Pirveli

hey Pirveli, the Greek POV pusher Khoikhoi is being requested for adminship by the offer of Latinus. you can vote here (85.97.143.5 16:09, 26 March 2006 (UTC))

Good it's ended. I did not follow up on what's the outcome, but glad it is over. And see you accomplished something. As for comments, don't worry too much, I have long forgotten. Anyway, I wanted to say that when you leave comments, you need to sign them by typing in four tildes (four of these things: ~). And please speak in English with me, my Russian is very bad :) Renata 06:10, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

I see, thanks for advice:) Pirveli 09:15, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

You welcome. Renata 18:08, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Youre free to move the "criminal-controlled territories" into a separate section, but please do not destroy the improvements I've made to the lead.--Jiang 09:51, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

As a warning, note that you are close to getting blocked for violating three revert rule at list of sovereign states.--Jiang 10:07, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

There is no compromise. I opposed it as soon as it was implemented. There is no reason to destroy the improvements Ive made to the lead section.--Jiang 10:11, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, Pirveli, the request has been made at WP:RCU, so hopefully we can find out who is who. Khoikhoi made the request, not me - we'll see what the results are; who knows? Also, don't accuse other users of slander, it could be interpreted as a legal threat and that would be a violation of WP:NLT. Regards. --Latinus 12:26, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Pirveli, I have nothing against you. That's what we're doing, asking someone to check the IPs. It's just something I'm curious about and have no intention to slander you. --Khoikhoi 15:32, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi, the IP test results have come out (Wikipedia:Requests for CheckUser#User:Pirveli, User:Irakliy81, and User:Papa Carlo) and it appears there is no sockpuppetry. I apologise for my suspicions. --Latinus 22:41, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Hello! Recently, you cast a vote against closure of the "Siberian" Wikipedia, presumably basing it on the supposed existence of the "Siberian language" with millions of speakers. Perhaps the issue was misunderstood. There is no Siberian language or Siberian nation, apart from the native Turkic and other peoples who lived there long before Russian colonists arrived in the 16th century. The matter in question is an artificial "language" created based on several archaic Russian dialects in 2005 by a Mr. Zolotarev and a few of his friends, inclusion of which fairly blatantly violates the No Original Research policy of Wikipedia. Siberian Slavs speak Russian and list themselves on censuses as Russians, Ukrainians, and Belarusans - this you can verify for yourself. I invite you to return to participate in the discussion and reconsider your vote, and appreciate constructive debate on the topic. Cossack 00:01, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Siberian wikipedia thanks you for your vote in our support. Unfortunately, many votes in this voting http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_closing_projects/Closure_of_Siberian_Wikipedia are alleged to be falsified. We need you to verify your vote. There are two ways of doing it: you can confirm it right below this request or you can do this by adding to your user page a link to your meta account (like this:[1]") —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.18.139.223 (talk) 08:27, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

Gamarjoba. Gmadlobt am shescorebistvis da daxmarebisvis abkhazetis gverdze, romelsac mudmivad uteven chveni chrdiloeli mezoblebi. Sauketeso survilebit, --Kober^Talk 04:51, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

gmadlobT Tqven im farTo da mravalferovani samuSaosaTvis, romelsac Tqven awarmoebT aq :). Pirveli 18:53, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Pirveli, sorry, but the graphic is correct. Everything that is not on the graphic will be disbanded within 2008. The 30th Mech. Brig you mentioned consists of 2 understaffed battalions and is scheduled to be disbanded this July. Maybe you have noted that the graphic is subtitled "Future Structure of the German Army". The German Army is downsizing, as there are plans to abolish conscription and with the excellent economic situation in Germany it is difficult for them to reach the strength they would like to have.So the graphic is actually correct, but the article isn’t anymore, as no one seems to update it with the ongoing disbandment’s. best regards, noclador 21:29, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

