User talk:とある白い猫

とある白い猫 A Certain White Cat User Page | Office | Talk Page | Bot edits | Sandbox SB2 SB3 JA TR Commons Meta	Assume good faith!	Wikimood [purge] [edit]
Today is Thursday, 7 November 2024, and the current time is 07:42 (UTC/GMT). There are currently 6,907,189 articles and 929,092 files on English Wikipedia. The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy. The truth resists simplicity.
TALK PAGE OF とある白い猫 Hello, welcome to my talk page. You are welcome to post comments below. Anything you put here will likely be archived and available for public view. Please be polite and civil. {{{ovr| To post a new topic please use this link or the 'new section' between "edit this page" and "history".
Posts Edit warring on Kurdistan Workers Party and User:Qwl First, I would apologise again for not realising that the edit summary comments were a personal attack. If I had realised I would have blocked the editor for that violation, as well as the 3RR. I did not issue a block in this instance because, although 3RR was violated, User:Qwl was not continuing the revert war and the article had been "cleaned" of their edits. As blocking is preventative rather than punitive I saw no point in blocking an editor who was no longer making those edits, so I decided to issue a warning instead. I hope this explains my actions and non-actions. LessHeard vanU 19:49, 16 June 2007 (UTC) Oh its fine. There is nothing to apologies about. If the disruption stops - I am cool with that. :) -- Cat chi? 21:18, 16 June 2007 (UTC) [1]. User is still removing the material. Perhaps the page should be semi-protected. -- Cat chi? 09:00, 23 June 2007 (UTC) Battle of Mazikert This is not part of Kurdish history as it belongs to Seljukid and Turkish one.Heja Helweda 18:05, 18 June 2007 (UTC) Spam Please stop spamming talk pages. Use WT:RFCU instead. — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 12:09, 22 June 2007 (UTC) I already have. It was ignored (only one of the checkusers made a normal check which is inadequate). See: Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/71.222.81.30. My edits contain no advertisement of any kind and it cannot be considered spam. Please do not make dealing with disruption more difficult than it already is. -- Cat chi? 13:12, 22 June 2007 (UTC) Please review WP:CANVASS. Soliciting opinions is considered spamming. You could have created a userspace page and left links, instead of leaving whole of the text on user talk pages. — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 13:15, 22 June 2007 (UTC) WP:CANVASS clearly does not apply. I am asking people to tell me if they have the checkuser logs of a user that was banned by arbcom for a year that can be used for a checkuser of a current case. I am not even asking for the logs themselves. I am not soliciting opinions as no opinion was presented. -- Cat chi? 13:17, 22 June 2007 (UTC) Clearly, mass-messaging comes under the purview of WP:SPAM and WP:CANVASS; and can be seen as disruptive. You can use emails instead. — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 13:20, 22 June 2007 (UTC) This is not "mass messaging" of a random/opinionated group of people hence WP:SPAM and WP:CANVASS can't apply. I am not advocating any view by requesting weather or not someone has a log file or not. I am simply asking weather or not they have the logs or not with a detailed explanation on why I am requesting it. Not every check user reviewes every case, certainly not a closed stale case. I cannot request a checkuser since the logs on wikimedia servers are gone for diyako/xebat and his armada of sockpuppets. I need someone with the right log files in order to file the case. It makes no difference for me to post something on a sub page in my userspace and link to it on individual userpages. Take it to ANB/I if you like and see if it sticks. I do not have to mail people. -- Cat chi? 13:28, 22 June 2007 (UTC) I strongly urge you to report this on ANI, instead of edit-warring, if you are intending to do so. — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 13:31, 22 June 2007 (UTC) I do not edit war. Wouldn't it also fall under WP:CANVASS if I did that? More people would see my post. -- Cat chi? 13:36, 22 June 