User talk:84.234.60.154

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

NOODLES!!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions.

Currently, you are editing without a username. You can continue to do so, as you are not required to log in to Wikipedia to read and edit articles; however, logging in will result in a username being shown instead of your IP address (yours is 84.234.60.154). Logging in does not require any personal details, and there are many other benefits for logging in.

When you edit pages:

  • Please respect others' copyrights; do not copy and paste the contents from webpages directly.
  • Please use a neutral point of view when editing articles; this is possibly the most important Wikipedia policy.
  • If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
  • Do not add unreasonable contents into any articles, such as copyrighted text, advertisement messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Adding such content or editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism.

The Wikipedia Tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. For now, if you are stuck, you can click the edit this page tab above, type {{helpme}} in the edit box, and then click Save Page; an experienced Wikipedian will be around shortly to answer any questions you may have. Also feel free to ask a question on my Talk page. I will answer your questions as far as I can! Thank you again for contributing to Wikipedia. —Khoikhoi 18:35, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Slayers Royal and Slayers article

I did insert mention of the game in the main article. I subsequently moved it to List of Slayers media. Please review the history of Slayers and List of Slayers media if you wish.--Monocrat 23:02, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you for your copyedits

To 'endecja' and other articles, please consider registering.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  17:37, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] An Automated Message from HagermanBot

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button Image:Wikisigbutton.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 11:05, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] personal attacks

I just came across Talk:Mohamad Ibrahim Shnewer. IMO these comments of yours look like an awful lot like an uncalled for violation of the wikipedia's policy of no personal attacks.

I don't think I even know you.

I don't want an explanation, or an apology, or excuses. But I urge you to be collegial,

If you think your concerns are serious, I urge you to first try to discuss your concerns directly with the person involved.

Candidly, Geo Swan 05:00, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edits Special:Contributions/84.234.60.154

Please do not undo redirects without consensus, if you want to bring the issue up that those characters deserve their own article please discuss it on the talk page. Thanks KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 12:53, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Please stop undoing those redirects unless you can show that there is consensus to do so. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 13:06, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

And where exactly is the consensus to do otherwise (your way)? --84.234.60.154 (talk) 13:12, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

To be honest I've no idea, which is why I brought the issue up to AN/I. I don't believe you are doing anything in a malicious way, so please don't be offended by my actions against you, and if you are miffed I apologize. Let's just wait until the AN/I thread gets some discussion going okay? Happy editing. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 13:24, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, okay. Also, I now read the talk page, and there's lot of crazy stuff going on. Definetely not what I'd call consensus - and looks like it means wiping out EVERY TRACE of the information on the all of charactees (even the "list of characters" is just a redirect). Simply weird. --84.234.60.154 (talk) 13:30, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes that is all very very odd. I'll do some more digging around and see what I can find. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 13:40, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Well I still can't find a discussion on any of this but after going through some of the articles' history it appears that TTN redirected List of Samurai Shodown characters to Samurai Shodown (series), which created a bunch of double redirects which Scepbot come along and fixed. I think the main question now is do we remove the redirect to Samurai Shodown (series) and work on one singular page (List of Samurai Shodown characters), or do what you were doing before I reverted you, which was to restore the articles to their pre-redirected state? It may be a good idea to ask this question at the talk page of the Wikiproject. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 13:53, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Also it looks like a new list for the characters is being created here. I imagine that once that is completed it will be moved over the current redirect on List of Samurai Shodown characters. This all gets rather confusing doesn't it. :) KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 14:05, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I pretty much made clear myself on my personal preferention. At least until now - someone on Samurai Shodown talk page said something he works on the "real" character page or whatever (I don't know if he still does). TNN's actions are like of a broken bot. --84.234.60.154 (talk) 14:11, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

If you want to save the article, then please help edit the old article so we can make it presentable and restore it. I'm making a lot of edits to it and encouraging others to join but it seems like I'm still the only one. I have no knowledge to the later games (SSV and up) or SS Warrior's Rage characters so they're basically gapping holes in the article. Sake neko 18:16, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] December 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. STORMTRACKER 94 21:21, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Prince of the Forest. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. —Animum (talk) 21:24, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] February 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Project Overkill do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia.  

Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
The external links I reverted were matching the following regex rule(s): rule: 'youtube\.com' (link(s): http://youtube.com/watch?v=jumPd6uj2fY) . If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. an image or a sound or video file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy and therefore probably should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, or similar site, then please check the information on the external site thorougly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creators copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).
Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! XLinkBot (talk) 16:06, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

Hi, the recent edit you made to Vojislav Šešelj has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks.   jj137 (talk) 00:13, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button Image:Signature_icon.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 09:04, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button Image:Signature_icon.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 16:31, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] March 2008

Hi, the recent edit you made to Movladi Baisarov has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Sam Korn (smoddy) 12:55, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to Assassination of Movladi Baisarov. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. Steve Crossin (talk) 13:00, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


Seriously, the heck? What is "vandalism" there? Are you on drugs? --84.234.60.154 (talk) 13:01, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Hmm. apparently your edit was constructive. The diff I saw merely showed me a large removal of content. Sorry about that. Steve Crossin (talk) 17:43, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to First Chechen War, you will be blocked from editing.
Your edits have been automatically marked as vandalism and have been automatically reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism: First Chechen War was changed by 84.234.60.154 (u) (t) deleting 49349 characters on 2008-03-18T12:09:10+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 12:09, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Kralizec! (talk) 12:19, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


I continued to edit while this crazy Crossin guy kept undo-ing me while I even didn't know about it - and even after he admitted his mistakes the day before and said "sorry" - he's stalking me so much he even reverted this on talk page I think someone should stop him. --84.234.60.154 (talk) 12:36, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Steve Crossin"

He reverts everything I write. Repeatedly. In all articles. Would someone do something about this? Please? --84.234.60.154 (talk) 13:03, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

No, seriously. This is crazy. --84.234.60.154 (talk) 13:05, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


  • Huggle is currently reporting that you are a blocked user. Edits from blocked users, in accordance with our blocking policy, can be reverted on sight. Steve Crossin (talk) 13:08, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not blocked, I was blocked for a few minutes only. I wouldn't even edit if i was blocked! Would you STOP and see what you are doing? How is this better than this? Hello?

This was a mistake, I thought I'm editing the esternal links (just putting them in alphabetical order and removing the broken one, for god's sake). --84.234.60.154 (talk) 13:12, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tehhh

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/chechnya-sl/message/54756 you might find this interesting. - PietervHuis (talk) 10:50, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] April 2008

Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia without explaining the valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you.

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to Torture Central, you will be blocked from editing. 122.29.53.223 (talk) 10:54, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

No, Mr. 122.29.53.223. --84.234.60.154 (talk) 10:55, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] April 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to No Gun Ri, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: No Gun Ri was changed by 84.234.60.154 (u) (t) deleting 39846 characters on 2008-04-04T10:59:20+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 14:59, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

No, not vandalism, Mr. Bot. --84.234.60.154 (talk) 15:04, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. Razorflame (talk) 15:11, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Kent State shootings. MBisanz talk 16:05, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Dude, think before reverting. Did you see the main category? No? Check it out. --84.234.60.154 (talk) 16:08, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

This is your only warning.
The next time you make a personal attack as you did at User_talk:MBisanz#Why_you_guys_don.27t_think.3F, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Mspraveen (talk) 16:15, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
Just because its in the main cat is not a reason to remove it from the sub cats... MBisanz talk 16:17, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I thought THESE CATEGORIES ARE REDUNANT. But whatever. Have them. Be happy.

I care too much for a stupid sh**. And you too. Wikipedia is a serious business, right? --84.234.60.154 (talk) 16:21, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello IP - I actually agree with you about this, but I have to say that you're not going about it optimally, what with your edit-warring and personal attacks. I've started a discussion on the subject at Talk:Kent State shootings; I suggest that you participate in that rather than revert-warring (you're at three reversions already anyway - one more and you'll be blocked for a WP:3RR violation). Sarcasticidealist (talk) 16:20, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

