User talk:Yaroslav Zolotaryov

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki


Постарайтесь при присылке сюда своих сторонников из ЖЖ объяснить им, что стирать чужие голоса, как в этой правке, абсолютно недопустимо. Edward Chernenko 06:47, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ни черта мы там не стирали, щас посмотрю. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:50, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Айпишник филлипинский, и он вандалил по всей мете. Не несите чуши. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:52, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zazaki Wikipedia[edit]

Hi Yaroslav, we strongly need your vote for the Zazaki Wikipedia. Although it is approved, one admin is so against our project and causing a lot of headaches. You know how hard we worked.

Voting Page:

Thanks, --Maviulke12 03:32, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

А це де?[edit]

Я щось не можу знайти, "хто хоче працювати на віці". --Dmitry Nikitin 15:21, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

А, все, знайшов --Dmitry Nikitin 15:22, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

До речі[edit]

Правильно Surzhyk - --Dmitry Nikitin 15:39, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Отож ты можеш выправиты реквест якшо шось знаеш краше. До речи я вважаю шо на суржыци краше пысаты якбы российскою, але видрожаючи пивденну вымову. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 15:40, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Как думаешь, поставить ссілку на суржик английскую википедию? Ничего что там написано, что суржик - "смешанній язік"? --Dmitry Nikitin 15:50, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Вважаю шо це похеру, чы ты думаеш, хтось буде це чытаты, гы) Зараз уси хто не люблят диалектив проголосують "против", а хто люблять "за") --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 15:52, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good trade. Now keep your promise. --Fratele lui Bonaparte, il cunosti? 14:01, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Russian nationalism[edit]

For you to condemn the Moldavian Wikipedia as a project of Russian nationalists, I find it insulting an unacceptable. I am not Russian, I have voted to support your Chaldon-Siberian Wikipedia.Node ue

You said once that you're russian. Now you renegate yourself?--Fratele lui Bonaparte, il cunosti? 07:59, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, I never said I'm Russian. I can't speak Russian worth shit, I have never been to Russia, my ancsetors are not Russians, I am not Russian. --Node ue 22:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, you said that you are! Now you say you're not? But who are you anyway? --Fratele lui Bonaparte, il cunosti? 14:00, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, I didn't. --Node ue 23:18, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moldavian is not any of Romanians' business, neither Russians. It belongs to Moldavians, and Moldavians only. Imagine if Mongolians started voting against Chaldon-Siberian too? It makes no sense that Romanians and Russians wage a battle against each other.Node ue

Moldovan is identical with Romanian. Have you forget this?--Fratele lui Bonaparte, il cunosti? 07:59, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, it isn't. Moldavian is written with Cyrillic letters, Romanian is written with French letters. --Node ue 22:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, you lie again. How can lie like that? Shame on you! Look here at official site of Government of Moldova: how can you say once again your stupid lies? Is Moldovan writen with Cyrillic letters? Don't lie anymore, your credibility is 0! --Fratele lui Bonaparte, il cunosti? 14:00, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That page is written in Romanian. Moldovan is written in Cyrillic. --Node ue 23:18, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What matters, is that real Moldavians do use the Cyrillic Alphabet to write our language. All over Moldova, but primarily in Pridnestrovie. Romanians say that "Pridnestrovian Moldovans are forced to write in Cyrillic by Russians", but it isn't true, well over 95% of the Pridnestrovian Moldavians support Pridnestrovian independence, and support use of Cyrillic script. Each Pridnestrovian is free to use any alphabet they want.Node ue

Who are real Moldovans? You, russian nationalists who wants to impose a sovietic language? I see in Transnistria only a sovietic puppet region who is mastered from Kremlin. USA and Europe will not allow Russia to interfere there anymore. --Fratele lui Bonaparte, il cunosti? 07:59, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you are blind then. --Node ue 23:18, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moldavian language has been using Cyrillic alphabet since the beginning. In Romania, Moldavian language was changed to Latin alphabet by French nationalists during 19th century. In Bessarabia (modern Republic of Moldova), it was only changed to Latin after 1st world war, but it was changed back again after World War 2. In 1989 Republic of Moldova changed to Latin again. But Pridnestrovie (formerly Moldavian ASSR prior to World War 2) has always used Cyrillic, there was never a time in history when Pridnestrovie used Latin alphabet ever.Node ue

