Atbashian

Welcome!

Hello, Atbashian, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! --TMCk (talk) 23:14, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Taitz article

Why are you undoing my edits?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Atbashian (talk • contribs)

Hi Atbashian. The image you're trying to add is of very low quality especially compared to the one we have now. since you're in contact with Taitz you could ask her to upload some better quality photos to add to the article.--TMCk (talk) 22:59, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Conflict of interest in Wikipedia

Hi Atbashian. I work on conflict of interest issues here in Wikipedia. Your edits to date are all about Orly Taitz and in this edit note you made it clear that you are working on her behalf. I'm giving you notice of our Conflict of Interest guideline and Terms of Use, and will have some comments and requests for you below.

Hello, Atbashian. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

• avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
• instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
• when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
• avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
• exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you.

Comments and requests

Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work and managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. As in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review. Please note that there is no bar to being part of the Wikipedia community if you want to be involved in articles where you have a conflict of interest; there are just some things we ask you to do (and if you are paid, some things you need to do).

Disclosure is the most important, and first, step, which you have disclosed via your edit note.

The second step is a form of peer review. This piece may seem a bit strange to you at first, but if you think about it, it will make sense. In Wikipedia, editors can immediately publish their work, with no intervening publisher or standard peer review -- you can just create an article, click save, and voilà there is a new article, and you can go into any article, make changes, click save, and done. No intermediary - no publisher, no "editors" as that term is used in the real world. So the bias that conflicted editors tend to have, can go right into the article. Conflicted editors are also really driven to try to make the article fit with their external interest. If they edit directly, this often leads to big battles with other editors.

What we ask editors to do who have a COI and want to work on articles where their COI is relevant, is:

a) if you want to create an article relevant to a COI you have, create the article as a draft through the WP:AFC process, disclose your COI on the Talk page, and then submit the draft article for review (the AfC process sets up a nice big button for you to click when it is ready) so it can be reviewed before it publishes; and

b) And if you want to change content in any existing article on a topic where you have a COI, we ask you to propose content on the Talk page for others to review and implement before it goes live, instead of doing it directly yourself. You can make the edit request easily - and provide notice to the community of your request - by using the "edit request" function as described in the conflict of interest guideline. I made that easy for you by adding a section to the beige box at the top of the Talk page at Talk:Orly Taitz - there is a link at "click here" in that section -- if you click that, the Wikipedia software will automatically format a section in which you can make your request.

By following those "peer review" processes, editors with a COI can contribute where they have a COI, and the integrity of WP can be protected. We get some great contributions that way, when conflicted editors take the time to understand what kinds of proposals are OK under the content policies. (which I will say more about, if you want).

I hope that makes sense to you..

Will you please agree to follow the peer review processes going forward, when you want to work on the Orly Taitz article or any article where your COI is relevant? Do let me know, and if anything above doesn't make sense I would be happy to discuss. And if you want me to quickly go over the content policies, I can do that. Just let me know. Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 02:11, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Communists for Kerry

A tag has been placed on Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Communists for Kerry requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Editor has for some reason duplicated Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Communists for Kerry here.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:50, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

January 2017

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. Safiel (talk) 23:43, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

• Thank you Safiel - I will try to remember :) --Atbashian (talk) 23:52, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Duplicate keep votes

I have restricken your second keep vote. While you are allowed to make as many arguments as you wish in an AfD discussion, you may only vote once. Thanks. Safiel (talk) 00:17, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello Atbashian, nice to meet you, I am also looking at the deletion-discussion. My advice is to concentrate solely upon WP:GOLDENRULE, it is the only thing that REALLY matters at such a discussion... nose-counting does not matter, logic does not matter, only sourcing matters (and the admin who makes the final decision will care about the quality/reputation of the publishers and the depth/detail specifically about the topic in those sources ... but ignore most everything else, ideally). So, since they are key to the effort here, thank you for posting the URLs you provided... but if you don't mind, I would like to reformat them. Wikipedia markup-language is not *that* difficult, but there are some unwritten rules about when to use boldface, when to show the full URL and when to just indicate the link with a numeral, and similar such things. Is it okay if I help rewrite your comments, to make the URLs you have provided a bit more 'traditional' in terms of how they are presented? If you would rather I not, that is fine. If you would rather I do so, and then dislike the end result, you can always undo my changes. And of course, if you want somebody to help you with traditional-formatting, and accept my good-faith offer, but another wikipedian swoops in and does the work before me, well that is also okay. Does this sound acceptable? 47.222.203.135 (talk) 05:28, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes, of course, I would really appreciate your help - as long as the information is preserved and the names are showing. And looking at how you did it will also show me how to do it next time. Thank you very much!--Atbashian (talk) 06:25, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

First lesson in wiki-markup, when you reply you can put colons in front of your paragraphs, which indents them. 47.222.203.135 (talk) 07:01, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

If you get tired of typing all the colons, you can use {{od}} as a magic incantation, which will draw the little outdent-icon. 47.222.203.135 (talk) 07:01, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

One colon to indent the first reply to myself. 47.222.203.135 (talk) 07:01, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Two colons to indent the reply-to-my-own-reply. And so on, see WP:Indentation helpdocs 47.222.203.135 (talk) 07:01, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Okay, I have modified your comments, I *tried* to modify your comments but another user objected then apparently fell asleep before we could finish our conversation, hiding the long list of URLs away inside a tidy green box (see Template:collapse_top), and formatted the first three of your refs from WaPo/BBC/FOX using the usual Template:cite_web. Because I modified your comment, and deleted some portions, another wikipedian has reverted me (it is NOT usually proper to touch another person's talkpage comments ... but in this case I had permission of course). That will get sorted out in a few minutes, and you can see what I have done by looking in the history-tab for the page, see instructions below. If you like, once my change is put back! but not yet you can mimic my alterations to the first three refs, and fix up the other ones. Most of the blogs are not going to be useful, but publications which are bluelinked like Daily Kos can *sometimes* be useful.

Now, in looking at the wapo/bbc/foxnews refs, with a practiced eye of paying attention to a lot of AfD discussions, the first two are not going to be super-helpful, because they only have a sentence or so specifically about CfK. By contrast, the FOX ref has several sentences (albeit mostly quotations rather than journalistic descriptive/analytic prose which is preferable), and indeed has the journalistic analytic/errata fox-news-editor's-note at the bottom which clearly indicates that the CfK deadpan satire was a success. *That* ref is helpful, towards satisfying WP:GOLDENRULE, because it is 1) a national broadcast television network, 2) has multiple paragraphs specifically about CfK/TPC/Oleg, 3) is 100% independent of those things aka not connected financially or otherwise to CfK/TPC/Oleg. We need more sources like that, which are independent in-depth publications which have a reputation for journalism.

Rather than trying to dig up more blogs (not useful because they fail WP:RS per WP:BLOGS in the vast majority of cases), usually the best thing to do is look for *depth* of coverage in well-known journalistic sources. After that has been thoroughly and carefully been done, it will be easy to see whether CfK is going to pass WP:GOLDENRULE, and to how many metaphorical decimal places. You can read about the deletion-helpdocs over at WP:AfD, that may help you understand the mechanics more, but I can say without much exaggeration that the only thing which matters is WP:GOLDENRULE, finding enough independent in-depth coverage in newspapers/books/magazines/television/academia/governmental/similar-type-sources (not blogs/forums/youtube/facebook/twitter/unpublished/selfpublished/etc).

Click on the little 'talk' thing by my number, then click 'edit' if you want to leave me a note, or if you leave me a note (here or at AfD or in Draft_talk:Oleg Atbashian or wherever) but I don't respond promptly feel free to joggle my elbow with a note on my usertalkpage. 47.222.203.135 (talk) 07:58, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Well, apparently my optimism was incorrect. Jim1138 might eventually acknowledge this message, or might not. But about five minutes after I sent them a previous message, they stopped editing, presumably for the night. So it might not be until tomorrow that this gets straightened out, I also have to be offline for a bit soon. If you want to see what I changed, and how specifically I modified your comments to better fit the wikipedia unwritten-style-guide for AfD materials, you can see that stuff below, or by clicking the 'view-history' button at the deletion-discussion-page.

• 07:36, 15 January 2017‎ Jim1138 (-3,205)‎ . . (Reverted edits by 47.222.203.135 (talk) (HG) (3.1.22)) (Tag: Huggle)
• 07:34, 15 January 2017‎ 47.222.203.135 (+3,135)‎ . . (some heavier re-formatting of the references provided by Atbashian, with their permission. also reply to comment they made, and reformat that comment also. !nosign!)

