User talk:Jhattara Information & User talk:Jhattara Links at HealthHaven.com

[edit] Iraq Flag

The New York Times reports that the flag design recently imposed is designed to be temporary and mention that Iraqis have "expressed varying opinions about the new flag." [1] The Christian Science Monitor reports that a referendum on the flag is expected at the end of 2008. [2]. This issue is hotly contested, especially as Iraq remains under occupation and many Iraqis, including most of the ones I know, refuse to accept the legitimacy of the occupied government. Don't you think it's preferable to use the widely-accepted 'old' flag until a genuine solution is reached? Jamal (talk) 13:49, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is supposed to be neutral on different points of views. If the internationally recognized and de facto ruling government uses a flag as the official flag of Iraq, then that flag should also be used in Wikipedia in all contexts. I know very well that some think that the current Iraqi government is not legitimate and that the flag they use is not the real flag of Iraq, but in all the contexts that Wikipedia cares about it is de facto and de jure the official flag of Iraq until a new flag is chosen by a government in power. --Jhattara ^{(Talk · Contrib)} 13:58, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Library cardback

Hi! Can you try uploading another version of the Vampire library card back? It shows up really weird on my view of it. The 'Vampire' script is totally "white-blurry". I will try to fix it with different sizes, but if that doesn't work, you could try scanning it again, or maybe use another compression rate... Ingolfson 11:29, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] European fauna template

Thanks for adding the '|show UK countries=true' device. Am I right in thinking that for anyone to see it, other than visitors to Fauna of Scotland, that I'd have to go around putting this in the other transcluded templates? (Fortunately there are very few Fauna ones at present). Wouldn't it make more sense to have a {{#ifexist: type code as per the Vatican City? Ben MacDui (Talk) 20:46, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Red Dogs Tei Subject

The truth hurts... I hope none of you will experience this kind of non-senses...

Anyway, there is a God outhere... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.86.98.234 (talk) 11:15, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

No matter what is the truth beneath this the subject is not notable enough and doesn't have reliable enough sources for Wikipedia. --Jhattara ^{(Talk · Contrib)} 11:35, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fact tag

Unless you provide a source for "the right of self-determination" of Gagauzia or that phrase will be deleted and accordingly, Gagauzia will be deleted from the list too.Sambure ^talk 05:13, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

We have provided a few documents there. --Jhattara ^{(Talk · Contrib)} 10:12, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Official documents are needed not "few documents" there.--Sambure ^talk 12:30, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Jhattara, this is a confirmed sock of banned user. `'Míkka >t 18:56, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

No wonder his opinions sounded so familiar. This isn't the first we've met. --Jhattara ^{(Talk · Contrib)} 19:05, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gagauzia

Could you, please, explain this on the talk page of the article. I am afraid you have something technical in mind, and I fail to follow you. Dc76\^talk 17:37, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Template:European topic

Regarding your recent edit to Template:European topic, accompanied by this edit summary: fixed broken romania link, if you want to redirect disambiguations please do those very carefully): This is not a matter of "if" someone "wants" to redirect disambiguations. Disambiguation pages should almost never be linked to, and to the extent the template does so inappropriately (which it does, all over the place), the template is broken and needs to be fixed. Criticizing someone for trying to do this is out of place, not to mention rather uncivil. --Tkynerd (talk) 13:13, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm always trying to be civil when editing and making comments. Quite often the edit summary doesn't have enough space to fully express the reasons why I have done a certain edit. e.g. in this case a user who was not very familiar with the purpose of this template redirected the link Romanian to Romanians, thus effectively breaking all prefixed and/or suffixed links to [prefix]Romanian[suffix]. --Jhattara ^{(Talk · Contrib)} 13:45, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it was clear to me what happened. That doesn't change the fact that this template has been broken for months because it incorrectly links to disambiguation pages. Your edit summary didn't seem civil to me, but I can accept the fact that you didn't intend to be uncivil. But if those of us who are not "familiar with the purpose of this template" have to leave it alone, then it is incumbent on those who are familiar with its purpose (and its syntax) to fix all of its links to disambiguation pages ASAP, and those people should be very careful not to bite those of us who are trying in good faith to clean up their mess. Thanks, Tkynerd (talk) 17:38, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, the purpose of this template is to use it only with the [prefix] and/or [suffix] parameters determined. It is not meant to be used without either of those parameters. And if you use at least one of those parameters there shouldn't be any disambiguation links left. --Jhattara ^{(Talk · Contrib)} 07:17, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, I've just looked at articles that use this template (all of which are air force articles, BTW -- this template seems pretty handy, and I hope it will see wider use over time), and I see what you mean. However, I think that could stand to be better documented in the template, so that those of us who regularly disambiguate terms of nationality know that we don't need to worry about the links in this template. Thanks, Tkynerd (talk) 12:35, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Asia topic

Hi Hattara,

I noticed that you removed the fourth footnote I added to Template:Asia topic. I had added it because I feel that the continent navboxes should recognize those countries which are also included on another continent navbox. Because the countries I had pointed out are also on Template:Europe topic, I thought that some mention of this fact should be present on Template:Asia topic. Such a recognition is made on Template:Europe topic.

On a more important note, the Hong Kong link on Template:Asia topic does not seem to be working; it links directly to Hong Kong no matter what the appended topic (ex. the "History of Asia" navbox does not link to History of Hong Kong but simply to Hong Kong). I don't know enough about the code to fix the problem. Do you?

Neelix (talk) 19:13, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I find that a footnote is only needed where the presence of said nation in the template in question is somewhat disputable, like in cases of Russia, Georgia and Egypt in Template:Asia topic. In Template:Europe topic only those countries with a vague continental attachments have footnotes describing those attachments. I find no reason why we should not in Asian templates that some people consider e.g. Israel or Cyprus European countries because of their cultural heritage, as they are undisputably geographically fully in Asia.

The Hong Kong part should be fixed now. Might take some time until the new version of the template is in use elsewhere. --Jhattara ^{(Talk · Contrib)} 13:24, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sub topic

"let's even try to find a consensus before bloating the template, reverting to pre-edit war status": Ok, give me your reply here. Thanks! --虞海 (talk) 13:15, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh, your view is remove all those additional information. I support you. My view is all these disputed area should be treated the same. I'm confused when I see "Undid revision 233292453 by 虞海 (talk)" in that I don't know you did extra changes. --虞海 (talk) 13:19, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

[edit] D&D articles for Wikipedia 0.7

Hi there! :)

As someone who's worked on D&D and/or RPG articles before, I'm inviting you to participate in our goal to both improve articles that have been selected to be placed in the next Wikipedia DVD release, as well as nominate more to be selected for this project. Please see the WikiProject D&D talk page for more details. :) BOZ (talk) 19:45, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Blood Shadowed Court

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Blood Shadowed Court. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blood Shadowed Court. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:11, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed deletion of Ursa (Finland)

The article Ursa (Finland) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

lacks 3rd party references demonstrating notability of this organization.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. RadioFan (talk) 15:54, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Contents