There isn't any Moldovan language. It's about Romanian language again. --Fratele lui Bonaparte, il cunosti? 07:59, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No. --Node ue 22:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Moldovan is identical with Romanian, and you know it. Look at official site lui Bonaparte, il cunosti? 14:00, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That page is in Romanian. Moldovan page can be seen at this site. --Node ue 23:18, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So we are just trying to have our own Wikipedia in our rightful historical alphabet in peace, but we are constantly terrorised by this man who calls himself "Bonaparte", vandalizing our Wikipedia, and by some Romanians who keep proposing it for deletion. Just because Russian nationalists vote to "support" our cause, does not mean we are evil. Judge us by our cause, not by the others who supported us. --Node ue 00:01, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You were alone only with your russian nationalists who want to block even the Siberian wikipedia.--Fratele lui Bonaparte, il cunosti? 07:59, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, I wasn't -- I have supporters from around the world, including Zazas, Filipinos, Romanians, Dutchmen, Serbians, Ukrainians, Moldavians, Poles, Israelis, Americans, Germans... Russians are only about 3/4 of voters. --Node ue 22:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You lie again. I haven't seen a Moldavian to support you..or a Romanian one..--Fratele lui Bonaparte, il cunosti? 14:03, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Illthyr is Moldovan, Gangleri is Romanian. --Node ue 23:18, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All this would have any meaning if moldavanians fight for this. But now what I see - no moldavian fight for cyrillics there, but more 50% votes are russian imperialists known for persecuting siberian language in ru-wiki and there in meta. Maybe sibwiki would be never open because they do so. But I should do the more harm to the enemy as possible. So my war is surely not against you, but you have very bad allies. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:08, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not true, there is one Moldovan voter who favors keeping this open; also some Transnistrian on Moldovan Wikipedia support it. --Node ue 22:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed there isn't any moldovan who wants to have a copy carbon of this wikipedia after the Romanian one.--Fratele lui Bonaparte, il cunosti? 07:59, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a carbon copy. Moldovan is written in Cyrillic. --Node ue 23:18, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And you have not vote for the Siberian, as you have said, only for our surzhik and belorussian allies :-)--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 02:23, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct, sorry, I voted for it. --Node ue 22:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You caught him with lies Yaroslav! Node ue is a master of lies, russian propaganda, manipulation by means of lies. --Fratele lui Bonaparte, il cunosti? 07:59, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, be quiet. --Node ue 22:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply] please look at the answer from Landroni a Moldovan/Romanian from Moldova.--Fratele lui Bonaparte, il cunosti? 08:06, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Landroni is a lying frenchman. He is in Toulouse, not Chisinau. --Node ue 22:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, he study there, in France. He is more moldovan than everybody else. The fact that he is now in France doesn't modify the situation kid. --Fratele lui Bonaparte, il cunosti? 14:01, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, he is not Moldovan. He is French. --Node ue 23:18, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please update the vote for creation of Siberian wikipedia. Another romanian has just voted there. --Fratele lui Bonaparte, il cunosti? 13:11, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ok)--Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:13, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Invalid votes[edit]

Hi Yaroslav,

After the precedent set by Zazaki Wikipedia vote, you may "strike out" votes which are based on false reasoning. Any vote which says "this is a dialect" or something with about the same meaning, you may put <s> </s> around it, and subtract a number from the vote count. Good luck. --Node ue 22:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]


пожалуйста, проголосуйте за новую Вікі на беларусском языке: нас блокіруют те, кто захватіл домен в своё время. К сожаленію, пока что это ім удаётся... Дзякуй:)

Уже --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:17, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ottoman Wikipedia[edit]