Currently the unmodified version is visible at WP:Articles_for_deletion/Communists_for_Kerry, which is sub-optimal. It is possible to undo-an-undo, but typically I avoid such back-n-forth (see WP:EDITWAR for why), and instead prefer to talk it over with the person who objected. In this case that is taking longer than it should, but that cannot be helped it seems. You are free to look at the links above, and compare and contrast, so as to get an idea of where I was going with my changes. Open the 07:34 version in one browser-tab, and then open the 07:36 version in another browser-tab, so you can toggle between them. I will be back in a few hours with luck, and we can resume our collaboration. 47.222.203.135 (talk) 08:57, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

trying again, Once More* with Footnotes

Manually copied this here from up above, please see [1] for the diff of the original edit by User:Atbashian and [2] for later re-confirmation

...Is it okay if I help rewrite your comments, to make the URLs you have provided a bit more 'traditional' in terms of how they are presented? If you would rather I not, that is fine. If you would rather I do so, and then dislike the end result, you can always undo my changes. And of course, if you want somebody to help you with traditional-formatting, and accept my good-faith offer, but another wikipedian swoops in and does the work before me, well that is also okay. Does this sound acceptable? 47.222.203.135 (talk) 05:28, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes, of course, I would really appreciate your help - as long as the information is preserved and the names are showing. And looking at how you did it will also show me how to do it next time. Thank you very much!--Atbashian (talk) 06:25, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello again Atbashian, I have been working on sourcing with Powderdry, who is currently putting some elbow grease into Draft:People's Cube, please see Draft_talk:People's Cube and also Draft_talk:Oleg Atbashian for an analysis of those mostly-TPC-related sources. After some talkpage-tag with Jim1138 on our userpages, I believe we are going to try this whole thing again... I am leaving this new section on your talkpage, so that I can point to it in my edit-summaries, that I'm about to make  :-) 47.222.203.135 (talk) 21:16, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

47.222.203.135 - Really appreciate your help. I just posted a reiteration of my permission on someone's talk page, but was it yours or Jim's? It's all very confusing for a newbie. Also, I couldn't learn much from the edits because by the time I looked at them, they were all redone. It's like how they played croquet in Alice in Wonderland, with the mallets in the form of live flamingoes who moved their heads, and the balls in the form of live hedgehogs who ran anywhere they wanted. --Atbashian (talk) 21:32, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

You can always see what happened in the past on wikipedia... there is no memory-hole, even for "deleted" pages you just ask the nearest of 1200 admins for a WP:REFUND to retrieve the invisible content. Old versions of the page are always visible in the 'view history' button up at the top-righthand-corner. So for instance, here are the changes I just made "for" you inside your own comments, which violates WP:TPO but satisfies WP:IAR to the hilt:

• (cur | prev) 21:48, 15 January 2017‎ 47.222.203.135 (talk)‎ . . (24,439 bytes) (+3,304)‎ . . (#3/3: modifying comment of another wikipedian WITH permission from that wikipedian. Please see User_talk:Atbashian#trying_again.2C_Once_More.2A_with_Footnotes before you revert, unless you are User:Atbashian who may of course rvv. Also, WaPo#2) (undo)
• (cur | prev) 21:38, 15 January 2017‎ 47.222.203.135 (talk)‎ . . (21,135 bytes) (+387)‎ . . (#2/3: modifying comment of another wikipedian WITH permission from that wikipedian. Please see User_talk:Atbashian#trying_again.2C_Once_More.2A_with_Footnotes before you revert this change, unless you are User:Atbashian who may of course rvv) (undo)
• (cur | prev) 21:31, 15 January 2017‎ 47.222.203.135 (talk)‎ . . (20,748 bytes) (+348)‎ . . (reply to Powderday, and any others reading the AfD, pointing to guidelines that show potential size-in-bytes is not a dealbreaker for the upmerge/rename tactic) (undo)
• (cur | prev) 21:26, 15 January 2017‎ 47.222.203.135 (talk)‎ . . (20,400 bytes) (+753)‎ . . (#1/3: modifying comment of another wikipedian WITH permission from that wikipedian. Please see User_talk:Atbashian#trying_again.2C_Once_More.2A_with_Footnotes before you revert this change, unless you are User:Atbashian who may of course rvv) (undo)

As far as talkpages go, yes they are everywhere! See WP:TALKPAGE and WP:PAGEHIST, but here is the quick-n-dirty introduction.

• User_talk:Atbashian aka [3] is your user-talkpage, six months experience but very spotty due to a busy personal life,
• User_talk:Jim1138 is his user-talkpage, eight years of experience,
• User_talk:47.222.203.135 is my user-talkpage, until the ISP has a hiccup or similar,
• User_talk:Jimbo_Wales is the Great And Powerful Jimbo's user-talkpage, founder and godking of wikipedia herself  :-)

These pages for wikipedians to chit-chat with each other, are not to be confused with article-specific talkpages:

• Talk:Communists for Kerry is was for talking about improving that article, and Draft_talk:Communists for Kerry will soon enough be the place for such conversations,
• WP:Articles for deletion/Communists for Kerry is a policy-talkpage for discussing the WP:GOLDENRULE status of the sources for that article,
• Talk:The People's Cube was for talking about improving that article but is now "deleted" unless somebody requests a WP:REFUND,
• Draft_talk:People's Cube is the 'new' place for talking about improving the draft-version of that same article,
• WP:Articles for deletion/The People's Cube is a policy-history for a closed discussion,
• Draft_talk:Oleg Atbashian is the proposed article which has never yet existed,

And that is just for one small group of articles! Can definitely get confusing, and the echo's and thank's and revert's and undo's and such make it nutty. Every single one of the talkpages (and indeed EVERY legitimate URL on wikipedia more or less) has a semi-permanent view-history function, so you can go back in time and see what the discussion looked like at various timestamps, by clicking here for instance.[4] That is the view-history tab of Communists for Kerry AfD discussion, but there is also a view-history tab for Talk:Communists_for_Kerry, and a view-history tab for the mainspace readership-visible article Communists for Kerry. Which can get terribly confusing, with little conversations going on everywhere at once. Mostly I just concentrate on talking to whoever I'm talking to at any one point in time, and being WP:NICE to anybody I happen to meet -- since sooner or later I'll run into them again 47.222.203.135 (talk) 22:07, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you 47.222.203.135 for your illuminating explanation. I'll try to remember it all, or a least where to look it up in the future - that's if I remember how to find this page :) BTW, do I need to include your ID in order for you to be notified of this post - or will the system do it automatically? --Atbashian (talk) 23:18, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

You can just call me 47.222, the mediawiki software does NOT notify anons like myself under any circumstances. If you comment, and I don't notice it ...I tend to leave browser-tabs with ongoing conversations open and refresh them periodically but that is memory-dependent... then just leave me a note linking to where you are asking me something at User_talk:47.222.203.135 in a new usertalkpage section. Other people, like Powderdry, can receive WP:NOTIFICATIONS when you put the correct syntax around their usernames while mentioning them in your postings. Powderdry, please see the section below, if you have time to help with sourcing, I have analyzed the group into a best-to-worst ordering at Draft_talk:Oleg Atbashian. 47.222.203.135 (talk) 23:38, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Edited a couple things to clarify & correct for present conditions, marked with strikeout-tags and insertion-tags as per wikipedia traditions. 47.222.203.135 (talk) 14:31, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

you definitely SHOULD be commenting

I am working on trying to find the sources that will have enough 'reliability' (roughly identical to prestige as mainstream media outlets) plus enough depth (multiple paragraphs specifically about Oleg/CFK/TPC) in order to pass WP:GOLDENRULE. I don't want to do all the work  :-)

