User talk:Cristi.falcas

Welcome!

Hello, Cristi.falcas, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Mihai -^talk 19:29, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Iasi pogrom[edit]

If you want to discuss further, you can take it to the Talk page, but, in brief:

You wrote: "The Iaşi pogrom of 27 June 1941 was one of the most violent pogroms in Jewish history" --Is this compared with what happened in Germany or with what happened in Poland? I think the big picture tells us otherwise.
- As far as individual pogroms, the death toll of Iasi was among the largest of any other single incident. Larger slaughters occured elsewhere, of course, but in terms of pogroms - the sudden anti-Jewish riot - there are few, if any, with larger death tolls.
You wrote: "Romania also joined Germany in the invasion of the Soviet Union." - I can't see what this has to do with the pogrom that took place in Iasi. It has no relevance to your article.
- Well, it is relevant because (a) it is background about the connection between Germany and Romania, (b) before the pogrom rumors spread of the Jews signalling Soviets, which requires explaination as to why it was significant, and (c) it was in the areas of the Soviet Union that the Romanian forces started their largest slaughters of Jews, Iasi was just the beginning.
You wrote: "the death train that left Iasi for Călăraşi, southern Romania, which carried perhaps as many as 5,000 jews" - Highly speculative. I don't understand why put unknown data in your facts. Maybe an official number it will be more correct?
- This is a direct quote from the official report. Please consider reading it before attacking the numbers.
You wrote: "Romanian authorities reported that 1,900 jews boarded the train and “only” 1,194 died." - At least that "only" is malicious. I really think no one told that in any official way. And if the romanian authorities say 1900 jews, the most correct thing is to accept it (it's no small number). You may be right that some numbers say 2700, but the reverse is also true. The official numbers are the most correct to put in.
- The most recent research on Iasi is the Commission Report, it is also the official report, it was accepted by the Romanian government as authoratitve. Thus, its figures are considered, by both Romanian and outside authorities, to be the most accurate, not what officials reported in 1941, which are mentioned in any case. Also, you are wrong, the "only" was indeed official, this is a direct quote from the Commission report: "In the official account, Romanian authorities reported that 1,900 Jews boarded the train and “only” 1,194 died." In fact, the whole section is a quote.

In short, you may want to read the Commission Report, linked in the article, since every piece of information is sourced there. --Goodoldpolonius2 04:25, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Notable people[edit]

Please do not add simply red links as you did in Iaşi article. If you don't have time to write an article, please write a short sentence about the person in the Iaşi article (and in other similar places). By the way, it will be good if you add short descriptions for all people listed in Iaşi (like I did for Antipa, Grigore), and in other geographical articles as well. It will be much more useful. `'mikka (t) 23:36, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects[edit]

Please do not create redirects to empty pages. They will be deleted. If you create a redirect, the corresponding red link becomes blue, giving false impression that the article exists. `'mikka (t) 00:30, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. I was to bored to check again what pages exist, so I made redirects for all the red links. I will be more carefull.

Re[edit]

Many of the people you erased were not Jews, but that is, of course, besides the point. I have added people who were notable, and who I plan to start articles on (or, at least, about whom wikipedia ought to have articles). I have based this on searches through the standard encyclopedic dictionary of 1978, as well as on various encounters on google when I was researching other articles.

As I have said before, I consider summarizing articles (which I suppose is what you mean by "categories") on lists to be utterly absurd and highly redundant (for one, because it implies that one can just adequately represent an entire article in summarizing sentence, the rest being just filler); add to this that the way in which you summarized them raises questions of objectivity and relevancy per wikipedia guidelines, and that the summaries were, sorry to say, not remotely close to proper English. Dahn 17:13, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is obvious to anyone that the one and only criterion for adding to that list is place of birth. Not contribution. That is to say, it is for people who are relevant enough to have an article, and I believe that the sources on the internet and elsewhere (again, the standard encyclopedia of Romania in 1978) have proven sufficient for these articles to exist. I do not have the arrogance to tell chemists or physicians that they should restrict the scope of their contributions to wikipedia because I have not heard of things they are writing about, so you should probably be a little more careful when testing that slope.