The German Army will remain bigger than the Spanish Army- in number of men, not in number of units. The difference lies in the organisational structure of the units- a German Battalion fields over a thousand soldiers, whereas a Spanish between 400-500, therefore we have this optical discrepancy. The same applies to France and Italy, which both call their units regiments- but French regiments field from 1000-1280 soldiers and Italian around 800-900. So in the graphic the Italian Brigades (especially the armoured ones) look bigger than their French counterparts, but in reality the French Brigades actually field more men and equipment (i.e.the French 501-503 Tank regiment fields 80 Tanks and over a 1200 men, the Italian 4th Tank Regiment fields 54 Tanks and 900men). Plus the Spanish have a regiment layer between the combat units and the Brigades. They keep regiments and therefore their Brigades seem even bigger than they really are. If you have a look at the 5th Spanish Light Inf. Brig. you will see that there are 2 regiments under the command that in turn command battalions- this command level has been abolished by now in all European armies... except for Spain. This also inflates their number of units. If you have any more questions, feel free to ask :-) noclador 02:09, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Dave, well then I would need to put in the numbers for each battalion- alas they change to quickly too (i.e. Germany continuously takes companies out of units for over a year to form mixed battalion battle groups for use in international mission) or in example in Germany and Austria the mixed Artillery/Recon battalions are gigantic (over 2000men), whereas their “normal” Artillery battalions field the usual 1000men. Furthermore Paratrooper, Air Assault and Special Forces are throughout Europe (and the USA) smaller in size than their classic Infantry counterparts, but some units go the other way (i.e. Italian Lagunari that field 1500 men) . But the real horror are the Swiss, Finish, Norwegian and Swedish Armies- even I’m continuously confused and annoyed by their combination of militia and active troops: i.e. Switzerland 4000 active troops- but a huge Army in case of war, when the militia will be called up (i.e. the Swiss Mtn. Inf. Brigade 12 has 3 (!!) active troops in peacetime). Or another good example in WWII German division fielded around 15.000- 20.000 men, the Soviet were around 6.000- 12.000 men and the Italians around 8.000- 10.000… So, as you see troop numbers change so rapidly and continuously, that it is actually impossible to know them- an easy way to guess them is “Army Strength” divided by ”number of units” :-) noclador 11:09, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

--Kober^Talk 20:27, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Dave. Thanks for pointing out Armies that are not on the to do list. When I created the list, I checked if there is some info on the net about the armies and if there wasn't any I left these armies out. If you find some info on these Armies let me know.

• Azerbaijan: the article about the military has expanded massively: Military of Azerbaijan, but there is still 0 info on the units and structure.
• Vietnam- still zero info. The only thing I know so far: there is a "4th Corps"
• Egypt: this info is not enough Egyptian Army#Order of Battle
• Syria: even less info available than Egypt (and there will be no info, as the Syrians try to hide their strength/structure from Israel.)
• Ethiopia: not interesting- no sub-Saharan nation has a Army that is worth mentioning- except South Africa.
• Iran: soon, there won't be left anything of it, so why do a graphic???

Some of the Armies that are really importnat to do are the UK, Japan, Korea, Bulgaria, Greece and Turkey. But about all these Armies the info is sketchy at best. --noclador 15:03, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

• I agree with you that Ethiopia is indeed very different from the rest of sub-Saharan nations. Especially its long history from the Aksum Empire to keeping its independence, when all the rest of Africa was being colonized. Still this leaves us with the problem, that there is 0 info available about the Army’s organisation. Also the fighting strength is mediocre at best- driving out undisciplined Islamist zealots is a piece of cake (when they are in the mountains and resort to guerrilla tactics, which is when the fighting gets hard). Furthermore the showing of Ethiopia’s Army in the Eritrean-Ethiopian War was anything but effective.
• "Rumours" I hear from the military circles I'm in contact with are: that the strike against Iran is set to happen; that it will begin as soon as Ahmadinejad does anything stupid (more Coalition soldiers hostages, or solid proof that Iran supplies weapons to Iraqi insurgents) and that the air strikes will be crushing, brutal and 2-weeks long. The Italian Army- who sits in Hezbollah infested Southern Lebanon and on the Afghan-Iran border- has been informed to prepare itself for massive retaliation attempts by the Iranians and Hezbollah. You are right about the unhealthy inner political situation in the US- but Cheney and Bush will not be deterred by it. And I sure hope they have learned the lessons of the Iraq war- namely that you must "Klotzen, nicht Kleckern!"= "Boot'em, don't spatter'em!". --noclador 04:18, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

PS: Are you from Georgia? As it is now the graphic of the Army of Georgia is very much incomplete and a person capable of understanding Georgian would be needed to have alook a http://www.mod.gov.ge/ to see if there is any info to be found about the 4 Infantry and the Artillery Brigade of the Army- the graphic as it is nowcan be found here: Image:Land Forces of Georgia.png. if you could help, thanks in advance. --noclador 11:51, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Dave, thanks for having a look at the site of the Army of Georgia. Sorry, I didn't answer earlier, but I did not realize that you left the info on my talkpage until today. hmm,... if the SF Brigade is not under Ground Forces Command, than we should not add it to the graphic Image:Land Forces of Georgia.png, but to the yet to be done graphic "Armed Forces of Georgia", but at this point there is not enough info about the navy and air force structure. So, lets keep our eyes open and hopefully we will find more info soon :-) --noclador 13:01, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi Dave,

The article you started required sections which I added, if you don't mind I can help you with improving the article, as it is now it is quite long and detailed and will probably need some major copy editing and referencing to meet article style guidelines. If you have English language references I can help with those and if some references are only in Georgian I can help format the reference so someone wishing to check can copy the original language and use a translator program if necessary. Thanks! Awotter (talk) 06:22, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Dave hello

for some reason you keep on insisting that ISET is a private university. Why? It is part of TSU. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tchaidze (talk • contribs) 12:02, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

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) 13:42, 23 November 2015 (UTC)