And I suspect that you have a lot of access to material that I don't, and probably can speak cyrillic languages which I cannot. So unless you do lend a hand, probably I'll just flail around until next year. So yes, please feel free to modify anything and everything. If I disagree, I will just delete what you are doing wrong, and drop you a note saying 'do not do that please' or similar. Wikipedia really is the encyclopedia anyone can edit, and in draftspace even people that are potentially saddled with WP:COI are free to make edits that Improve The Encyclopedia without worrying about crossing any invisible lines or violating any unwritten rules. There are a bunch of unwritten rules at AfD, so I recommend staying away from there -- I will update the thread tonight myself, when we have got a handle on what the top-ten-best sources are. You should also not modify anything in mainspace, presumably. But you should definitely help me get the contents of Draft_talk:Oleg Atbashian / Draft:Oleg Atbashian and also optionally Draft_talk:People's Cube / Draft:People's Cube properly sorted out. My gut feeling is that we do NOT have enough in-depth mainstream refs to save Communists-for-Kerry (by contrast see my analysis of Billionaires for Bush in terms of satisfying WP:GOLDENRULE which is over at User_talk:Powderdry -- that article *is* comfortably above the WP:GOLDENRULE threshold with the sources it already has listed in mainspace). partial comment by 47.222.203.135 (talk) 23:33, 15 January 2017 (UTC) ...[note: splitting long original comment to reply inline --Powderday]

if you are going to split a long comment in twain... NOT recommended per WP:TPO guideline though I think it is fine... make sure you 'sign' all the parts, like I did in green above, so that there is no confusion over who said what. 47.222.203.135 (talk) 13:26, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

(Sob, sob, sniff) There I go, pretending to be real cool and all and taking the name "Powderday" and then they start referring to me as "Powerdry". There goes my street cred :) Just kidding: its "Powderday", just a reminderd so in the future i don't miss anything because the link to my username was not spelled right. Greetings all ! Powderday (talk) 20:53, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I've been trying to keep your usename straight, sorry... I associate that particular letter-sequence with "keep your powder dry" catchphrase. Too many movies watched, on my part, I suspect :-)     I'll try not to mis-identify you Powderdry err, make that Powderday, but if I do please forgive me ;-) 47.222.203.135 (talk) 13:26, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

If we can come up with enough sources to justify the combination-article Draft:Oleg Atbashian, by pooling CFK+TPC+GMU, then we can also see if there are enough sources to justify keep on the Communists for Kerry article, and maybe even WP:REFUND of the content formerly at The People's Cube. But my wiki-nose is pretty sharp, and I'm not seeing that outcome as likely. AfD began on the 9th, and usually runs seven days, *sometimes* extended another seven days if progress is happening, so we need to get our sources organized chop-chop. Right now we are still missing WP:GOLDENRULE for any of the draftspace or mainspace topics. It will help me if you can start working on some of the refs, formatting them like I showed you, with the |quote= portion filled in. But concentrate on things at the TOP of the list that I have provided, not stuff mid-way down like Snob.ru which *might* be a WP:RS but will take time to prove... and even if we prove it, the content is not easily retrieved, and in Russian. Better to concentrated on low-hanging-fruit for now. Do you have time to work on this tonight? Do you want me to assign you some refs to fill in, so that we can divvy up the effort? Let me know what you are thinking, so that I can help get to WP:GOLDENRULE. 47.222.203.135 (talk) 23:33, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

47.222 - I have some urgent work waiting to be done, and I should have been doing that work today instead of being on Wikipedia. Unfortunately, the Wikipedia business also seems to be urgent. I wish there were more than 24 hours in a day... I want to help, but I really need to get this other work done. Can this wait a couple of days? I also know a volunteer willing to help. Should I put you both in touch? --Atbashian (talk) 00:10, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes, sometimes real life intervenes :-)     And yes, anybody can edit, although it is (strongly) discouraged to bring people to wikipedia for the purpose of arguing at AfD, it is perfectly fine to bring people to wikipedia to improve content and sourcing. No need to make formal introductions, just explain to them WP:GOLDENRULE, have them read your talkpage here so they understand what I've taught you, and then they can start pitching in on the source-digging and source-verifying work at Draft_talk:Oleg Atbashian (and the other places mentioned above -- but since you are 'recruiting' them please ask that they stay away from "voting" at the AfD since you have already "voted" there). Apologies that wikipedia is a pain in the buttocks -- it is not always annoying like this, though of course, sometimes it is. Whatever happens during the next few days, with the deletion-question-of-the-moment, I think that the sourcing is pretty clear such that in the next six months or so, at least one of the three Oleg/CFK/TPC wikipedia articles will be properly sourced, neutrally written, and restored to mainspace. As noted earlier, nothing ever really disappears permanently on wikipedia -- though most "reliable sources" do not properly report that factoid. Moreover, WP:NOTTEMPORARY applies, once you prove a topical-subject is demonstrably above the WP:GOLDENRULE threshold, it remains thataway indefinitely. It is a hard mountain to climb though, mostly because wikipedia policies in the past few years have become a pit of despair. IAR still works though, even if it takes a bit longer to make it stick. Best, 47.222.203.135 (talk) 00:41, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

47.222 - Oleg asked if I could spend some time working with you while he deals with other matters. I have a little experience editing Wiki articles and some free time over the next day or two - so first I'll read up on where things stand at the moment. I won't have time to begin till sometime tomorrow morning. In the meantime, if you have specific items you want me to work on, please let me know. Snit333 (talk) 03:38, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Okay, that is fine, but since you are close to the subject of Draft:Oleg Atbashian biography-article, and since you are thus also under 'WP:COI' with respect to Communists for Kerry please restrict yourself *entirely* to editing pages that begin with the work 'Talk' or the word 'Draft' in the URL pagetitle -- you are free to make ANY helpful encyclopedic changes to Draft_talk:Oleg Atbashian, and even Draft:Oleg Atbashian, but you should NOT until I have time to train you about edit-requests and such make ANY changes no matter how seemingly-harmless to Communists for Kerry (but Talk:Communists for Kerry is fine since it starts with 'Talk') and especially not to WP:Articles for deletion/Communists for Kerry -- since I believe the person who asked you to this discussion has already WP:NOTVOTEed and it is considered extremely poor form to WP:CANVASS for new WP:NOTVOTEs. Even though it is not a vote :-)

As far as divvying up the workload, I will start a new section on my own user-talkpage at User_talk:47.222.203.135#Oleg, so that I can see the Orange Bar Of Doom whenever you Snit333 and/or Powderdry and/or Atbashian needs a new assignment. Many hands make light work, as the old saying goes. I am planning on keeping the *primary* list of vetted and organized sources at Draft_talk:Oleg_Atbashian#URLs_from_TPC.2C_CFK.2C_and_GOOG, and although anybody is free to edit that, it is probably better to avoid WP:EDITCONFLICTs to just start a new talkpage-section (by clicking the 'new section' button up at the top) and then making a comment or a question or a correction there. Let me know if this makes sense, and if you -- or User:Atbashian or anybody really -- have questions or concerns please ask me at User_talk:47.222.203.135 where I will most-easily see them. 47.222.203.135 (talk) 11:06, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

don't panic but CFK is now in the wiki-oubliette

You may have noticed Communists for Kerry turned into a redlink, but no worries, I have asked for it to be restored, please see User_talk:RoySmith#request_for_WP:REFUND_x3 for progress on that front.

I will continue to work on Draft:Oleg Atbashian, and with our recent efforts I believe we are coming close to achieving WP:GOLDENRULE for that biographical article, which will of course contain Draft:Oleg Atbashian#Communists for Kerry as well as Draft:Oleg Atbashian#The People's Cube.

Although this is a discouraging moment (for beginners on wikipedia -- you become immune to wiki-tradegy after awhille when you realize it is all just electrons), please do not lose heart. I have enjoyed working with you thus far, and would like to complete our work, and get Draft:Oleg Atbashian turned into a bluelink in mainspace. Best, 47.222.203.135 (talk) 12:05, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Have requested from a new admin for Draft:Communists for Kerry history-tab to get restored. If that turns from a redlink to a bluelink, I will have achieved success. We don't really NEED the old content to finish our effort, but it may help to have it as a cross-check, or perhaps if there are sources in the body prose or the reverted-history of that page or talkpage that will help. 47.222.203.135 (talk) 13:54, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

heads-up, in case this happens, and advice on how to possibly prevent it from happening

Dear User:Atbashian, from our recent conversations, I believe I ought to mention this....

Here is the official text of WP:IMPERSONATE: "...Do not edit under a name that is likely to imply that you are (or are related to) a specific, identifiable person, unless it is your real name. ...If a name is used that implies that the user is (or is related to) a specific, identifiable person, the account may sometimes be blocked as a precaution against damaging impersonation, until proof of identity is provided. ...If you have been blocked for using your real name, please do not take offense; we are trying to prevent somebody from impersonating you... You are welcome to use your real name, but in some cases, you will need to prove that you are who you say you are. You can do this by sending an email to info-en@wikimedia.org."