No no no no. I don't care anymore. But these "vandalism patrollers" are annoying as hell. They don't think even a little bit. Why they won't just leave it to the equally mindless bots, i can understand bots may be doing stupid things, but... ah, screw this. Anyway. I just wanted to add this to Category:Military scandals. I was right, right? --84.234.60.154 (talk) 16:24, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd say that would be a good addition. If nobody's responding to you on the talk page, I'd say just go ahead and add the category, and then if somebody disagrees with you they can discuss it. As for the vandalism patrollers, I think you might get on better with them if you used more informative edit summaries - "main category" is pretty vague. I'd have gone with something like "Wikipedia guidelines state that articles shouldn't normally be included in categories and their subcategories". If you're reverted anyway, it's usually a good idea to take things to the talk page. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 16:33, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Did you left messages at the reverters' talk pages telling them that they were completely wrong and should AGF? Did you chide them for using stock rv summaries instead of informative edit summaries? You didn't? Why the double standard? --Yooden ☮

[edit] 3rr Warning

You are about to violate the Three Revert Rule and you are edit waring on the 767 article. Consider this your last warning. Take it to the talk page and discuss it, make your points, consider the points of others, and build a concensus. This is not a dictatorship and you aren't Hitler. --'''I am Asamuel''' (talk) 16:55, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Darn. But can I be Himmler? Hitler was overrated anyway. --84.234.60.154 (talk) 16:58, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I would strive not to be a dictator in general. If you're going to be anyone, be the guy that doesn't shout in edit summaries to make his point rather than discussing it civilly on a talk page. Yeah, let's go with that. Aim high Willis! --Cyrus Andiron 17:01, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Btw, as we are here, could someone persuade the "Steve Crossin" guy to stop vandalising wikipedia? Once in a while, he reverst my edits randomly. It happened many times, last time few minutes ago:

I think he holds some kind of idiotic grudge against me. --84.234.60.154 (talk) 17:10, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I've asked him for an explanation. His behaviour actually gives the impression that he thinks you're a sock of a banned user. In any event, an explanation will no doubt be forthcoming. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 17:16, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Apologies, I owe an explanation.

I'm sorry about what has happened, I want to tell you I have no personal grudge against you. My full explanation is here Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 17:23, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Only in 2007?

Hi, you undid my edit saying "only in 2007". What does that mean? It doesn't matter when he gave the interview because he said he's been trying to discredit Putin for the past 6 years, which falls into the timeline of Litvinenkos books. Krawndawg (talk) 21:22, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

It's about 1999 events. Some (/many...) even argue the whole plot was Berezovsky's doing ("Operation Successor"). But never mind. The point is financing books have nothing with babbling about "violently overthrowing". --84.234.60.154 (talk) 21:23, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I think you misunderstood my reasoning for adding it. I was basically pointing out that he was funding Litvinenkos work, which tries to discredit Putins regime, all the while admitting that during the time he funded Litvinenkos work, he was also trying to discredit Putin. There is a connection there so I thought I would point it out, I'm not implying that he had anything to do with the actual bombings. Maybe I chose the wrong quote and should have used the part where he specifically says he has been trying to discredit Putin. Would you agree with that?Krawndawg (talk) 21:28, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

How about "and Putin critic" (or maybe even "former Putin ally-turned-enemy"). --84.234.60.154 (talk) 21:33, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Former Putin ally-turned-enemy or something to that degree would be okay. I don't like the word "critic" because he's obviously more than just your average Putin critic. Krawndawg (talk) 21:37, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Editing Style

Hi. While I see you are making an effort to contribute to Wikipedia, it seems that you edit in an inefficient style. Instead of repeatedly saving the page you are working on (and by doing so clogging up watchlists and the page history) please consider using the Show Preview button to review and check for errors before saving. Thanks. Random89 22:38, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, +1! The recent changes to Aerial bombing of cities, while probably well-intended, are clogging the history of edits. User:84.234.60.154, try using your Sandbox for all of your edits, then copying and pasting the results back to the page you want to change. Binksternet (talk) 01:18, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Agree, and see also my comment here, though of course you're free to ignore that advice.--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 04:05, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

You are persistently inserting libel into the article Krzysztof Kononowicz. Please stop, or you will be blocked. There have been sufficiently many warnings.

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. --B. Wolterding (talk) 12:16, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

What "libel"? This is your frst warning. --84.234.60.154 (talk) 12:16, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

You wrote in the article that this person is a "simple-minded pig farmer", and the like. While it may be true that he is a pig farmer (actually I can't read all of the sources), at least the first word seems to be a negative personal comment. Also you had already been reverted once, and re-inserted your edits. Therefore I was of the impression that your edits were vandalism (similar things are inserted only too often).