Hello. I voted support for your Old Turkish Wikipeda, so can you please also support an Ottoman Wikipedia? It's right above your proposal. Thanks.--Fox Mccloud 21:31, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ok --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 21:32, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Sanırım biraz Türkçe biliyorsun. Eski Türkçe diğe bir viki oylaması başlatmışsın. Eski Türkçe'nin tam olarak anlamı nedir? Yani eğer Orhun Türkçesi ise bu Orhun alfabesi ile yazılır. Orhun Yeniset yazıtları gibi. O zaman bu alfabe neyin nesi? Bu konuda tam bilgim yok aydınlatırsan sevinirim. Eğer bu mesajı anlamadı isen İngilizce olarak yazarım. İyi günler. Kolay gelsin.--Absar 11:04, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your text, but it is better to me speak English. I think Siberian Turks should revive the Old turkic, because siberian turk languages are very small, almost nobody speaks them, but Orhon language was ancient language of all siberian turks. The alfabet in the wiki is just transliteration, because we can not use the old Runes in wikipedia. Now we begin to collect words but soon we shall write articles by them. We use some vocabularies and grammar of Russian researchers of the Old Turkic language. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:14, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will support this Wiki. But what is the meaning of the iskturk. --Absar 12:00, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know what name I should give to it - iske turkca, or yenisey, or orhon? I am not quite sure about that. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:17, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merhaba isturk'den başka bir kod buldun mu? Bence esturk (Eski Türkçe) olabilir e n azında isturk'den daha iyi zira onun hiçbir anlamını bulamadım.--Absar

Your Proposal[edit]

I liked the idea. I copied and pasted the proposal on both Test Wikis.--Fox Mccloud 21:00, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About Wikiversity[edit]

You can test your Wikiversity on Wikiversity Beta. It is an incubator for Wikiversity projects. guillom 15:41, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 15:46, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Thank you for your vote! I am a Moldavian and does not exist a Moldavian language. As a Moldavian belong to Romanian Nation and I speak Romanian. The union between Moldavia and Walachia was made by a Moldavian Prince: Alexandru Ioan Cuza. He made Romania as country. Dacodava

Да я тоже думаю, что это вам решать, а не русским, на каком алфавите писать. Yes, and this is your business, what alfabet you will use -- 10:15, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Yaroslav for your vote, can you support us more to close Moldovan wikipedia? We will help you also. --Fratele lui Bonaparte, il cunosti? 11:55, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But I do not know how to help you more with it. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 12:15, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's fine with me. -- 17:46, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


А может, хоть "свернёте" за нас нашу дискуссию? :) Yury Tarasievich 08:09, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Правка чужих сообщений недопустима. В проектах Викимедиа разрешается лишь убирать личные оскорбления (aka personal attacks), но никак не невежливые (incivil). Просьба прекратить такую практику. MaxSem 09:08, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Я надеюсь, такое же предупреждение сделано Черненко, который это начал? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:03, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Пожаловались на тебя. MaxSem 10:22, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ок, можно считать что я жалуюсь на Черненко. Просто я считал, что может это так и надо, но дело в том что мои выражения 100% такие же, как и у оппонентов. Если стирать, то всех, если оставлять, то тоже всех. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 10:23, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

То, что против вас нарушают правила, не даёт вам прав на ответные нарушения. Например, в ответ на что было это? Подобные выражения абсолютно недопустимы, и я категорически не советую продолжать в таком тоне. MaxSem 13:00, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Данная реплика, на мой взгляд, не является персональным оскорблением, так как относится к самому принципу вмешательства в дела других народов, характерному для российских империалистов. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:33, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Padonki test[edit]

Hello Yaroslav.

Apparently, denied tests can be proposed for deletion at incubator:Incubator:Test deletion. This page is still a proposal, but it's probably time to switch it to an official policy? I'd suggest you to ask Dbmag9, the creator of the page, as well as the community. Best regards, Korg + + 18:26, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Incubator administrators[edit]

There are three administrators of all Incubator pages:

  1. Angela (administrator, bureaucrat)
  2. Dbmag9 (administrator, bureaucrat)
  3. Timichal (administrator, bureaucrat)

Maybe sending a message about the situation (preferably to Angela), will be resolving the problem. --Taichi - (あ!) 05:09, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I will try. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 06:59, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Timichal and I talked about that and he has been aware but he has also offline parts of his life. Now he is offline but when he returns, he'll care for that. Perhaps you could request for deletion of pages concerning. I heard there was a request page for deletion on incubator. --Aphaia 07:12, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, we already made it; --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 07:18, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A Favour[edit]

