice other than punching category «Central Intelligence Agency» every time they upload something related, I would rather treat it as a meta space. And right now we are very close to that! :) I am not ready to voice anything definite about CIA experimentation right now since I did not go through the literature and related court cases if any, but you have dropped a lead that can be useful — «CIA related human experimentation», it is a good name, if we forgo the hyphen!:) Regarding audio files, how about something like this: «CIA related broadcasts»? Regards, --Nabak (talk) 02:37, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:CIA related human experimentation might be good, although I would still also create a more generic parent category for it such as Category:Human subject research. Wikipedia just puts all the programs that happened in connection to the US under w:Category:Human subject research in the United States. Personally I would avoid getting too narrow with categories until you have categories with dozens or hundreds of files to split. djr13 (talk) 03:24, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So let it be written, so let it be done... :)) I'll leave the audio files in meta space and will get back to you with human experimentation when I'll be ready, as they told me in school, team work rules! Yours, --Nabak (talk) 03:42, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All related materials were a fascinating read, which gave me an idea that apart from the CIA some scientists, if unchecked, can go berserk in a quest to uncover the scientific truth! :)) OK, going back to our category business, how about: «CIA programs in human experimentation» with parental categories «Human subject research in the United States» that needs to be created and already existing «Central Intelligence Agency»? --Nabak (talk) 01:36, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the slow response. Yes, those look good. Although, instead of Category:Human subject research in the United States I think Category:Human subject research would be preferable until there is a lot of per-country content worth splitting out. djr13 (talk) 04:16, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sold! --Nabak (talk) 05:28, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Shelling of Gorlovka, July 28, 2014.jpg

File:Shelling of Gorlovka, July 28, 2014.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 file, 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. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.