2007 (UTC) White Cat's request of checkusers has a serious purpose with the aim of improving Wikipedia and seems to be in order. If the Canvassing guideline says he shouldn't contact checkusers to see if they retain private copies of checkuser logs concerning a sanctioned editor, it's wrong and should be ignored. --Tony Sidaway 16:10, 22 June 2007 (UTC) I am not against contacting. Proper channels of communications should be used rather than whole-sale spamming of checkusers' talk pages. For e.g. the ArbCom mailing list, private emails or WT:RFCU. — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 11:57, 23 June 2007 (UTC) Category:Maps of Kurdistan Hi, what is the scope of that category? -- Cat chi? 14:55, 27 June 2007 (UTC) Hi. In answer to your question I found this earlier today: Kurdistan#Geography. --Timeshifter 15:40, 27 June 2007 (UTC) Well... Kurdistan is also a wannabe defacto country and lacks any definition of borders. If you google for "Kurdistan map" you'll see what I mean. What falls inside and outside of Kurdistan (or its very existence for that mater) is disputed. So it is a problematic term. Perhaps you may want to categorize the maps as being relevant to the Kurdish people as these maps are always about them (weather its Kurdish homelands or ethnic composition). It would have a definite scope and non-controversial title at the same time. -- Cat chi? 16:08, 27 June 2007 (UTC) What do you suggest? --Timeshifter 16:18, 27 June 2007 (UTC) I am uncertain. Maybe something along the lines of Category:Maps related to Kurdish people. You may be able to have a better wording in mind since you deal with such categories in bulk. :) -- Cat chi? 17:13, 27 June 2007 (UTC) Or maybe along the lines of how the commons is dealing with it. Please see commons:Category:Maps of Kurdistan and commons:Category:Kurdistan. --Timeshifter 17:17, 27 June 2007 (UTC) Thats different. On Commons "Kurdistan" refers to Iraqi Kurdistan. Thats possible as a subcat of "Maps of Iraq" in a non controversial manner. Your edit however made it highly controversial :) -- Cat chi? 17:28, 27 June 2007 (UTC) I believe that the commons is supposed to use the English wikipedia decisions on naming. In order to avoid repeating all the naming battles. I don't care either way how the Kurdistan maps are categorized. So I linked to the relevant wikipedia and commons categories and articles. I figured I'd let others discuss it first before I changed anything. Maybe you can ask at the various commons talk pages and see what others say. Let me know what you find out. I suggest asking at Category talk:Maps. Also, there is no need to reply on my talk page. Please reply here. I have your talk page watchlisted. --Timeshifter 18:04, 27 June 2007 (UTC) Commons is commons. Commons often use English naming schemes but not always. For instance all plants and animals have Latin names. It may be better for you to post this there, I'll comment after you do. -- Cat chi? 18:12, 27 June 2007 (UTC) Feel free to copy this there. Please let me know if you do. --Timeshifter 18:36, 27 June 2007 (UTC) Thanks for the notice on my talk page that this thread was copied to Category talk:Maps. --Timeshifter 14:45, 28 June 2007 (UTC) Air related articles You finally free? :) User talk:White Cat/Archive/2007/05#Air episodes - Juhachi -- Cat chi? 11:25, 28 June 2007 (UTC) The situation has completely changed since then I believe. There is in no way that those Air episode articles are going to be made ever again. Those articles all lacked secondary sources, and I now would actively promote their deletion if you were to recreate them. As for the character articles, only the 4 main characters should deserve separate articles per WP:FICT, while the others should be kept in the List of Air characters article.--十八 11:53, 28 June 2007 (UTC) Well, I am not asking about their current situation. I am asking if you are going to help or not. You said you would back then. i see no change in the situation. I have waited this long. -- Cat chi? 12:01, 28 June 2007 (UTC) And I am saying that it depends on a few things. Yes, I am free, but if you go blatently against policy, then I am not going to help you. We've had our share of differences in the past, and we still disagree on some of the finer points.