Now looking twice, I see that you were in fact making a good-faith effort to rewrite the article, and not vandalizing the page. I apologize for the revert, and have stricken the message above.

As it seems from the entries on your talk page, several people before had the impression that your edits were vandalism. I assume that your edits were actually in good faith. Still, there are a few thing you might change about your editing style, in order not to generate the false impression of being a vandal.

  • You almost never specify edit summaries. Doing so can help others better understand the reason for your edits.
  • You are making many successive small edits instead of one large edit. This can obfuscate what you're actually trying to do (in fact it's a tactics often used by vandals). You can use the "Preview" button in order to preview your edits, and press "Save" only once you're finished. This also helps keeping the edit history clean. If you create an account, you can also create a user sandbox, prepare rewrites of articles there, and only copy the final version to the actual article. It will then be clearer to others what you are doing, since they don't see the intermediate versions.
  • If you are a long-term contributor, it can generally add to your credibility if you create an account. (Most vandalism comes from unregistered users.)
  • If someone reverts you, and you wish to re-insert your edits, you may want to leave a note on the article's talk page, explaining your reasons.

Take these as suggestions, not accusations. --B. Wolterding (talk) 14:00, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

OK. The thing is: Kononowicz is a mildly-retarded man who was used by a really fringe far-right nationalists (they sold stuff, demanded money for intervews with him, and promoted themselves using this publicity). He is a pig farmer and some people even say he abused his pigs (well, he was even accused of abusing his mother) - but I don't think it was a case, I think he's pretty harmless. I've seen a program with him on TV, presenters asked him directly if he knows he's used for being a laughing stock and he said nothing. He couldn't grasp it. It was funny at first and then it became very sad. He's no longer a celebrity ("old meme"), even if the nationalists still show up with him on some occasions and make videos from time to time. Before he fell again into obscurity his handlers rented him as a clown/jester at a New Year party. Some "politician". --84.234.60.154 (talk) 14:06, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Maybe it is time to get an account?

Thank you for your contributions to the Beslan school hostage crisis and many other articles. Maybe it is time to get yourself an account? It takes only a minute or less, do not have any strings attached as far as I can tell but have a number of benefits:

  • You will be able to edit semi-protected articles;
  • You will be able to vote in community events (like elections of Arbcom, requests for adminship, etc.)
  • Your edits from the different computers will all be marked as yours;
  • Your edits will be taken more seriously: as many people have prejudice against anonymous editors;
  • Your IP will be hidden from other readers (except a handful of "checkusers"). Thus, nobody will calculate your real life address from the IP and come to break your window or demand from your boss to fire you.

This is not a demand at any rate but a friendly advise, you have all the rights to ignore it.

Thanks again for your contributions Alex Bakharev (talk) 08:04, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] quote

[1]

But Kirill Belyaninov, a Russian investigative journalist, says that could be tricky -- and not only because of respect for the victims' families.

"There were some mistakes in handling the operations of freeing hostages. I spoke to some people from the Kremlin and also from some power structures -- and I think they [the Kremlin] do understand their guilt and therefore they don't really want to bring this topic up again," Belyaninov says. "Obviously, the current situation in Russia would make really hard to find funding for such a project if the government opposes it."

Maybe an interesting quote.

I have a dozen of pictures of Raduyev I'll add some sometime (when I stop being lazy).

Can you send me an MSN or e-mail message? I want to ask you something (in private).

And yes it would be cool if you registered an account. - PietervHuis (talk) 20:33, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

No, that is not a good idea.Biophys (talk) 20:41, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, the recent edit you made to War crime has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Keilana|Parlez ici 20:12, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


Writing "Interview With History by Oriani Fallaci- " (no link, a misspelling in the name, no ISBN and/or page if a book, etc.) is not "a reliable source". --84.234.60.154 (talk) 20:24, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Please do not use talk pages such as Torture Central for general discussion of the topic. They are for discussion related to improving the article. They are not to be used as a forum or chat room. See here for more information. Thank you. ALLOCKE|talk 21:05, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

[edit] Alleged vandal reverts by me

Sorry about those edits. Have left an apology note on the discussion page of War crimes. Prashanthns (talk) 21:24, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Torture Central. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. ALLOCKE|talk 21:24, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

[edit] This is a mistake

I apologize, I thought I was doing something else.
In the future, feel free to contact me after you've familiarized yourself with WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL.