Bujor was a socialist activist who is rather relevant for interwar Romania, being at the center of a scandal for two decades of his life. Currently, I have added some info about him in the Mihail Manoilescu and Alexandru Averescu articles. Since wikipedia is not aimed at 5th grade students, I dream about the day when it will have an ample coverage of what Romanians consider obscure, and then it will actually be truly useful (it est: it will be a learning instrument, not a cliché).

Please don't imply that I should be contributing this type of information on all those persons just because you have never heard of them.

As I have said, whatever you think about adding summaries, you could at least add them in English.

Allow me also note that dividing the list into "writers, painters, politicians" on one side and "Jew community" on the other is highly risqué to say the least (I'm sorry if this would need to be explained). Btw, the word "Jew" is used in the construct "Jew community" is only present in vulgar slang, so you may want to avoid it in the future.

I consider this matter clarified. If you have a complaint with my behavior, direct it towards an admin. Have a good day. Dahn 18:15, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personalities from Iaşi[edit]

Making a list of people who you (or anyone else) consider important is called to be POV and against Wikipedia rules, because while I consider some people important, you may consider some other and we can't reach a consensus. That's why lists should include all the people who are notable enough to deserve an article, as for inclusion, there are very clear criteria of notability (see WP:N). bogdan 19:01, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An Automated Message from HagermanBot[edit]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 07:00, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD Nomination: Personalities from Iaşi[edit]

An editor has nominated the article Personalities from Iaşi for deletion, under the Articles for deletion process. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the nomination (also see What Wikipedia is not and Deletion policy). Your opinions on why the topic of the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome: participate in the discussion by editing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Personalities from Iaşi. Add four tildes like this ˜˜˜˜ to sign your comments. You can also edit the article Personalities from Iaşi during the discussion, but do not remove the "Articles for Deletion" template (the box at the top of the article), this will not end the deletion debate. Jayden54Bot 22:10, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An Automated Message from HagermanBot[edit]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 08:07, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Poze[edit]

Cristi, din nefericire eu nu pot trimite e-mailuri de acasa (o poveste lunga). Ideea e foarte buna, si va multumesc amandorura. Ca sa iti raspund la intrebarea privind licenta: e foarte important ca el sa stabileasca daca doreste sa-i fie mentionat numele de catre cei care preiau pozele (sa fie "credited") sau nu. Eu presupun ca el nu vrea sa renunte la toate drepturile asupra imaginilor, ci numai sa le distribuie gratuit celor care, la randul lor, le distribuie gratuit; de altfel, ii si recomand sa faca asa. O idee ar fi sa le faca upload in Wikimedia Commons (un fel de rezerva de poze pentru toate proiectele wikipedia, unde sunt trimise numai documentele care sunt, explicit sau implicit, fara nici un drept de autor). Tag-ul de licenta pe care i-l recomand este

This work has been released into the public domain by its author, author. This applies worldwide.

In case this is not legally possible:
author grants any entity the right to use this work for any purpose, without any conditions, unless such conditions are required by law.

(vezi amanunte si restul licentelor la [1]). (Nota: nu uita sa inlocuiesti "author" cu numele lui). Upload-ul se face la [2] (trebuie sa te inregistrezi ca user pe Commons). Daca prefera, si mai ales daca doreste sa conditioneze utilizarea, folosesti uploadul de aici, cu o licenta de aici. Important: pentru toate cazurile, iti trebuie certificarea lui - un copy-paste dupa partea din e-mail in care isi da acordul, cu o traducere, si un link catre site (eventual si catre o adresa de mail, doar daca adresa e publica - adica daca o poti gasi pe acelasi site, ca un link de "contact me"). Sper ca am fost de ajutor. Dahn 08:19, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Da, chiar trebuie (asta iti spuneam mai devreme). Ideea e ca iti mai trebuie si un citat de-al lui in care sa arate ca si-a dat acordul. Adresa lui de e-mail e optionala (si de dat doar daca el a facut-o publica pe site). Dahn 09:09, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An Automated Message from HagermanBot[edit]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 09:06, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Large Hadron Collider[edit]

Please do not make disparaging comments in the edit summary when making edits, such as in this edit. Thanks. --DannyDaWriter (talk) 05:16, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:45, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]