--十八 12:08, 28 June 2007 (UTC) Please read the discussion we had. Your approach to me is almost hostile. You said yourself you did want Air articles to have the coverage of Kannon (or something like that). -- Cat chi? 12:23, 28 June 2007 (UTC) And as I said above, the situation has drastically changed, and my opinion is different now. The Kanon episode articles, and the minor characters for Kanon, have all been removed by me per the policies set at WP:EPISODE and WP:FICT. Currently, the Kanon set of articles is nearly identical to the Air set of articles, except Kanon has 6 separate articles for the 6 main characters. Air should also, in my opinion, get 4 separate articles for the 4 main characters, but nothing beyond that. No Air (anime), or Air (manga) articles, or anything else; just those 4 articles. Nothing else has to be made, or can be made realistically without going aganisnt policy.--十八 12:26, 28 June 2007 (UTC) Those are guidelines, not policies. Will you help or not. Please do not lecture me on policy when I am asking if you will participate in an article improvement drive or not. -- Cat chi? 12:54, 28 June 2007 (UTC) Actually forget it, this is being far too unpleasant to begin with. -- Cat chi? 13:05, 28 June 2007 (UTC) Dictionaries How dare you call my contribution spam!!! I am a Kurd and I made a lsit of kurdish dictionaries. you bloody turkish nationalist and atoricity commiting bone breaking Nazi. watch out folk this slimy Turk is trying to censor the internet this is not undemocratic Turkey here, no prison cells in wikipedia you stupid Turk! And you buggers want membership to the EEC—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jopling100 (talk • contribs) 22:24, 28 June 2007 (UTC) WP:RFBOT Your recent bot approvals request has been approved. Please see the request page for details. When the bot flag is set it will show up in this log. Sorry for the delay. —METS501 (talk) 05:50, 30 June 2007 (UTC) Bot flag for WOPR Hi. Per Mets501's approval [2], I've granted your bot account a bot flag [3]. Cheers, Redux 13:29, 30 June 2007 (UTC) Yay! -- Cat chi? 13:30, 30 June 2007 (UTC) Non-free use disputed for folowing images This file may be deleted. Thanks for uploading following images. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description pages and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Image:Superpower2 cover.jpg Image:Stratagem (ENT episode).jpg Image:Storm Front (Part II).jpg These Are the Voyages... (ENT episode).jpg --BetacommandBot 04:41, 3 July 2007 (UTC) RFCU Are you going to start a request for checkuser case or should I? If it can be proved that those IP addresses were me, then surly it also could prove or disprove if I am a sockpuppet of Diyako or Xebat. --D.Kurdistani 00:07, 4 July 2007 (UTC) Midsummer Night's Dream (Oh my Goddess! episode) Would you mind discussing why you moved that? Shakespeare's play is "A Midsummer Night's Dream" not "Midsummer Night's Dream". There is a disambiguation link on top of the page. -- Cat chi? 15:00, 4 July 2007 (UTC) Are you serious? Read the Talk page -- the vast majority of users who came to that page did so by mistake. Do you really expect that everyone who is searching for the Shakespeare play is required to know that it starts with the word "A" and include that in their search? --Russ (talk) 15:29, 4 July 2007 (UTC) I am always serious when I post such a thing. The talk page conversation is most uncivil and even one of the posters was a vandal (which you have reverted). I do not see an adequate discussion to move the page. Consider a search for "Midsummer Night's Dream", as you can see the first hit is "A Midsummer Night's Dream" and second one is "Midsummer Night's Dream". If people typo and forget to put an 'A' in front of the title the first line they read will show them their mistake to them. And yes I generally expect people to either use the "search" function or know the exact title in what they are looking for. -- Cat chi? 16:51, 4 July 2007 (UTC) Your comment about search results is applicable only if a user chooses the "search" button instead of the "go" button. Be that as it may, I think the issue should be posted at WP:RM