User talk:DragutBarbarossa

Welcome!

Hello, DragutBarbarossa, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! Baristarim 00:59, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sock[edit]

Shuppiluliuma, I told you when I blocked you that you could come back when you asked to and when you'd be willing to get back to constructive editing. You were shouting you'd leave Wikipedia. If you now want to come back, please do so through your legitimate account, don't give us this shit about sockpuppets. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:54, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOL :)

Sorry...

I sometimes can't stop the devil inside me (there's an angel there too) and my engine boils water very quickly. I'll have to change the combustion system and add a catalysator. Unfortunately many things which Rarelibra wrote were right.

I came back basically because there are many things left to be added, especially regarding Turkish naval history, etc. If there's one thing I can't stand, it's "unfinished work", which is the second unbearable thing after "inaccurate data."

I could keep contributing "no name" with different IP numbers, but I guess "no name data" is prone to prejudicial elimination very quickly and needs confirmation.

I'll stick my big nose in other issues too, but more calmly this time.

I only feel sorry that the beautiful Istanbul page has turned so ugly just because a lightning flashed in my brain when OttomanReference accused me of contributing only rubbish/useless things and being the number 1 reason why Istanbul didn't get the star.

I'll try to correct it if possible (the only "possibly problematic" image is Istanbul_from_above.jpg which I scanned from a Bosphorus Marathon poster which is nearly 10 years old - other images are taken by my friends from WowTurkey.Com)

Sorry for all the trouble. DragutBarbarossa 15:44, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I'm too ashamed to turn back as Shuppiluliuma (King of Hittites, if you ever wondered who he is) DragutBarbarossa 15:47, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So, you prefer staying on as a pirate instead? Harr, harr. - Eh, just pick one account. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:58, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll pick the pirate :)

Everyone hates Shuppi now - my talk page is full of protest letters from people who are angry with my arrogant "I know it all" attitude - not to mention my lack of ABS and ESP systems. DragutBarbarossa 16:17, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, then... Avast, ye scurvy sea-dog! --Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:24, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yo-ho-ho, and a bottle of Budweiser from the fridge :)

Thanks me hearty DragutBarbarossa 16:36, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So, how is it going? :) Glad you came back.. Baristarim 21:54, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine but I feel sorry for Istanbul's current shape. The only controversial image was the one on top (Istanbul_from_above.jpg), which I scanned from an old poster. The other images can be re-added, but unfortunately I don't have the capability of doing it myself. Eventually, as new (more recent) images arrive from Wikipedians living in Istanbul, they can/will replace the WowTurkey images within time (updating the city's street level view and skyline), of course. DragutBarbarossa 22:55, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding:[1]; Wikipedia is not a Form or a personal socialization enviroment. My communication with you were civil and positive. Every advise I gave you already repeated by "many other users". I advise you "one more time"; as I did before: check this "No One is waging war against you! Hope you will calm down and take the "positive criticism" which will help not only to you but to everyone". Wikipedia is an encyclopedia; which you may like some facts and not like some of them, but have to show respect. I will be pleased if you can bring the Istanbul into GOOD ARTICLE status. I have already showed the guidelines; see [2] If you read and understand them, it will benefit your additions as their quality will improve. Many editors, including me have already read these guidelines. Try to obey them. However, your previous history shows that it is going to take a lot of effort in your side. Have a nice day. --OttomanReference 18:37, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't respond to my question. Your lack of telling the difference between Sirkeci and Haydarpaşa has also increased my suspicions. Tell me in Turkish with a detailed paragraph:

Türk müsün? İstanbullu musun? Kimsin? Niye Atatürk'ü 1916-1917 olaylarından sorumlu hale getirmek için elinden geleni yaptın? Niye Abdülhamid II'ye fena halde kafayı taktın?

Ben açıkçası bir Truva Atı olduğunu düşünüyorum. DragutBarbarossa 18:41, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of concentrating on personalities, why don't you concentrate on the "Knowledge". Look If you want to tell "Turks" are the greatest nation, or what ever you want to tell; You can not do it by "using personal attacks" or "changing facts of the history." Why do you care What I think or who I'm? I will never delete any edition that is really/positively improve the content of Istanbul. THERE IS only one wayfor you to prove that you represent something good, that is you improve the content which proves your point. In your case the city "ISTANBUL" The current Istanbul is only 42 KB, and needs a lot of citations and many more factual info. Show me (prove it), the Istanbul is the best city, by giving balanced and TRUE information. TODAY: Among this 42K text, my edits are 15 K. (there are statistical tools that keeps your edits and shows your improvements) Yours edits are constantly reverted so it does not even add up. NOTE:People do not read the PICTURES, so you have to write with your correct English. I have things to work on. Have a nice day.OttomanReference 18:54, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I knew it :) DragutBarbarossa 18:56, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, in every article you edit, you leave behind a tremendous amount of grammar/typing errors which need to be corrected. DragutBarbarossa 18:58, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I forget to say: There is a criteria that shows how good you are; Drop me a message when you prove that you can bring the Istanbul to the Wikipedia:Featured content level. OttomanReference 19:03, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't underestimate me dear friend. People look at books to find the dates of historic events, or the building year of a church, etc.