• {{Share email |target = info-en@wikimedia.org |subject = Pre-emptive attempt at compliance with WP:IMPERSONATE |contents = This is my wikipedia username on en.wikipedia.org, User:Atbashian, and I would like to disclose that I... (( fill in the rest please )) |show = click here to compose an email message to info-en@wikimedia.org |icon = true }}

Here is the ACTUAL PRACTICE that admins who specialize in being anti-spam anti-COI wiki-cops use in reality: If your username User:Atbashian, is even close to matching that of a BLP such as Draft:Oleg Atbashian, you WILL BE BLOCKED without warning by the first hard-ass admin to find you. (Those admins who are NOT hard-ass wiki-knights are in the majority... but will merely pass you by without warning you... the first hard-ass to run across you will instantly WP:BLOCK you.) You will *remain blocked* and unable to edit wikipedia indefinitely (except your own talkpage and then only to appeal the block). Your talkpage appeals will be 100% denied every time. The only way to get unblocked is to {{Share email |target = info-en@wikimedia.org |subject = Pre-emptive attempt at compliance with WP:IMPERSONATE |contents = This is my wikipedia username on en.wikipedia.org, User:Atbashian, and I would like to disclose that I... (( fill in the rest please )) |show = click here to compose an email message to info-en@wikimedia.org |icon = true }}, with some kind of 'proof' of your identity. I don't know the details, maybe just emailing them from your official published email address at thepeoplescube.com will be sufficient, or maybe the force you to undergo a DNA cheek-swab? I suspect it depends on which volunteer answers your initial email to the info-en@wikipedia.org shared volunteer mailing address, but per WP:AGF my further suspicion is that all those hard-working volunteers are doing their best to help wikipedia improve. So my advice is, please go ahead and email the people right now, pre-emptively, from your official email, with whatever 'proof' of your real-world identity you are comfy including therein, and then follow the instructions you may receive to further 'prove' who you are, and that you are not in violation of the spirit of WP:IMPERSONATE.

Now, your username MAY STILL BE blocked anyways, as a result of your pre-emptive email perhaps, just for spite (since you are obviously not threatening wikipedia mainspace in any fashion presently there is nothing 'preventative'), but if so... just let it slide. Once the OTRS/UTRS/INFO-EN people are satisfied, you will be unblocked, eventually, and WP:TIND, others and myself can continue improving draftspace in the meantime. Similarly, as I've been trying to teach you, no matter how rude anybody is to you on wikipedia, or hypothetically via the email back-channels to the underbelly of wikipedia, it is absolutely imperative and essential that you personally never fail to assume good faith about THEM and their actions, no matter what happens TO you, and in particular that you personally never lose your cool, and at all times remain omnidirectionally friendly and helpful to all your fellow wikipedians, per WP:NPA and WP:TE and WP:ASPERSIONS and the general pillar of WP:5 number four aka WP:NICE. Even when, especially when, other wikipedians are not being nice to YOU. And no, politely asking rude people to start following pillar four themselves, will only backfire and make them even more rude. No admin will intervene. Sorry!

There is SOME advantage, in a pragmatic discourage-the-spammers sense, to having this wiki-cop reality. There are plenty of people every day who show up to wikipedia to promote their rock band, their employer, their PR clients, and similar... usually with the mindset that having a username like User:OFFICIAL CORPORATE REP FOR XYZ CORP DO NOT REVERT MY CHANGES OR DELETE MY PAGES ANYMORE YOU DUMB WIKIPEDIANS will somehow be "helpful" to their agenda. Those kinds of usernames are always blocked, obviously, as soon as they are noticed, because #1) clearly they are only here to spam and not to provide sourced neutral content that improves the encyclopedia AS an encyclopedia which summarizes all human knowledge, and #2) clearly they have a big chip on their shoulder. So it is especially important, given this reality, that you do your best never to give even the slightest hint that could be perceived as spam-like, and second, that you have nothing which could remotely be perceived as a 'tude in terms of your interactions with your fellow wikipedians.

I strongly suspect, that you probably have a fairly good understanding of exactly how the sort of sociological ecology, that I am describing here, works... from your real-life activities and pursuits and experiences. Wikipedia is not THAT bad, but it is pretty bad. Sorry about that, I'm working on it  ;-) 47.222.203.135 (talk) 13:52, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

• I can send the email, but if that may block me for a long time, wouldn't it be easier to just change my user name to a nickname and start writing about myself in the third person? Or simply create a new account under a nickname? --Atbashian (talk) 18:29, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Short answers are, you don't have to send the email (see option#2 below), you probably would not be blocked at all and not for a 'long' time in any case, changing your username is allowed (see option#3) but you should not refer to yourself in the third person (honesty not just a good idea it is the wiki-law). Similarly, you should very much not create a new wikipedia-username, see WP:SOCK, that is blockable and the blocks follow you-the-human. There are limited circumstances where people can edit with multiple usernames per WP:VALIDALT... e.g. some admins have two usernames, one for home and one for travel, and people like myself have multiple IP addresses over the years (but not *simultaneously* nor in *interleaving* fashion... just one at a time). One person per username is mandatory, AND one username per person is safest/cleanest, especially when editing with COI-encumberance. Longer answers and recommended 'good' options below. 47.222.203.135 (talk) 09:30, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello there, as one of those patrolling "anti-spam anti-COI wiki-cops" (not an admin though, so you don't have to worry about me blocking you), I'd like to interject. Most of the advice the unregistered user gives is correct: administrators routinely block accounts because they appear to be impersonating a living person. This is done to protect the identities of the person, as I'm sure that you wouldn't want someone to impersonate you and spout nonsense on the noticeboards. The IP's suggestion for verification is also correct: an email from an address publicly tied to you would be enough to satisfy the requirements. As far as your suggestions go, one is better than the other. If you'd rather not edit using your real name, you can change your username and do so. However, writing about yourself while pretending to be someone else is an issue. Since you are connected with the topics of yourself and a website you created/run, you should follow the conflict of interest guideline, which includes advising others of your connection to the subject. If you have any questions, you can always ask at my talk page or at the Teahouse. --AntiCompositeNumber (Leave a message) 01:45, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi AntiCompositeNumber, thank you for the interjection, appreciated. I was reasonably certain that just an email was enough 'proof' but having never done it...  :-) So, to answer your question User:Atbashian, probably nobody will block you, whether you send the email or not, unless they think you are disrupting wikipedia. But I've seen people get blocked for just having the same username as a bluelink, and Draft:Oleg Atbashian is likely to become a bluelink soon. So to keep your wiki-ducks all in a wiki-row, you can deal with the username thing by: 1) emailing pre-emptively as suggested, 2) not emailing and just continuing on as normal... getting unblocked from a WP:IMPERSONATE should only take a day or two... but WP:TIND and while blocked (for whatever reason whether 'good reason' or just mistake/goof/etc) you must NOT do any editing except unblock-related-discussions-and-actions. You could also 3) request a new username via WP:NAMECHANGE process, which keeps a 'paper trail' of what your old username was... 4) theoretically even *stop* logging in with a username and become an 'anon' aka IP-based-editor like myself. Unless you just want to not have your name on your everyday edits for some reason, it is actually beneficial to be known as Atbashian because it inherently *announces* aka discloses a likely COI with every edit you make. On wikipedia it is considered rude to presume out loud that User:Atbashian is likely related to Draft:Oleg Atbashian, per WP:DBTF and WP:AGF, so I waited until I was sure beyond a reasonable doubt to bring up the email-thing. Because you have COI, therefore, I recommend not doing #4 and not doing #3... editing as 'Atbashian' will help protect you from getting perceived as spamming/pufferizing/attackpaging/etc/etc *because* it clearly discloses who you are. You can optionally do #1 if you wish, or, just carry on (option#2). As you can see from AntiCompositeNumber's message, the anti-spam patrollers are looking for The Bad Guys, who either are messing up wikipedia by spamming (WP:PSCOI + WP:PROMO) or are messing up wikipedia with puffery (WP:PSCOI + WP:PUFFERY) or whatever. You can also run into trouble, for instance, through having a negative-type COI, such as if you started editing Billionaires for Bush to insert rude unsourced things. As long as you are careful to firmly adhere to the WP:5 pillars, especially pillar two on staying neutral and pillar four on being friendly to everybody, you cannot go wrong here on wikipedia, and if you goof or make a mistake, usually somebody will notice and tell you about it. The reason I brought up the you-might-get-blocked thing, is *because* that is a rare case where some admins do (sometimes) block-before-talk. Lemme know if you have other questions or troubles, if I don't answer promptly that means I forgot to check back, just leave a direct note on my user-talkpage (or ask AntiCompositeNumber or WP:TEAHOUSE or WP:IRC). 47.222.203.135 (talk) 09:30, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

how to make a userpage

Per conversation above, please see instructions at User_talk:Snit333#since_we_are_starting_to_think_about_mainspace, follow the three steps in green to create a userpage, add the appropriate userbox, and then insert yourself into the draft-article-talkpage header (as user2 or if Powderday beats you to the punch then as user3 or whatever). 47.222.203.135 (talk) 09:30, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