Hi Yasroslav, can you type in Mandaic script font in test wiki incubator rather than latin script? Do you know how to type in Mandaic scipt? So that other Mandaic volunteer can work for this project using its own script after this Mandaic wiki opens. Many thanks. - Lokey3310 13:42, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I only have seen Mandaic script several times. Actually I know from Mandaic only several religious terms. I think that latin-based Mandaic would be better to study the language. Do you know where to get rather big grammar and vocabulary of it? There are many little information in the Internet now. I am not native Mandaic speaker, but only follower of eastern gnosticism, based on Mandaic and Manichean teachings. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 13:52, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

Thank you for your support for the future

Russian xenophobia[edit]

I don't understand Russian Xenophobia. My vote was for you. I love your fight against Russian Xenophobia. My parents were killed by the bloody Russians. --Mauco 12:58, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Please do not comment on top of the proposal. Use talk. Ask your romanian friends to authorise themselves at ro-wiki. That's all. Ru-wiki accounts must be subject to the same requirement. So, there are no double standards. --Irpen 19:55, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you comment in top, but I can not? Where are rules who may comment on top and who may not? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:57, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Look, let's just address the problem. Do you agree that socking is bad? My proposal applies equally to Russians, Romanians and New Guineans. Why do you make a circus out of a reasonable attempt that will resolve the socking problem? --Irpen 20:01, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you begin to resolve it when your idea of closing was in danger? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 20:03, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry if it may seem so. I just came up with it. Now, do you agree that sockpuppetry is bad? My idea will solve it and eliminate socks from both sides. Don't make it look like you hope that socking will help your goal. --Irpen 20:16, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
it is bad, but changing the rules during vote is more worse. This is just like changing price during the trade. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 20:19, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Look, 7 days is enough to let everyone know. This is doable. Anyone committed to his opinion has enough time to authorise his vote. Leaving it as is open to socks is clearly worse. --Irpen 20:24, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is new rule which you invent during the vote, this is much worse. If tomorrow romanians will come and vote, will you permanently protect the voting page? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 20:25, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No one will protect anything from legit votes. It is simply requested that Romanian voters authorise their votes. Same is requested from Russian, Siberian, English, Ukrainian and Fiji voters. 7 days is enough to give a chance to everyone interested. If you think 10 days is needed, let's discuss it. --Irpen 20:34, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that rules should not be changed during the vote itself. Why you did not propose new rules and did not protect pages, when similiar votes have came from ruwiki? --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 20:38, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't you see that the "rules" with no provision for socks can bring the arbotrary outcome. This vote is meaningless as long as Bonny or Russian Chauvinists can inject 20 support or oppose votes at any time. Protection is bad because many users will not be able to vote. Authorization is good because it will allow voting for anyone interested but will not allow socking. --Irpen 20:50, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But there are common rules in Meta, to vote without authorization procedures. If there is something bad with this vote - many insults, socks, etc - I think it should be revoted after significant time, 3 months or more. All the same, 90% of voters on both parts know very little about the thing itself - there are many announcements in different wikipedias to vote such or such, so they go and vote. How can wikipedia which have only one month be judged without emotions? Actually Siberian wiki is too young for real judgement, so you can see all of this in the voting page. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 20:57, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Votes for Siberian Wikipedia[edit]

Please don't do things as on Bonaparte's talk page. It shouldn't be something like a "trade" here, people should vote in accordance to their opinion and not to there own interests. Thanks for understanding, —Pill δ 20:59, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The same was done in Russian wikipedia, where there are 3 announcements to vote against Siberian wiki --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 21:01, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's not good. You should inform somebody about that, this is definitely an inappropriate way to win a voting. On the other hand it doesn't give you the right to do the same here, too. —Pill δ 21:04, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I know, but this is reality in which we live in Russia and post-soviet space. It was not me who began this war, but it were they who want to close the wiki. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 21:10, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Authorization procedure[edit]

Yaroslav, as per your request below is the explanation of the vote authorization procedure in Russian for the maximum clarity, as you requested. The one and only goal of this, is to eliminate sockpuppetry from both sides and not assure the victory of any one side.

Мы исходим из того, что за каждым легитимным голосом на мете стоит один реальный участник одной из Википедий. Русской-ли, английской или румынской, значения не имеет. Все могут голосовать. Каждый участник голосования должен сделать правку в своей национальной википедии будучи там залогиненным под своим обычным именем. Правку эту он может сделать либо на своей странице участника, либо на обсуждении собственной страницы. Данная правка должна четко связать его аккаунт на Википедии с голосом, поданным данным участником на странице голосования на мете.