I have them all in my brain, with an "autistic" memory.

Ask me a building in Istanbul, I'll respond you with its construction date in 5 seconds. DragutBarbarossa 19:07, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey pirate, you're on thin ice here. I told you to pull yourself together, and there's still those extreme attacks against OttomanReference from some days ago. Instead of apologising and settling in to constructive editing as you promised, I see you resuming your personal attacks here. Take this as a final warning, this kind of behaviour is not going to be tolerated after what has happened. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:11, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I only want to know the truth: I doubt he is Turkish and his intentions are plain "good".

A "Trojan Horse" for promoting the Armenian point of view in Turkey-related threads.

But this is my last remark on this issue: I only "understood" what's going on. DragutBarbarossa 19:13, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Among this 42K text, my edits are 15 K. (there are statistical tools that keeps your edits and shows your improvements) Yours edits are constantly reverted so it does not even add up.

Perhaps because it's you who constantly reverts what other people edit. Check out the history of Atatürk, Abdülhamid II, İstanbul, etc: in all of them, you act like the "owner" of the article and don't let anyone else add/edit their own contribution. DragutBarbarossa 19:18, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Selam[edit]

Mail in aktif değil. Must ^TC 19:34, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mail'imi nasıl activate edebilirim ki? DragutBarbarossa 23:16, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

è semplice voi può farlo dal mio menu di preferenze E104421 23:23, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

O.K., grazie :) DragutBarbarossa 23:26, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

siete benvenuti E104421 23:29, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

E' fatto, potete mandarmi un e-mail DragutBarbarossa 23:32, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

proverò E104421 23:35, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sabiha Gökçen[edit]

Welcome to Wiki. Thanx for your contributions. Kind Regards. E104421 21:09, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We actually know each other for a very long time - especially from the Milgem and TN threads :) DragutBarbarossa 22:48, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeap, that's why i'm following your edits. By the way, i'd like to remind you Mustafa's comment above. Keep in touch young brother. Prego :) E104421 23:10, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ataturk[edit]

Please There is no bigger "vatan hainligi" than injecting arguments which does not belong. No one is preventing you develop what you want to say. However you need to do it at the correct article. Ataturk is not the correct article.OttomanReference 01:23, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have never seen a "worser" article on Wikipedia. The grammar errors are enormous, some paragraphs are absolutely horrible (such as Atatürk's telegram to the Sultan from Syria). Elementary school Tarzan English. DragutBarbarossa 01:32, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, you are acting as if you are the "owner" of the article, despite being protested by many others for the bad quality of your editing work (not just me) and "completely changing" everything without asking for other people's opinions. DragutBarbarossa 01:34, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

quello è di destra E104421 01:35, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A dire la verita' avevo pensato anche a quella possibilita', ma non riesco a credere che un turco e' cosi determinato a rovinare ogni cosa che ha un valore per il nostro popolo. DragutBarbarossa 01:44, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

sì siete di destra. quello è il senso prego non dà in su. riguardi. E104421 01:49, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding reversions[3] made on February 18 2007 to Sabiha Gökçen[edit]

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

The duration of the block is 24 hours. —Ryūlóng (竜龍) 06:50, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've extended your block to four days for the use of two IPs to continue your edit warring. When the block expires, please discuss changes on the talk page instead of performing unilateral changes repeatedly.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 07:27, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have extended this block again for continued abuse of editting priveleges after you were blocked to two weeks. If you want to contribute constructively, place {{unblock}} here, and place a request to be unblocked.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 00:05, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New sockpuppetry[edit]

After the activities of StamboulioteParExcellence (talk · contribs), I'm now blocking you indefinitely and will propose this to become a community ban for having exhausted the community's patience.

By the way, your image contributions are still not useable like that, sorry. Several clear copyvios among them, some with "non-commercial use" only licenses, and generally no evidence of actual licenses from the photographers. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]