Thanks! SWik78 (talk) 20:16, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] shatoy 95

[2] You've heard of this? I believe this was against gelayev's men. - PietervHuis (talk) 10:17, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Well unfortunately I can't understand a word he's saying. This battle doesn't have much info or does it? - PietervHuis (talk) 00:05, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

There was no battle. "The bandits" issued them an ultimatum to disarm, so they took the village hostage (some 2 months before Budennovsk). It wasn't quite an isolated incident. --84.234.60.154 (talk) 02:38, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A friendly comment

Perhaps you do not like it, but I am watching for you. Please always remain civil. It does not matter if you are right or wrong. Incivility never helps but only backfire. In a case of trouble, please politely ask someone for help. Please remember about WP:AGF. Best regards, Biophys (talk) 17:20, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Also a message to you, Biophys: Please remember about WP:AGF. --Yooden ☮

[edit] work to do!

Someone removed two paragraphs here[3] because it was missing sources, can you help me find out the sources so the information can return?

Also can you please help me out with the Guerrilla phase of the Second Chechen War (2008) page? It's kind of monk work, and if we work on it together it wouldn't require much effort, that would be cool. (Recently there was a huge firefight between the Kadyrovtsy and the Yamadeyevtsy btw). - PietervHuis (talk) 21:17, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Can you make out the difference between these kadyrovtsy?[4] The ones in black, are they the akhmad police squad? - PietervHuis (talk) 20:58, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Black berets, so possibly OMON. The original Chechen OMON was led by a former Soviet policeman who was always on the Russian side and hated Kadyrov, but died in a mysterious car accident in 2003 and OMON was taken over by a kadyrovets Ruslan Alkhanov (no relation to Alu Alkhanov), now the Kadyrov's interior minister. --84.234.60.154 (talk) 12:26, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] OMON

So which formations of the Kadyrovites are part of OMON? Is the AkhmadKadyrov policesquad part of OMON? Or North and South? Neftepolk? - PietervHuis (talk) 18:24, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Chechen OMON is theoretically part of the Russian OMON. The original commander was Musa Gazimagomado, who once declared he would kill 5,000 Chechens if this would "bring peace". He died after his car was hit by KamAZ truck, which was said to be a car accident. Right now they're absolutely Ramzan's cowboys. --84.234.60.154 (talk) 18:40, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

On the other hand, they have Kadyrov on their banner, so they may be Kadyrov Patrol Regiment. --84.234.60.154 (talk) 18:49, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah... So those estimated total of 5,000 kadyrovites, do they include or exclude the Chechen OMON's? - PietervHuis (talk) 18:53, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

It's a tricky question, because Ramzan now controls some 20,000 armed men in uniform as the president and has his hand-picked men in command everywhere but in the army formations. And now he's now forcibly replacing even his men by the people of literally his own clan. --84.234.60.154 (talk) 19:01, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

20.000 is probably an overestimation based on the boasting of government officials, the last estimation by reuters said 8,000 pro-moscow chechens, and that included the kakiyevtsy and yamadayevtsy.[5] I don't think anywhere there's an estimation of how strong the Chechen OMON forces are. What I wonder is how OMON forces were subordinated to Alu Alkhanov during their armed conflict? Maybe Kadyrov only received total contral of OMON after he became president. - PietervHuis (talk) 19:14, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

OMON probably isn't very big. Deputy commander was Buvadi Dakhiyev, the enemy of Ramzan who was killed by the Ingush police in 2006 (Politkovskaya about him - it should be "but he was not one of the new breed that came into being when criminals and terrorists from Kadyrov's contingent took over power"). --84.234.60.154 (talk) 19:54, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

There's also a picture on that page of militants in blue suits, who clearly have OMON stamped on them, I believe blue is the usual color for OMON anyway. Maybe the Chechen OMON doesn't exist theoritically, and it's officially just OMON recruits from all over Russia, as well as including kadyrovites who Kadyrov turned into OMON members to take away any "foreign" control over Chechnya. In the shootout between forces of Alu Alkhanov and Kadyrov OMON forces acted on behalf of Alu Alkhanov so he didn't have complete control of OMON back then. - PietervHuis (talk) 20:08, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

No, Chechen OMON was and is staffed by the Chechens 1995-96 and again since 1995 (OMON forces sent to Chechnya from the other regions are not the Chechen OMON). Except now all commanders who were always pro-Russian ever since the early 1990s are dead and replaced by Kadyrov's former rebels. Dakhiyev, a conflicted man who befriended Politkovskaya (including once saving her from Kadyrov's wrath), died only in 2006.