Такой правкой может например быть создание интерлинка между аккаунтом ва Википедии и аккаунтом на мете так как это сделал Олесси.[1]

Другой способ авторизации, написать сообщение на собственной странице обсуждения, будучи залогиненным под собственным именем, как, например, это сделал я.[2]

После этого, каждый участник должен найти свой голос на странице голосования, и добавить к нему линк на авторизацию в своей Википедии, например как это сделал я[3] или Anton Khorev [4]

Если человек свой голос на мете дал из-под IP номера, то тоже никакой проблемы, если етот человек реален. Он просто должен на своей Википедии подтвердить, что голос действительно его и добавить линк на подтверждение к голосованию.

Несколько дней вполне достаточно для того, чтобы оповестить всех, кто голосовал. Если кто-то не потрудится авторизовать свой голос, значит ему это и не очень-то и важно. Небольшие потери возможны с обоих сторон, но все заинтересованные участники потрудятся сделать авторизацию. Самое главное в том, что это на 100% отсечет любых клонов. Какой смысл в этом голосвании, если какой-нибудь Бонапарте сейчас наделает 50 аккаунтов и проголосует каждым? Если такие деятели были среди русских участников, называемых Вами москалями, их фальшивые голоса тоже будут отсечены.

И последнее, ничто не мешает фокусникам насоздавать десятки аккаунтов на местных википедиях. Поэтому авторизаованный аккаунт должен был существовать на момент начала голосования.

Если есть вопросы, спрашивайте. По-моему процедура честная, прозрачная и зеркальная для обеих сторон. --Irpen 23:23, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Конечно, есть. Почему он сам должен подтверждать эту свою авторизацию, неужели линка между аккаунтами недостаточно? Это и есть переголосование, поскольку вся совокупность людей должна теперь дергаться на Мету снова. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 03:09, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Достаточно ли линка зависит от того, где этот линк указан. Если он указан на родной википедии владельца, то достаточно. Если только на мете, то нет. Что мешает Бонапарте вставить линк на мете на аккаунт абстрактного ничего не подозревающего участника какой-нибудь Википедии, так как он сделал на Мауко? Единственный способ убедиться в аутентичности пользователя - это если он сделает заранее оговоренное действие на родной Википедии, будучи там залогиненным под своим именем.

Он должен написать на своём talk, что я действительно голосовал там-то и там-то таким образом. А на Мете линк на это потверждение, и Вы можете поставить рядом с его голосом. Ему второй раз ходить сюда не обязательно. --Irpen 04:53, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Все это дополнительные ограничения, затрудняющие участие новых людей в голосовании и потому выгодные той стороне, которая уже набрала голосов. На мой взгляд, достаточно, если на википедии будет линк на мету, а на мете линк на википедию. Злобному Бонопарту или руспату несложно ведь будет подделать и оговоренные действия своих кукол. И ведь есть стандартная процедура проверки пользователей, так что нет смысла в каких-то шоу, и я категорически против, если их будут нам навязывать. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:56, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Мы где будем разговаривать? Здесь или на основной странице? --Irpen 05:00, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Я могу и в обоих местах, но если вы не можете, то здесь. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:01, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ОК, давайте здесь. Итак отвечаю на Ваш вопрос. Ограничение влияет на обе стороны одинаково. Той стороне, которая набрала больше и авторизовать надо больше. Неавторизованные голоса не защитываются. Кто такой руспат я не знаю. Понаделать новых кукол и повлиять на голосование невозможно, потому что аккаунт на родной вике должен был быть создан до начала голосования. Конечно возможно введение в действий спящих кукол, если они у кого есть. Но их обычно либо нет, либо мало. Поймите, что если мы чего-нибудь не предпримем, голосование вообще бессмысленно. Мы с Вами сейчас можем по 150 новых аккаунтов посоздавать и всеми проголосовать. Бони так и делал. Может там еще куча таких голосов и может даже и против sиб-вики.