• 47.222 - sorry, but I'm not sure what it is you want me to do. You have probably overestimated my ability to comprehend the Wiki-speak :)
• Last night I emailed my request to confirm my identity and it was quickly approved, so thanks for steering me in that direction --Atbashian (talk) 18:36, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

• Yeah, it is usually quick, but sometimes it can be slow. All the volunteers there are good-faith, but some are new, or some get confused, or whatever. My mildly-complex request to get a refund for CFK has gotten stuck in the wiki-gears, but not because of bad intent, just unlucky. It will get unstuck eventually and solved (either by the WP:BURO bureaucracy or failing that by WP:IAR), as long as I'm persistent. And I'm persistent. So here are your instructions:

1. open this page in a new browser-tab: User:Atbashian
2. click 'edit'
3. type something like "Hello fellow wikipedians, my name is Oleg (see Draft:Oleg Atbashian), I'm the author of Shakedown Socialism && co-founder of www.ThePeoplesCube.com" which is disclosing your WP:COI clearly but *without* going overboard into WP:PROMO -- don't post your full resume, or write up a glowing review of how awesome your website is, or where to buy your book or whatever, but do mention clearly who you are and where your COI exists
4. click 'save changes'

• After that clear on-wiki disclosure, I can fix the other steps 47.222.203.135 (talk) 12:25, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

• Done! Feel free to fix it if needed. To clarify, I'm the "founder" of the People's Cube, while I was a "co-founder" of CFK.
• I understand that a glowing resume and similar self-promotion would be a bit silly, but should I post at least some brief bio? --Atbashian (talk) 20:01, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

• Okay thanks, correction noted, founder of TPC and co-founder of CFK. I've added the Template:connected_contributor for you at Draft_talk:Oleg Atbashian, and asked Snit333 to help us out by adding the COI-userbox to User:Atbashian, after which you will be wiki-paperwork-compliant. As for posting a brief bio-blurb, it is sometimes tolerated but rarely encouraged. And in your case, linking to Oleg Atbashian once it is a bluelink, and to Draft:Oleg Atbashian in the meantime, is probably sufficient  :-)
• There is a wee bit of latitude, especially for wikipedians that are not bluelinked themselves, but only a little. Wikipedian-userpages are supposed to be for "improving the encyclopedia" in the specific sense that a userpage is a way to advertise how you wanna contribute to wikipedia so that other wikipedians can find you. It should not be used for any other kind of 'advertising'/'spam'/etc, no matter how glowing the resume, no matter how noble the cause.
• So for instance, you are an experienced translator with some knowledge of Russian poetry, and thus you might want to volunteer your wikipedian-services to your fellow wikipedians, with the WP:USERBOX for "I speak Russian" which is the very first thing listed at Wikipedia:Userboxes#Gallery. There is also a wikiproject for people interested in helping with volunteer translation work -- there are a lot of articles such as the ru:snob.ru content which exist on ruWiki but are missing on enWiki. Sometimes that is because ruWiki has *different wiki-policies* and in particular the WP:GNG standards are lower on ruWiki, so it might be the case that snob.ru should not be translated until more WP:SOURCES are found. But in general, if you put a userbox on your userpage which says "I speak Russian" then sooner or later somebody will ask you on your user-talkpage, "Hey Oleg can you help me with this Russian-language source/wikipedian/paywall/imagefile/translation/streetsign/etc." You are a WP:VOLUNTEER here too, so you can just say "no sorry too busy" or similarly polite things, and they will find another Russian-savvy wikipedian. Or you can help sometimes, and decline sometimes. Or you can just not post the userbox at all, which is what I personally do -- partly because I don't happen to speak Russian, but mostly because I don't think userpages and userboxes are truly helpful. They tend to make wikipedia more like facebook, and I'm a firm believer in WP:NOTFACEBOOK.
• Similarly, you can -- and a minority of wikipedians actually do -- put some userboxes like "this wikipedian is interested in the Republican Party (United States)" or even negative ones like "this wikipedian opposes totalitarian communism" if you really REALLY feel that somehow 'improves the encyclopedia' in some vague way. (I don't recommend that kind of stuff, I think it hurts neutrality and promotes WP:BATTLEGROUND.) There are also lots of fairly silly userbox options, such as "this user enjoys playing basketball" or slightly more encyclopedically-relevant ones like "this wikipedian is interested in the history of classical music" as well as the REALLY silly ones like Template:User_KBN. Which is fun, and wikipedia is not supposed to be the gulag.
• But if you want to be a *respected* wikipedian, my advice is, always make at least 99 well-sourced impeccably-neutral edits that are in mainspace articles where you have zero WP:COI per every single vanity-edit that you make to your userpage. Spending 1% of your edits on wikipedia cultivating a userpage is non-horrible, so long as you are doing that *after* improving the encyclopedia-as-an-encyclopedia, methinks. So far, you've made one 'vanity-edit' (albeit one required by WP:PSCOI) to your userpage, and you've made two live edits to mainspace articles under this wikipedia-username (chart here[5])... both of them to Orly Taitz where you have a Template:connected_contributor relationship, so those don't really 'count' towards my 99-to-1 recommended ratio.
• Now, all this is optional. If you are not really interested in becoming a "respected wikipedian" per se, and really just care about seeing bluelinks at Oleg Atbashian or Communists for Kerry or The People's Cube eventually, that *is* perfectly okay. Anybody can edit, even people that are only interested in wikipedia because of WP:COI-type interests. But if so, best not to edit your userpage any further, let alone turn it into a glowing resume, because WP:SELFPROMOTION would apply. Userpages are supposed to be helpful-navigation-aids for other wikipedians to figure out where to offer you wikipedia-related-tasks, and not advertising for off-wiki projects, businesses, causes, and so on. Make sense? If people want to find out about your personal backstory, they can visit your facebook/twitter/blog/business/homepage/whatever, whereas if they want to find out about User:Atbashian-the-wikipedian, *that* is what goes on your wikipedia userpage, not the other stuff. 47.222.203.135 (talk) 14:32, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

• And depending on how much interest you have in getting Draft:Oleg Atbashian turned into Oleg Atbashian, please continue to help me with converting bare-URLs into nice Template:cite_web format, with |quote= portions excerpted so it is clear *what* the source said about you/CFK/TPC exactly. (In particular I need your help with the Russian-language snob.ru |quote= parameter since I'm not really qualified to fill it myself!  :-) Such things will aid me in quickly composing neutral summarizing sentences. I'd also like to get YOU in practice, at trying to compose such impeccably-neutral sentences, since if I'm not around (my IP address will eventually change) it will be helpful for you to make a proposed-change-suggestion at WP:TEAHOUSE which #1) has a properly-WP:RS source, #2) has a nicely-formatted Template:cite already made, and ideally #3) has impeccably-neutral suggested-body-prose already written. Thataway, the teahouse-wikipedian just has to glance it over, and then say "looks good I have added it to Oleg Atbashian#2018 for you" or in some cases if they are super-busy "looks good please add it yourself". That is the best pathway to staying out of perceived-COI-problems. I'm also planning to train Snit333 and Powderday in these same skills, of course, so it will be a group project of sorts. Make sense? If not, fire away with questions 47.222.203.135 (talk) 12:25, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

optional and for fun

Something tells me you might have an enjoyable time, if this WP:VOLUNTEER and 100% at your discretion wiki-task perchance interests you. Robert_Sheckley#Bibliography has a bunch of redlinks, e.g. for On The Planet of Bottled Brains (1990). Writing up Draft:On The Planet of Bottled Brains is usually a cinch. You have a Plot section, which is sourced to the *novel itself* as a published WP:RS per WP:ABOUTSELF, and then you have a Reception section where you list neutrally-summarized sentences that cover what the book reviewers said. As long as you can come up with three or four solid WP:RS book-reviews, articles are a piece of cake to write. And as a bonus, you get to read the novel, in order to write the plot-section properly.  :-) 47.222.203.135 (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