to allow a broader discussion, rather than have you and I go back and forth about what makes more sense. --Russ (talk) 16:54, 4 July 2007 (UTC) As you wish. Though I,d like to add that the "go" button is reserved almost completely for "exact" titles. -- Cat chi? 17:08, 4 July 2007 (UTC) Oh, and just to be clear -- when I said "Are you serious?" I didn't mean were you serious about wanting the page at a particular title, but were you serious about not understanding my reason for moving it. --Russ (talk) 21:23, 4 July 2007 (UTC) Heh, its fine :) -- Cat chi? 21:29, 4 July 2007 (UTC) Thanks! Thank you very much for the barnstar. It's always nice to see that one's work is appreciated. :) --Hemlock Martinis 04:35, 5 July 2007 (UTC) WP:RFBOT Your recent bot approvals request has been speedily approved. Please see the request page for details. When the bot flag is set it will show up in this log. --ST47Talk 12:02, 9 July 2007 (UTC) Zombie It has been reanimated, as befitting for the undead. >Radiant< 14:29, 10 July 2007 (UTC) What type of animation? :D -- Cat chi? 14:31, 10 July 2007 (UTC) You know, the classic type. Heavy slabs, electrodes in the neck, lightning bolt to the chest, that routine. >Radiant< 14:42, 10 July 2007 (UTC) No ice cream? (btw what is this about? :)) -- Cat chi? 14:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC) the White Zombie band cat. >Radiant< 14:54, 10 July 2007 (UTC) OH! How could I miss that! :D -- Cat chi? 14:56, 10 July 2007 (UTC) Btw, I see you are more active with cfds. I'd like to use my bot to assist you with decategorization and recategorization. :) Is there a central list for this? I would like to work on a particular nom right after you close it making a backlog non-existant. -- Cat chi? 15:01, 10 July 2007 (UTC) WP:CFD/W. Also, WP:BACK. >Radiant< 15:10, 10 July 2007 (UTC) ... sono chikara mo watashi ga torikonde kuru... 阿修羅96 21:24, 10 July 2007 (UTC) Hi, how can I help you? -- Cat chi? 13:11, 11 July 2007 (UTC) Kurdish historical sites Hi, I am curious, what makes a historic site "Kurdish"? Can you reference sources for these? -- Cat chi? 11:20, 11 July 2007 (UTC) Hi, Thank you for your question. Every site built by Kurds is Kurdish, and every site built by Turks is Turkish. Brusk u Trishka 11:26, 11 July 2007 (UTC) I do not believe it is that simple. We generally sort historic sites by country not ethnicity. What if a site is partially built by Kurdish and Turkish peoples? Consider Ephesus, it has Ancient Greek and Roman origin. It isn't categorized as a "Greek city" though. -- Cat chi? 13:04, 11 July 2007 (UTC) Well. if you look at it again, you will see that it is categorized as a Greek city twice in the article. Brusk u Trishka 13:17, 11 July 2007 (UTC) Ancient Greek refers to an era, Greek (ethnicity) does not. -- Cat chi? 13:19, 11 July 2007 (UTC) Status of Template:Infobox Military Conflict (4 sided) Hi. Template:Infobox Military Conflict (4 sided), which you created, is currently unused and seems to have fulfilled the purpose it was created for. If there is no particular reason to retain it, would you mind tagging it for deletion with {{db-author}}? Thanks, Black Falcon (Talk) 16:23, 13 July 2007 (UTC) I can but why? :) It may be used later on. Does it cause a problem? -- Cat chi? 17:18, 13 July 2007 (UTC) Why? Just routine maintenance, I suppose. I encountered the page while randomly browsing through templates and suggested deleting it because it is unused and has been for a while. I also can think of no conflict where there have been four distinct (i.e., not allied) fighting sides. If you think it merits retention, would you please replace the "temporary template" message with some basic documentation (nothing too detailed, but so that someone can know how to use it if the need ever arises). Thanks, Black Falcon (Talk) 18:11, 13 July 2007 (UTC) I have done as you asked. I really think the template may be used for a 4-way conflict. There are plenty of those - mostly allied two sides which can be presented individually with this. -- Cat chi? 21:15, 13 July 2007 (UTC) OK, thanks. And never mind about the documentation ... I just realised that it's probably almost identical to that for Template:Infobox Military Conflict. Cheers, Black Falcon (Talk) 21:54, 13 July 2007 (UTC) (unindent) Can I see an example of this particular infobox anywhere?