В том-то и дело, что стандартной процедуры проверки нет, т.к. она обычно не нужна. Просто проект настолько противоречивый, что посыпались куклы с обеих сторон. На Википедиях включают чекюзера, но здесь и это не поможет, т.к. связывать надо аккаунты с разных проэктов. Чекюзер Мауко здесь никак не подтвердит и не опровергнет Мауко с вики. Против прокси чекюзер вообще бессилен. Это самая простая из надежных процедур. Она усложняет голосование немного, но для всех одинаково. И абсолютно гарантирует уничтожение фальсификаций. Не хотите же вы выиграть голосование фальшими голосами? --Irpen 05:13, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ок, поскольку сибирская группа достаточно новая на Википедии, нам нужно время, чтобы обсудить данное предложение между собой, и с более опытными википедистами, которые нас поддерживают. Нам надо день-два на взаимные консультации, до тех пор, я думаю, процедура должна оставаться той же, а с нашествиями кукол справляйтесь обычными методами. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:19, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
А раз проект спорный, то просто надо дать время, чтобы ему развиться. Если основные претензии к содержанию, то какое содержание мы могли создать за месяц? Естественно, противоречивое и черновое. Основное предложение всей сибирской группы по данному голосованию - это вообще отложить его, пока не улягутся страсти и сибвика не разовьется. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:20, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ярослав, ну я ж вам твержу, что "обычных" методов просто нет. Нашествие кукол убивает заведомо любое голосование. Можете спросить у Вашего друга Бони сколько админовских голосований он завалил атаками пока его не забанили. Он с удовольствием похвастается. Пусть новые люди голосуют сколько угодно, но пусть подтверждают свои голоса на родных им Виках. Голосование никто не приостановил. Вместо траты времени на "совещания", потратьте его на рассылку просьб Вашим друзьям отметиться на родных виках. Это ведь пятиминутная процедура.

Что касается спорности проекта и необходимости для него времени, то это совершенно отдельный разговор об аргументах за и против. Сказано об этом уже достаточно. Нам друг друга вряд ли переубедить. Но заметьте, что сырые проекты развиваются в инкубаторе. Сделайте там что-то приличное, без мерзостей и угроз массовых убийств, без мата в Гамлете, без издевательств над Пушкиным, Шевченко и украинским гимном. Без скользящего мата в статьях, без картинок, фальшиво представлающих украинцев русоненавистниками. Напишите статей без дерьма и мерзостей, выкиньте чушь, и я Вас уверяю, что многие воспримут Ваш проект иначе, особенно если Вы при этом еще и прекратите пропаганду ненависти в ЖЖ. --Irpen 05:36, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Почему это мы должны без совещания принимать в пять минут процедуру, которую вы только что придумали? К тому же она нигде ни в каких правилах не прописана. Буду ждать, пока все наши выскажутся, объявление на нашем форме дал.

По проекту - проект прошел инкубатор уже давно, все мерзости сочинены по ходу т.н. "голосования". В любом случае, никто вам не мешает править "мерзости", чего вы, почему-то, не делаете, а вместо этого сочиняете тут процедуры. Впрочем, нам друг друга видимо точно не переубедить. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 05:43, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Мы на Вашем "языке" писать не умеем, поэтому внесение нужных поправок остается за Вами. Kazak 03:58, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Там идут сейчас обсуждения, но пока сторонники удаления в самой вике (они есть) не набрали большинства голосов. Я строго следую вики-полисям, голосуют только участники. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 09:18, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New proposal for Ottoman Wikipedia[edit]

The proposal format for the opening of new languages has changed. So We had to submit a new proposal for the Ottoman Wikipedia. One of the new conditions for acceptance is participation of more than 5 users in editing effort, so your participation in creating and editing new articles would help.