• How did you know Sheckley is one of my favorite sci-fi writers? Mostly his earlier stuff that I read in Russian translation as a kid. After I came to the US I exchanged a few emails with him (got his address through his agent). There was a funny story I had to tell him with him in it, and he liked it. He died a year later. I would have loved to volunteer on his behalf, but I here is so much on my plate right now, I don't even have time to contribute to my own page (I have more links to post), and help you convert the existing links - and not for the lack of trying. Hell, I haven't even had time to remove the Christmas tree and the decorations from the house yet, and the neighbors must think I'm a lazy bum. But I'm slaving away morning till night, trying to catch up with all the work. I'm not the kind of writer who sits for hours outside his house in the Hamptons and stares at the ocean waves over his whiskey sour. If I were to support leftist causes, I might have succeeded better. As it were, I don't have much and must work hard to pay the bills, plus write my stuff and run the People's Cube. And this Wikipedia deletion debacle has already thrown a big monkey wrench into my plans, taking way more time than I could afford. But I'm still willing to work on it, I think it's worth it. I'll also be happy to work on Sheckley's legacy when I have more time, but not right now, sorry... Atbashian (talk) 04:11, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

• I read the funny story in archive.org, digging for BLP cites, of course. No apologies for not having time, which is why it is called 'optional and for fun' rather than 'would be a shame if anything happened to your nice article' ... but I had fun smacking together Bottled Brains. And once you are independently wealthy and sitting on your private island or whatever, you will have more time  ;-)
• But yes, all it definitely WP:VOLUNTEER hereabouts. Which includes the article on yourself, we are to the point now where I'll be able to finish it myself, possibly with a pagemove assist from Snit333. So don't feel that you HAVE to stay with your wikipedia-nose to the wikipedia-grindstone, I think we are over the WP:GOLDENRULE hill and ready to roll. There are two important questions left, that do need your decisions at some point (can be anytime). Do you want your D.O.B. and the names of your immediate family in mainspace? This is optional stuff per WP:BLPPRIVACY which will *probably* get added by somebody sooner or later (since after all AnybodyCanEdit) but we can leave such details out at the moment, and leave an html comment instructing good-faith folks to please refrain. Think that over and then let me know, and I'll either clear out the talkpage of any revealing tidbits, or put in the revealing tidbit, when you have decided which you prefer.
• Next is the questions of copyrighted imagefiles. It is traditional in WP:BLP situations, when there is access to the person who is the subject matter of the article, to see if they would like to upload a self-portrait under CC-BY-SA v3 and/or dual-licensed GFDL and/or tri-licensed CC-BY-SA v4. These are 'open content' licenses which means that other people on the internet can take the photo, put your likeness in photoshop, and make fun of you on the internet *without* violating copyright. Similarly, because quite a lot of the refs discuss your 'obamicon' work, I believe that we will be able to upload one of the examples of your fair-use-of-a-fair-use-of-a-disputed-status-original. There are several ways to go about this, and it is a pain in the rear to upload *any* imagefiles, but it is nearly impossible to upload any non-libre-licensed imagefiles *until* the relevant Oleg Atbashian article is in mainspace. So this one does not need an answer now, and indeed, it will be quite some time (not years but probably not 'days' either... week(s) or in the worst case a month-plus) before there is any need to discuss WP:NFCC imagefiles. But please do start cogitating about imagefiles, and decide what you think is maximally WP:IAR. Best, 47.222.203.135 (talk) 00:29, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

humongo-URLs

When using firefox, the trick to a multi-lingual URL seems to be, that you have to copy one language-script at a time. So here is a URL for the newspaper:

• http://evrejskaja-panorama.de/%D1%87%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F-%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B0%D0%BA%D1%86%D0%B8%D1%8F-%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%88%D0%B0%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BE-%D0%B3%D0%B5%D1%82%D1%82/

Which is what happens when I try to copy the whole URL in one shot. However, if I just select the ASCII-charset portion, aka the first 'English' part of the URL, then copy just that first portion, I can paste this:

• http://evrejskaja-panorama.de

Then I can select just the cyrillic portion, copy THAT portion of the address bar only, and then paste it to get this:

• чрезмерная-реакция-варшавского-гетт

Which is no longer percent encoded and therefore can be combined together to get the final result:

• http://evrejskaja-panorama.de/чрезмерная-реакция-варшавского-гетт

The two-step trick (or maybe the N-step-trick if you have *lots* of glyph-languages in the URL) might work with chrome, might not? Try it and see. Best, 47.222.203.135 (talk) 00:29, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

• Wow! Thank you for the very neat multilingual URL trick! How come I didn't think of that? I'm sure it'll work in other circumstances as well. :) I'll post answers to all your today's questions later tonight. --Atbashian (talk) 00:55, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

• You are welcome, but it is fundamentally an intractable browser-software-bug, which the necessities of backwards compatibility may never erase. My apologies, though, since I should have explained that there was a trick, when I grumpily asked you to post the non-humongo-versions (since using said trick is necessary), but I've been using the trick so long I'd forgotten that I was using a trick at all :-)
• Very zen of me. I doubt you care about the gory details, but on the off chance, since you are a web designer with multilingual experience, and since this is a user-talkpage where latitude is permissible, I will give you a short braindump. Feel free to skim, skip, ignore completely, or just delete this nonsense  ;-)
• In addition to machine-translation-related screwups with which you are already very familiar (and which will NOT be solved anytime soon methinks), you've probably experienced computerized-font-and-glyph-and-encoding-screwups over the years, where Cyrillic or diacritic-bearing characters go from looking fine on computer X to looking like incomprehensible garbage on computer Y... especially tricksy on websites, obviously, where there are millions or billions of potential 'computer Y' devices that can visit the webpage being served by the web designer's computer X.
• Although by 2005 or so things were "mostly" okay from the perspective of the body-prose of webpages, the DNS stuff and the URL stuff visible in the address bar have always been separate-but-equal in terms of requiring ASCII. Thanks to IDNA it is nowadays possible for JewishPanorama or JewishReview or whatever the proper translation is, to hypothetically register and have a user-visible website name like http://ЕврейскаяПанорама.de and therefore to stop using the transliteration http://evrejskaja-panorama.de for their domain name, even though the HTTP and the .de portions would still be ASCII. Even that latter thing is avoidable: with a bit of jumping through hoops, it is conceivably possible to nowadays register something like http://ЕврейскаяПанорама.онлайн and have it Just Work™
• That said, under the hood there are billions of toiling proletariat electrons, making it all seem easy to the humans that click on the (hypothetical) website http://ЕврейскаяПанорама.онлайн -- and more importantly to our discussion, the humans that are *viewing* the hypothetical website in their IDNA-and-IDN_ccTLD-compatible browser. What happens when those humans are reading the newly-migrated article-content about TPC, at the following hypothetical new URL, http://ЕврейскаяПанорама.онлайн/чрезмерная-реакция-варшавского-гетт ...and they try to copy-n-paste the URL into Some Other Application? Well, the browser has to guess if the UnknownOtherApplication will understand the URL, and usually it guesses wrong. So if you tap or click or hotkey the virtual 'copy' button inside Chrome, the browser *might* give you the raw unicode cyrillic string:

• http://ЕврейскаяПанорама.онлайн/чрезмерная-реакция-варшавского-гетт

• copied to your device's clipboard area, and then your operating system *might* paste that same raw visibly-cyrillic stuff into whatever app you are using to pass along the hyperlink (email app ... twitter app ... fbook app ... HTML editor app ... et cetera ... etc). Or instead of the browser & clipboard guessing that you INTENDED to literally copy the visibly-cyrillic stuff, sometimes the browser will helpfully give you the backwards compatible all-ASCII version of the same exact website, which is visibly-humongo-URL stuff. So instead of the "http://ЕврейскаяПанорама.онлайн/чрезмерная-реакция-варшавского-гетт" string you thought you copied-n-pasted, you instead may well see[6] this type of garbage:

• http://xn--80aaaagrb6ajxjmkjij4v.xn--80asehdb/%D1%87%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F-%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B0%D0%BA%D1%86%D0%B8%D1%8F-%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%88%D0%B0%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BE-%D0%B3%D0%B5%D1%82%D1%82

