User talk:Kardrak

The image Image:Nafta.JPG has been listed for deletion as an orphan. Please feel free object at Images for deletion

México export much more than Brazil, but Brazil has a solid internal economy and it does outweight Mexico's in GDP. I don't understand so much on economy, but I though the GDP is the best metter to a economy. Isn't it? Yet, instead of saying Brazil has the biggest economy in L.A., I've rewrite the article to say Brazil has the biggest GDP in L.A. All right? Just curiosity, are you Mexican? José San Martin 15:49, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

I've just made a sugestion on the Brasil talk page regarding the disute.--Vertigo200 00:39, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Brazil's GDP is $1.492 trillion versus Mexico's $1.006 trillion. CIA World Fact book (2004 est.), so Latin American seems accurate. El_C 01:30, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding developed country: You shouldn't have omitted the section about Barbados, since the article is not about regional "powers", but about development, while the section about Barbados discusses its development status only (not about its being a regional power). Please add back what you have omitted. I'm waiting for you, so please don't disappoint me... Have a nice day, Kardrak. Eliko 10:29, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How am I abusing my powers? Is removing OR from a high profile article, abusing my powers? No. Is finding consensus with two other Wikipedians in a civil and professional manner, abusing my powers? No. Is improving Wikipedia's apperance and crediblity, abusing my powers? No. Please instead of accussing me in a rather uncivil fashion, you could have just contacted me on my talk page. I'm a rational and reasonable person and quite sure that we could have worked out any problem you may have had. I would have been gald to work with you as I did with Eliko. But please abstain from shouting accusations at me on discussion pages. Thank you, Signature^brendel 17:13, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to me that you are signing out of your account and editing as 189.180.70.169 in order to avoid the 3 Revert Rule. Behavior like that could lead to accusations of sockpuppetry, which could lead to sanctions; I would advise not engaging in such behavior, for your own sake. From a quick scan of the arguments, I kind of agree with you in terms of the discussion of the appropriateness of Argentina in the article, but I think you are going a bit too far. Perhaps you could suggest Argentina be added to a list of "Other Suggested Regional Powers", with arguments for and against their inclusion in the article. Brianyoumans 03:47, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. 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. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. 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! --SineBot (talk) 04:45, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Was that a concession (in which case, no worries, it happens to the best of us) or something else (in which case I really am confused about something)? - Eldereft (cont.) 22:56, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The table is about energy production ... over a given length of time. The easiest way to see that terawatt/hour is incorrect is to convert watts to joules/second. A joule/second has the same units as a joule/year - energy per time, which meshes with the rest of that table. A civilization which consumes 680 exajoules of energy every year has an average consumption rate of 22 terajoules of energy every second, or an average power draw of 22 terawatts. - Eldereft (cont.) 23:29, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have full-protected the article and have made a suggestion and warning here. What I really didn't want to do is block you but, if either you or Eldereft continue warring after protection is lifted, I shall block the pair of you for 24 hours. In future, please abide by the WP:BRD cycle. Thank-you. Seraphim♥Whipp 23:44, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't undo my reversions again without using the talk page to discuss. Also, when you create a completely new page on Wikipedia by copying and pasting contributions from another user, please note which page you copied it from in the edit summary or on the talk page, in order to comply with Wikipedia's copyright license. Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:36, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Homicide rates in Mexico by state has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

replaced by List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate#Country_subdivisions

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. Magog the Ogre (talk) 08:23, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kardrak.

I've just seen your message and also noticed you and Magog debating on the country homicide talk page when I was last logged in. I agree, it should be an article by itself though he's made it collapsible which seems to have pacified you somewhat. We should work toward an article by itself though I believe. I was going to do exactly the same list a couple of years back but, for various reasons, haven't spent nearly as much time on Wiki as I used to. I'll message him when I have time because it's a great article in the making and I have tons of statistics for admin. divisions from many countries.

Thanks. Power Society (talk) 16:56, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Everything is ok for my part on that article, Im agree with Magog.

Thanks. kardrak (talk) 04:38, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do NOT change the dates on the generation pages backed up by sources. You have changed a date on the Generation Y page that is sourced, and the wording on the Generation X pages was previously decided by a consensus, and recently proven yet again by the majority of sources using 1981 and the Class of 1999 as the end of Generation X, and 1982 and the Class of 2000 as the start of the Millennials. Further changes will be reverted. CreativeSoul7981 (talk) 03:39, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm not a vandal, I reverted your edit because when I saw 0.699 I thought it was a vandalism, then I checked the source and the page was not found, so I reverted. But now I checked and I see you were right, sorry for the inconvenience. AmigoDoPaulo (talk) 15:31, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I believe this map:

is superior to this map:

The blue to pink to red color scheme is very clear to understand in the first map. In the second map, however, the lowest category (low HDI) is nearly black, completely defeating visual perception and understanding. I ask you to please stop replacing the maps. Thank you. Pristino (talk) 04:22, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

you only want your map in the article, plus is full of errors and bad quality, so please stop doing vandalism i requested protection to the article and i will report you.

kardrak (talk) 04:26, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Why do you think the map is "full of errors"? Could you please specify? And why do think the map is of "bad quality"? Again, please be more specific. Thanks. Pristino (talk) 04:34, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't understand you. I added the map by quartiles first, then you removed it saying the classification was "arbitrary" and that it was "vandalism". Then the next day you uploaded a new map using the same classification by quartiles. I believe you owe me an apology for your behavior. Pristino (talk) 07:24, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:NAFTA map.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 10:47, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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) 12:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:NAU flag.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused fictional flag

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --TheImaCow (talk) 19:10, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]