--Timeshifter 03:49, 14 July 2007 (UTC) Template:Oh My Goddess Why was it deleted? Who requested the merge? Whats going on? :D -- Cat chi? 22:46, 13 July 2007 (UTC) Very sorry about that, Cat. Template histories are merged now. Sr13 03:55, 14 July 2007 (UTC) No problem at all. :) -- Cat chi? 08:34, 14 July 2007 (UTC) Iraq operations There are currently 3 Different lists of Iraq Operations; Iraqi coalition counter-insurgency operations(which is also somewhat POV), a chonological list and an alphabetical list. I have added a lot of operations to the alphabetical listing and have been updating it faithfully but I haven't updated the counter insurgency or the Chonological listing much. Before I do I recommend that we consider other methods. I figured out how to add a column sort function and added it to the Alphabetical listing. I recommend the other 2 articles be merged into the alphabetical listing and then we can rename the alphabetical listing to something more appropriate like Iraq Military Operations since 2003 perhaps. I added a blurb on the discussion page and recommended the merge for the chronological list and the counter insurgency operations page. You seem to do a lot with the Iraq war articles what do you think? --Kumioko 15:16, 18 July 2007 (UTC) I merely fixed an ugly looking template. I do not know much about the Iraq war itself aside from the fact that we have a lot of articles on it. We can merge multiple templates yes. Which templates did you have in mind? I would prefer a chronological listing over an alphabetical one. -- Cat chi? 15:22, 18 July 2007 (UTC) User talk:Cool Cat/Archive/2006/06 and others Why should I take the deletion of something in my userspace to the MfD? User:Cool Cat underwent an mfd (closure was reverted 4 times by Ned Scott) and later drv (by Ned Scott). My userspace and how I organize it is completely my thing. I can alter it as I please. I do not even have to maintain archives. Whats wrong with me reorganizing pages in my userspace? Ned Scott has been repetitively attempting to dictate how I am do organize my userspace. -- Cat chi? 12:30, 19 July 2007 (UTC) What's wrong is that you are causing a large amount of drama (as evidenced by the many ANI threads) over something trivial. You said you want the talk page archives to point to your proper talk page. Fixing these broken redirects is the easiest way of resolving that. You seem to be under the mistaken apprehension that the literal wording of the rules must be applied at all times. >Radiant< 13:14, 19 July 2007 (UTC) The "drama" is a product of Ned Scott's reverts of my edits. I am not the cause of the drama, Ned Scott is. I am explictly allowed to request the speedy deletion of anything on my userspace. Please do not recreate them again. -- Cat chi? 13:29, 19 July 2007 (UTC) False, because Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy. You are mistaking the letter of the rule with the spirit of the rule. Speedy deletion is for deletions that are not controversial; these pages have proven controversial, and hence should not be speedily deleted. >Radiant< 13:31, 19 July 2007 (UTC) Nothing controversial about me reorganizing my userspace, the suggestion is rather strange. Please take it to WP:DR or directly to WP:ARBCOM or else, leave it alone. Thanks. -- Cat chi? 13:41, 19 July 2007 (UTC) False. As the ANI threads prove, your means of reorganizing things does cause controversy. I'd suggest you quit playing ostrich. >Radiant< 13:59, 19 July 2007 (UTC) Take it to arbcom or whatever process you feel like. I have no intention of allowing Ned Scott or someone else dictate how I am to organize my userspace. I have no intention of stopping editing my userspace. -- Cat chi? 14:01, 19 July 2007 (UTC) 3RR on User talk:Cool Cat/Archive 2005/08 Please do not make excessive reversions, like you did on User talk:Cool Cat/Archive 2005/08, as that is considered edit warring, and is a bad idea. For relevant policy, see the three revert rule. --ST47Talk·Desk 13:37, 19 July 2007 (UTC) While 3rr does not cover my userspace, I will do as you ask. -- Cat chi? 13:42, 19 July 2007 (UTC)