• Which is a combination of ASCII letters + numerals + punctuation that any 7-bit-capable computer system will be able to transmit, in a combination of punycode and URL encoding form, and thus backwards-compatible in theory all the way to the 1970s hardware and software (prior to the invention of the World Wide Web :-)    but not prior to the invention of email. (There is such a thing as the 6-bit communications-system, though not all of them possessed the percent-sign-glyph, and even the 5-bit type of communications-system, which usually did not have such a thing but sometimes did: the world of pre-ASCII pre-EBCDIC charsets.)
• Which one you *actually* want, the ASCII-URL or the I18N-URL, depends on your target audience. For a non-cyrillic-capable-human like myself, it is actually possible to type in the latter humongo-URL by hand, if truly necessary. You could even call out the ASCII to me over the telephone, or send it to me via morse code (perhaps spelling out P.E.R.C.E.N.T. or just eliding it by convention), or hand-write it onto a piece of paper and tie the message to a pigeon's leg or something, all 241 ascii chars of the humongo-URL. And I could, correctly if I was lucky, touch-type the 241 ascii chars into a browser on my end of whatever obsolete hyperlink-communication-mechanism we were utilizing. We could even have you send me a CRC or some other kind of error-checking thing, to help me make sure I didn't have a typo on my end during data-entry.
• By contrast, if you were to try and tell me the Cyrillic characters over the telephone, and have me hand-type the material on this end, you would quickly run into laughably-painful pragmatic difficulties: I don't speak any form of verbalized Cyrillic, and my keyboard (short of alt codes) doesn't really accept Cyrillic, and I don't know how to actually type Cyrillic in any case, even if I verbally spoke the lingo, which I don't, or had a keyboard which was made for that, which it isn't. There's no way to even transmit Cyrillic via original old-school morse code, without using a Russian-language-capable-variant. The homing-pigeon technique *would* still work, interestingly enough without needing any special alterations, especially if you provided me with a check-digit or a cryptographic hash to help me correct typos and mis-identification of chars on my end. But with a hardcopy untied from the leg of a bird, I would have to look at each hand-printed cyrillic letter, open up the charmap-equivalent app, hunt through the cyrillic alphabet for something that looked right, use the mouse to 'type' that guesstimated character-glyph, and then rely heavily upon either the check-digit, or upon trial-and-error, to finally get my browser to connect to the intended webpage on the intended website. Pretty error-prone, and very slow and painful compared to the backwards-compatible humongo-URL.
• Thus sometimes, even though the 67-char Cyrillic URL is visibly shorter than the 241-char humongo-ASCII, the latter is better. And in particular, there is still software lurking around in dusty corners of the world, which will completely garble unicode text transmissions. The new-fangled Cyrillic-based ccTLD is most likely to cause such problems, but the stuff outside the domain-name-portion can also cause difficulty. The main trouble with humongo-URLs is that they cannot be tweeted... 140 'chars' is the limit.[7] Whereas from my reading of the devdocs, the visibly-Cyrillic URL can be tweeted just fine, and the recipient will be able to click the visibly-Cyrillic URL just as easily as they would be able to click the humongo-URL... and considerably easier than they would be able to hand-combine the humongo-URL which was split in twain to form a pair of 121-char-and-120-char halves, so as to fit inside the 140-char limitation imposed by twits  :-)
• For wikipedia purposes, the non-humongo URL is highly preferable, because #1) almost everybody that 'receives' the URL will be reading it *in* a web browser and thus will be able to click or tap the Cyrillic version just as they would any WP:EL whether they can personally read it or cannot read it, plus #2) although in theory the humongo-URL is 'transcribe-able' in some technical sense in practice it is visibly-just-garbage to human eyeballs, and aesthetically distracting from the perspective of those editing the wiki-markup, and finally #3) there will be *some* wikipedians such as User:Atbashian that actually can edit the page and can see what the Cyrillic material looks like and understand the visibly-Cyrillic URL... plus there are many more Russian-speaking people amongst the readership, who will see the Cyrillic tooltip pop up when they hover over the EL in the Notes section, at least hypothetically. So if possible, use the copy-twice-paste-twice trick to retain the proper visibly-Cyrillic stuff. That fits better in tweets, and it also has no real disadvantages in the webpage-reading context, and a few advantages in the wiki-markup-editing context.
• That said, if you are trying to do something with an internationalized URL like that, via telephone or carrier pigeon or 7-bit-constrained software apps, definitely get ahold of a punycode converter and then use the NATO phonetic alphabet plus the addition of 'PEHR-SENT-SIGHN' and also 'DAH-COLE-UHN' to transmit that sucker old-school.
• And whilst we are chit-chatting, my congrats on your citizenship achievement. Wikipedia is not for legal advice, and although I do edit courtcase articles from time to time, am just an amateur hobbyist, but as one member of the wikipedia readership to another, I may say that Florida and New York have some laws you may be interested in reading up on,[8] if you are still working through the post-election flak related to GMU, or just as generally-fascinating topic-matter. As I say, this is not the place to talk about such things in detail, even on user-talkpages there are limitations. And as I also say, wikipedia articles and wikipedia talkpages are NOT the way to run one's affairs. So I won't bring this up again, but figured it could not hurt to mention briefly.
• Okay, as for wikipedia-business, I've found several more WP:RS cites with some depth (will add them as I get them organized), and we are basically ready for mainspace now. We'll follow the WP:AFC pathway, which is preferred but not required, and see how that goes. It might go very quickly: first AfC reviewer glances at the vast list of sources, and the decently-encyclopedic prose, and mainspaces the same day I submit the article. After which you may immediately find yourself back in WP:AFD again, the main difference being, this time we are talking about a broader subject (the combined poetry + artwork + writing bibliography of Oleg Atbashian as a biographical topic-matter PLUS the refs for CFK-related activities and events PLUS the refs for TPC-related activities and events). And of course, this time the WP:SOURCES are carefully organized and carefully vetted and pretty clearly satisfy WP:GOLDENRULE even for the hardest deletionists, and with those WP:RS inherently comes WP:N. But wikipedia is not a perfect utopia of humans, and there are a lot of touchy people nowadays w.r.t. COI and DNC and BLPPRIVACY and FNW types of considerations... some of which are at least vaguely-wikipedia-policy-backed-arguments and some of which are just human nature.
• Therefore! we shall stride forwards into the future of glorious progress towards a bluelink, and the worst that can happen is we might get kicked back into draftspace for another six months, whilst we await the publication of additional in-depth independent 'Reliable' cites for the topic-matter in question. But I honestly have very little doubt, we are now 85/15 likely to sail through AFD, maybe 95/5 if the topic-matter were not so controversial, and most experienced wikipedians will not even bother to AFD something which is this well-supported by breadth and depth of sourcing. There is such a thing as an IAR deletion, though, and since there were two previous fairly-contentious AFD discussions with strong nose-counts plus some (good-faith but incorrect) questions of WP:COPYVIO, it is actually pretty likely that somebody will send the newly-bluelinked BLP page to AFD.
• The important thing in such a situation, should it ever arise, is always #1) keep your cool at all times and stick to talking about sources and content no matter what anybody else does or says, #2) be very careful that you don't "spam" the AFD or the article-talkpage with WP:CANVASSing of your off-wiki circles, or for that matter your on-wiki circles, just let the discussions play out 'naturally' amongst the regular wikipedians -- which of course now includes yourself and Snit333 and Powderday as well as any other folks that have interest-in-being-wikipedians as distinct from interest-in-non-wikipedia-policy-backed-argumentation, and #3) remember that quite literally as well as figuratively speaking WP:TIND, anything 'deleted' can always be refunded without prejudice on enWiki, though sometimes it takes a little persistence as my experience with retrieving the CFK contrib-history to draftspace clearly proved. But in the end persistence works: I was immediately able to dig up half a dozen RS related to hellgate && sager, once I had the WP:REFUND'd content.
• And speaking of WP:TIND, although I will happily hand you more shovel-ready wikipedia-questions, and delegate some cite-template-crafting and URL-translating and neutral-sentence-construction tasks your way, as long as you are HAPPY to keep digging faster of course, you very much don't need to spend endless hours on enWiki. You are a volunteer here as well. And in particular, don't let enWiki stuff interfere with your sleep, your work, your family, et cetera. Priorities please!  :-)
• Although WP:TIAD as far as deletion-'discussions' are concerned, and although WP:TIAD as far as backing specific sentences with specific sources is concerned when or or similar tags are uglifying mainspace, and (once bluelinked) there is definitely a "deadline" for starting and finishing WP:RSN discussions about snob.ru / J.M.Waller / JewishPanorama / etc sources where it is questionable whether they 'count' as WP:RS for our specific context-dependent use-case... don't sweat that small stuff. Either we will get it done, or we won't. If there is a 'failure' at some point, no big deal, wikipedia always allows trying again later, hours or days or even years in some cases, with better sources and better body-prose.
• So please, #1) don't let the crazy 'Notable' and the really crazy 'Reliable' inside baseball jargon get to you, although the names were made up a decade ago in an attempt to be WP:NICE to beginners by re-using common words, as you are now very aware, the words as of 2017 are almost-meaninglessly distorted from realworld notable and realworld reliable. Also, #2) don't let the crazy WP:VOLUNTEERing workload get you down either. Just give what time you have, and if you don't have time, don't feel guilty. Nobody expects you to learn all the crazy wikipedia-WP:PAG stuff yourself, and scour the internet for 'Reliable' 'Independent' 'Published' sources yourself, and craft impeccably-neutral body-prose with perfectly-formatted-ref-templates yourself... well, except for a few deletionists, that is  :-)
• Speaking of which, I need to get back to applying the PAG which I've already memorized by rote, upload my latest gold nugget WP:SOURCES found whilst scouring the interwebz, and craft some impeccably-neutral sentences! Help me along when you have time. I will leave questions when I think of them (otherwise I'll forget to ask entirely), but I don't care if you answer me three hours later, or three years later. Make sense? Best, 47.222.203.135 (talk) 03:51, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