Related: "In early November, some FSB-controlled Russian media sources initiated a campaign against Ramzan Kadyrov. "Bandit formations in Chechnya are still threatening factors and local security officials do not fully realize it…saying that there are few militants in the republic," wrote German Pronin in an article published on November 15 by Utro.ru. Pronin was clearly referring to Kadyrov, who has repeated from time to time that there are almost no rebels left in the republic. It should be noted that Pronin specifically criticized the work of two Chechen senior police officers who are very close to Kadyrov. Pronin stated that Chechens who had been fighting on the Russian side for many years, like Musa Gazimagomedov and Buvadi Dakhiev, had been killed, while former rebel field commanders like Artur Akhmadov and Adam Demilkhanov occupied high positions in law- enforcement agencies or in the regional government. Pronin added that the Chechen police were full of traitors who provided the insurgency with intelligence while Russian servicemen were being killed every day. "In August 2006 alone, during the period of the so- called `peaceful construction and resurrection of the republic,' Russian security officials lost 30 men in Chechnya," Pronin wrote. "It is a pity that the Kremlin does not subscribe to the Chechen newspapers where complaints against the central government are sometimes the same as they were during the Ichkeria period" [when the separatists were in power in Chechnya]."

--84.234.60.154 (talk) 20:20, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

OMON was roughly 300 when Kadyrov mostly took over (Alkhanov mispelled as Kolkhanov). --84.234.60.154 (talk) 20:31, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah ok I get it, every oblast has its own OMON, and where help is needed extra omon recruits are sent to. I'm not sure if that still happens in Chechnya, but it sure does in other districts of the Caucasus, especially in Ingushetia where no Ingush wants to be a part of it anymore. Most of the wounded in a recent raid on a base were from other regions. - PietervHuis (talk) 20:34, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

They don't send recruits as such, they send detachments for a period of several months and they do this from the first day of war in 1994. The OMON groups from outside Chechnya commited many of the worst crimes in Chechnya targeting civilians at random (even ethnic Russians living there and often just to steal money or property - one of moderators of chechnya-sl list recently called them the "Russian SS"), while the Chechen OMON were just brutal against enemy or suspects (with Gazimagomado being "bad cop" and his deputy Dakhiyev being "good cop", both dead now and none of them killed by the fighters). --84.234.60.154 (talk) 20:46, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

They're still in Chechnya, and since the increased insurgency in the other caucasian republics also in ingushetia, dagestan and balkaria & such [6] - PietervHuis (talk) 20:55, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, they are, but if they came from, say, Moscow, they're still the Moscow OMON and they return eventually (and others come in their places, and the circle repeats). I remember in 2001 or 2002 a number quit their jobs en masse to not be sent to Chechnya, but others go volunteerly to earn the extra money (legally or not). Thousands of OMON were killed or injured in the conflict and they killed or disappeared thousands of civilians. You'd also read this. --84.234.60.154 (talk) 21:38, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

They are indeed black berets from OMON, [7] [8] [9]. Again with the Akhmad Kadyrov flag. Maybe the akhmadkadyrov police patrol is simply part of the Chechen OMON? - PietervHuis (talk) 23:08, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

No (or at least I don't know anything about this). --84.234.60.154 (talk) 23:21, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I know "Alambek Yasayev/Yasaev" was the commander of this squad first. But I can't find who commands it since. - PietervHuis (talk) 23:10, 20 April 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Samashki

On the Samashki massacre page it said there were about 40 fighters, did you add that number? I can't find the source. Also it might be better if we give the page a Civilian Attack template just like with the My Lai Massacre. There are a dozen of grizzly pictures of the mass graves I can add too. - PietervHuis (talk) 18:03, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Memorial said so. also related --84.234.60.154 (talk) 21:00, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] May 2008

Hi, the recent edit you made to Operation Lentil has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. CanadianLinuxUser (talk) 15:10, 20 May 2008 (UTC)