Mehrdad 15:39, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Am I late to authorize?[edit]

No more edit of voting page? Please reply Wikipedia:User:TestPilot talk page or - for faster communication ********* TestPilot 17:19, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you write an article on your language...[edit]

on the English wikipedia? I could imagine something similar to the page on Slovio. I know you already had written an article, it, however, was, uhm, kind of odd - i.e. in bad English, lacking essential information, while containing many odd and confusing lines (as those mentioning some 'volgota group' without explanation) - that is maybe why it was deleted or why nobody opposed it's deletion. Therefore I suggest you to take the Slovio article as an example, rewrite it, let some native speaker of English proof-read it and put it back in as soon as possible(!). It would be an essential argument for the current discussion about the wikipedia in that language. I advise you to contact the Pan-Slavists of the group and slavic linguists at the forums, you might get aid there. And try to turn down the rhethorical sentiments about Russian chauvinism and things alike. Let's keep it AS CIVIL AS POSSIBLE. Best wishes! InTeRnAzI 20:43, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Such an article was written by Nat Krause, but was deleted by Russian Nationalists's flashmob, so the article about Siberian was deleted from enwiki three times. This is only because of specifics of Russian mentality - they think that every dialect development is threat to the Russian state. The problem is not civility of both sides but just in it. Accusations in incivility - next way to lay the blame on ours else from them - they not only are incivil themselves, but they delete articles and want to delete the wikipedia. German and Hebrew articles were also deleted because of invented accusations of them. When they have an article in Russian wikipedia itself, and consider this notable, they still organize companies against articles about sibwiki in Western wikipedias, just because they fear that somebody will not hearken to their fantasies, but will know the truth. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 21:19, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Original article of Nat Krause about us: (we have saved it in our site) - the article was deleted by the same persons which want now to close us. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 21:27, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That is exactly what I was talking about - please try to 'turn down the sound of hate' about 'those phesky russkies' with their 'imperialist mentality' (your repulsive persona shuns most users, including Siberian speakers, as pro-deletion comments show) and write a high-niveau article solely about the (re-)constructed language. If it would be good enough people would eventually keep it. Could you provide me the German article if you still have it? It passed by without me even noticing it. Maybe it would make sence to start off with an article on Siberian dialects similarly to Alemannic German or Upper Saxon which would mention your standartization/revival attempt? InTeRnAzI 02:40, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Again: 1) such an article was written without any politics 2) Russians came in amount of 40-50 with cries to delete it 3) during the Afd process they constantly wrote to this non-political article sentences like "and this is a language written for destroy Russia" and "this is language developed by Nationalists" etc. You can see in this case too, who is really politicized. Actually the Siberian wikipedia has not political articles at all, but that's ruwiki who invent politics in this case. You can see the truth of my words just in their conduct. Russia is not your Germany, for sure. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:35, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The German article, totally neutral, and deleted because of false accusations, was saved by Ukrainian bureaucrat Yakudza, I will ask him for this. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 11:40, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandals on ru-sibwiki[edit]

I noticed your request to a steward. I'm currently registered on ru-sib, tried to revert some vandalisms but you have the ConfirmEdit extension enabled and this is very slow; in any case, I'll flood the recent changes page. I'm a sysop on the Italian Wikipedia and here on Meta. On ru-sib there are 4 sysops, 3 of them offline; can I ask you to make me a temporary sysop to help revert these vandals? --.anaconda 18:48, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I will make you, It is holidays in Russia - all the sysops will be online after several hours. I will halp you with reverting soon - maybe in half of hour. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 18:55, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hm... 700 edits... maybe it's better to write special revert tool for this? I have a ready one but unfortunately it will be as unefficient as normal admin revert interface for that case because vandal edited one article from several accounts (script will rollback to previous vandalized version only in that case). If you'll decide to revert this manually: always check your edits whether it reverts article to normal version or not. Edward Chernenko 19:11, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About scholarwiki[edit]

Hi, thank you for your interest in Scholarwiki. I have given you edit privileges on my site. I have anonymous edits turned off and read only privileges given. I also have edits turned off automatically for new signed in users until I give them edit privileges manually for the whole site. In addition, the new user's user page will only have edit privileges given to the user who owns the page. This is so individuals can post Vitae/resume information on their user page without worrying about others editing.

However, I understand that waiting for edit privileges is not ideal and would like help with an extension that would allow signed in users to automatically have edit privileges on the whole site while automatically protecting their user page from others edits but not reads.