• Thank you for your detailed comments. I'll keep your advice in mind. SPeaking of Cyrillic URLs, they are very uncommon. Most Russian websites simply transliterate Russian words in their URLs with Roman characters, which is a lot easier and still is readable. That's how many Russian speakers type when they don't have a Cyrillic keyboard - by using Roman characters and doing a phonetic approximation - and everybody understands them. I do it on my smartphone too, when I'm writing to Russian speakers. As for the GMU stuff, it's being postponed now, but I'm not too concerned because the entire matter is so obviously blown out of proportion. Cheers! Atbashian (talk) 04:59, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

• There are some wikipedians that have Cyrillic usernames, and at the same time have WP:VALIDALT transliterated Cyrillic usernames, so they can e.g. login from a library kiosk with an english-only-keyboard, or login from a smartphone-virtual-keyb, or whatever. The Template:cite infrastructure is not smart enough to support multiple URLs for the same end-location, we only have |url= and nothing more at the moment. So given the technological restriction that only one URL can be used, generally my position is to prefer the URL-with-cyrillic-chars over the humongo-URL-with-percent-encoding. But ideally, it would be cool if enWiki provided some kind of mechanism for supporting both a transliterated URL, as well as a non-transliterated URL... not sure if there are many websites in the wild which have two domain names registered, that point to the same end-result-content. If I did run across such as case, I would say something like inside the wikitext. But generally I don't give the humongo-URL, even in a comment, because it is just too unwieldy. By contrast, for articles with Cyrillic titles there is some support for transliteration, see helpdocs at Template:Cite_magazine#Title, or an example would look like this...

• "Oleg Atbash'yan — N'yu-York, SSHA — Proyekt: satiricheskiy sayt ThePeoplesCube.com" Олег Атбашьян — Нью-Йорк, США — Проект: сатирический сайт ThePeoplesCube.com [Oleg Atbashian — New York, USA — satirical website ThePeoplesCube.com] (in Russian). {{cite magazine}}: Cite magazine requires |magazine= (help); Invalid |script-title=: missing prefix (help)CS1 maint: unrecognized language (link)

• Though personally I just use trans-title and skip the confusing script-title versus plain old title difficulties entirely:

• "Олег Атбашьян — Нью-Йорк, США — Проект: сатирический сайт ThePeoplesCube.com" [Oleg Atbashian — New York, USA — satirical website ThePeoplesCube.com] (in Russian). {{cite magazine}}: Cite magazine requires |magazine= (help)CS1 maint: unrecognized language (link)

• And if I'm really pressed for time, or just don't know the language AND don't trust the machine-manglation, sometimes I'll just do this:

• "Олег Атбашьян — Нью-Йорк, США — Проект: сатирический сайт ThePeoplesCube.com" (in Russian). {{cite magazine}}: Cite magazine requires |magazine= (help)CS1 maint: unrecognized language (link)

• Plus if there is no deadline I will generally be maximally lazy and just do this, assuming somebody with WP:ReFill installed will show up later to correct my lazy referencing:

• Atbashian is the founder of TPC.

References

• So if you want to provide transliterations of titles, you definitely can. However, only titles! The template doesn't support transliteration of author-names, tranliterations of |quote= contents, or the part relative to our discussion of URLs which contain international glyphs, transliterations of URLs. There is a triple |title= |script-title= and |trans-title, but there is not a similar triplet for other params (yet at least). One can always work around the limitations of the Template:cite family, such as by abusing |translator1= until the required |trans-quote= parameter is programmed by the wiki-devs, or by using html comments, or by manually inserting (parenthesized) commentary, or whatever. And now, go forth and WP:BEBOLD, you are an expert ;-) 47.222.203.135 (talk) 16:25, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

conserve + liberty = bluelink?

• Factions_in_the_Republican_Party_(United_States)#Libertarian_wing and Factions_in_the_Republican_Party_(United_States)#Conservative_wing
• Fusionism (which is where Conservatarian redirects — perhaps incorrectly?) ... philosophy is most closely associated with Frank Meyer. ...most famous advocate was Ronald Reagan... [who grouped Meyer with] Russell Kirk, Friedrich Hayek, Henry Hazlitt, Milton Friedman, James Burnham, [and] Ludwig von Mises...
• Libertarian conservatism... Friedrich Hayek, Ludwig von Mises, Milton Friedman, Richard Posner, Richard Epstein, and Albert Jay Nock have been described as libertarian conservatives.
• Tea Party movement ... has been characterized in various extremely distinct ways over the years, was at first primarily pro-fiscal-conservative and anti-bailout (Ron Paul and Rand Paul), later became more pro-Christianity (Carson and Cruz), currently is at least partly pro-populism (Palin and Trump), has always been pro-Constitution and pro-Founders
• Libertarian Republican ... liberty-leaning Republicans plus right-leaning Libertarians, see Freedom Caucus as distinct from Tea Party Caucus, also see the more mainstream Cato Institute perhaps
• Republican Liberty Caucus ... left-leaning Republicans, see also Gary Johnson and most of Reason.com
• Objectivism (Ayn Rand) ... rejects social conservatives, as well as 1960s/1970s libertarian party platform (see Objectivism and libertarianism for recent developments), primary focus is on anti-statism generally and anti-communism specifically, radicals for capitalism
• Paleolibertarianism... In the 1990s Lew Rockwell and Murray Rothbard described their views as paleolibertarianism. ...[later] dropped that self-description because people confused it with paleoconservatism (Virgil Goode, Walter B. Jones, Jimmy Duncan, Tom Tancredo, Pat Buchanan, Robert Novak, Russell Kirk, etc) which Rothbard&Rockwell rejected.
• Classical_liberalism (free market capitalism plus civil & political liberties), especially e.g. Bastiat
• Thatcherism, which is possibly more relevant to your stances than USA-based political factions, see also Burkean branch of the Old Whigs
• Also perhaps relevant: Anti-communism (esp. during the Cold War), Old_Right_(United_States) (anti-progressives 1900-1950), Anti-Federalism (Madison/Jefferson/SamAdams/PatrickHenry).

There is a conservatarian bluelink, but I'm not sure it fits you. Might be a mistake in wikipedia, or might be that WP:SOURCES usage of the term has not caught up with colloquial usage of the term. Can you look through some of the bluelinks above, and help me figure out a correct WP:ABOUTSELF sentence? 47.222.203.135 (talk) 14:41, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

• Let's go with Classical_liberalism. Thank you for all the research. I did my own research, too, but then decided to not include any links because they didn't appeal to me. Ayn Rand feels the closest, but I can't define myself as an "Objectivist" because that entails something else. My mind went blank and I completely forgot to mention Classical_liberalism, while that is indeed the best way to describe my worldview.--Atbashian (talk) 22:24, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

• Here is a source with this ABOUTSELF quote: "Atbashian describes his ideology as 'classical liberalism.'" --Atbashian (talk) 05:15, 24 February 2017 (UTC)