Also, i have anonymous edits turned off and I need to know opinions on this because it is not set in stone. Again, I would still want to protect users individual user page and would need help with an extension that would allow this

Белорусская вика на модернизированной тарашкевице[edit]

Превед. Ты не в курсе, случаем, что с тем запросом насчёт другой белвики? Некоторые запросы, судя по архивам, чисто механически отклонили после принятия новых правил Meta:Language_proposal_policy, но конкретно данное обсуждение найти не удалось. Edward Chernenko 19:55, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Запрос так и висит, Тарасевич все еще в инкубаторе. Но он активно там пишет с друзьями. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 04:14, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Москальские вандалы[edit]

Добрый день! Вас, наверно, уже спрашивали об этом, но не могу удержаться. Вам не кажется, что правками типа замены фразы "основными проблемами Сибирской википедии являются вандалы" на "... являются москальские вандалы" Вы лишь даете пищу тем, кто обвиняет весь Ваш проект в политизированности и некорректности по отношению к русским? ru:Участник:Иван Володин.

Пожалуйста, почитайте, кто такие москали, вот тут: [5] Они нерусские, и не имеют никакого отношения к русским. Более того, москали - главные русофобы. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 14:46, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Я Вам не излагаю свою точку зрения на то, что такое москаль, а лишь пытаюсь узнать, отдаете ли Вы себе отчет, что большинство русских воспринимают это слово как попытку представителя иной национальности пренебрежительно отозваться о русских? + см. у Даля [6]: МОСКАЛЬ м. южн. москвич, русский; Москалить - малорос. мошенничать, обманывать в торговле. ru:Участник:Иван Володин 18:03, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Так надо просвещать людей, объяснять, что такое москаль, а что такое русский. Москаль - ну это вроде Сыя (см. на голосовании по статье про сибирский язык). А русский - это вроде Сыгачева, Волыхова, Волкова, это русские. Такая терминология у славянских освободительных движений (укранцев, беларусов, новгородцев, сибирцев) уже 200 лет. Почему мы должны менять нашу устоявшуюся терминологию из-за того, что какие-то фашисты приписывают нам русофобию, и с этой целью внушщают людям, что мы москалями зовем всех русских? Москаль совершенно четкое понятие, и оно не пересекается с понятием русский не в чем. Татарин, украинец тоже могут быть москалями. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 19:07, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Что ж, просвещайте, желаю успеха. Только так, как Вы это делаете сейчас, ничего кроме отторжения у просвещаемых это не вызывает. ru:Участник:Иван Володин 23:13, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Что связано исключительно с засильем москалей среди русских википедистов)) В ЖЖ у нас абсолютно другая ситуация, так как там нет возможностей для цензуры, как на рувике. --Yaroslav Zolotaryov 03:16, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your support to Manchu Wikipedia[edit]

Thank you for your support for the future

Whlee 14:50, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote a message to the steward[edit]

Hi, I wrote a message to the steward asking him whose idea was to add Wikislavia to the spam list, and I could not find any discussion about this issue here on Meta. Hopefully we will get to the bottom of this unfortunate incident. Smartass. SA ru 21:07, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Печальная история фатальной ошибки[edit]

Увы, случилось непоправимое и ваша предостойнейшая попытка увековечить пустое место внезапно оборвалась. Так почтим сей грустный момент торжественной минутой радости и покоя. 14:17, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are now blocked[edit]

Since you seems to go mad (6 reverts in one hour), I placed blocking on your account. It's temporal, and expired in a certain period. Your peaceful and productive editing will be welcome. As for the closing of votes, its procedure is the same used on other closing projects voting, so it is okay. I hope you understand meta convention better. Cheers, --Aphaia 14:22, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chukchi and Koryak wikipedias in the incubator[edit]

Hello, Yaroslav Zolotaryov! I see that you're Siberian. I've created wikipedias in wikincubator in Chukchi and Koryak languages. So please contribute if you can. Good luck! (-- 14:15, 14 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Fundraising translation feedback[edit]

Hey Yaroslav Zolotaryov,

I wanted to ask for your help. As you may be aware we have been running banners on many language wikis. We have a lot of new content this year and I really want to conduct a thorough review of our translations. This is a combination of feedback from the community, readers, donors as well as those with professional translator experience. This will help us ensure the highest quality of translations used in our messaging.

To help us out with this I wonder if you would be willing to give us feedback for Russian using This Link

Simply follow the simple instructions on that page and if you have any questions feel free to contact me on my talk page.

Many Thanks

Jseddon (WMF) (talk) 09:43, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]