Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 05:08, 1 February 2008

Archives:

• 1 (- Jan 2008)

Ban warning

I see you have been edit-warring extensively on Turks in Bulgaria (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), together with others. Under the terms of Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Macedonia, I am hereby putting you on notice that you may be placed under a revert parole (1 rv per week) or similar restrictions if this edit-warring continues.

I also notice that you have done nothing to clean up your image uploads, despite numerous requests. You are therefore banned from any further image uploads until you can demonstrate a better understanding of our copyright policies. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:32, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, about those images marked as "alcoron", I asked you back in October and got no response. The first thing to do would be to provide the exact link to the site (if possible, to each original image), so we can check if they are indeed free. I'd also suggest you provide more info for the "Skylitzes" ones. I mean, I personally happen to know what the Madrid Skylitzes is, but others won't. I suggest for those you could say:

==Summary==
Image from the ], depicting ...
]

Additionally providing a web source would still be good though. I just made that category now, by the way. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:43, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Then didn't know anything about uploading and I have seen that when Todor Bozhinov uploads an image, he usually puts "martyr" as a sign so I thought I can proceed that way and I put "alcoron". I will try to review my images but currently I am sick and I have exams... Thanks for showing me how should I proceed when uploading images. Best, --Gligan (talk) 11:14, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Can you just give me the link to that "alcoron" site or whatever it is? Because now the images are tagged, they are likely to get deleted in a week from now if nothing is done about them. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:44, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

But that is not a site, just a sign that I have uploaded them. However, I will try to find the site and will put it in your talk page. --Gligan (talk) 15:59, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see. That's bad, of course. That guy Nikola Gruev's site has nice images, but he says that they are all not for commercial re-use (). So, unfortunately, we cannot use them. This is bad news, because Todor has apparently uploaded quite a number of them too. We'll have to delete the lot, unless you could contact Gruev and convince him to license them under cc-by-sa or GFDL.

Please note that I tagged quite a number more of your images besides the two that have the twinkle warning on your talk page, please check my contributions from this morning.

As for the page protection, it was obviously The Wrong Version (TM), as always. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:43, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that's a mistake many people make. We are not a commercial site, but our content must be free for others, including commercial sites, to re-use.

(copied from User talk:TodorBozhinov:) :P.S. In fact, I now see the page on bg-wiki that is linked from {{NGruev}} bg:Уикипедия:Разрешения за ползване на материали/Никола Груев. That page is confusing: It states there that he licensed them under GFDL, but only for use on Misplaced Pages. That's a contradiction in terms. If it's for Misplaced Pages only, it isn't the GFDL. I can't read the original mail by him that is included in that page, can you translate? It seems that when he wrote it he may not have been aware what the GFDL actually said. This looks like one unfortunate mess to clean up. :-( Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:56, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, reading the English wording on that page again, maybe I was a bit quick there. It says "other pictures for another purpose". Could you please clarify for me what the Bulgarian is saying, is Gruev really explicit about it that he's aware that once an image is on Misplaced Pages, it can be re-used anywhere else? Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:08, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay, Laveol explained it for me. Seems the Gruev stuff is okay after all. I'll add the tags to those airport images. Please be so kind and go through your other upload logs at your earliest convenience and add the remaining sources. I've added some info to the Skylitzes ones (I love those!); in that case the pd-art status is of course unproblematic. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:23, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay, good luck! And thanks for the translations. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:34, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Archiving

You can read about ways of archiving your talkpage here or you can try automatic archiving from Werdnabot like I do. Cheers. --Laveol 07:52, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

As for images I guess you mean one of those sites. If this is the case you have forgotten to put the relevant tags in. Like {{NGruev}} or {{cc-by-2.5}} or {{cc-by-sa-1.0}} with the proper attributes. --Laveol 08:00, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

When you click on {{cc-by-2.5}} and {{cc-by-sa-1.0}} you'll notice that there is a text explaining that you should include attribution details like this {{cc-by-sa-1.0}}. What you need to add there is the exact spot where you have taken the images from so that the original author of the work is mentioned. --Laveol 08:14, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I've archived the page for you. (Copy-and-paste method). Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:48, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

За да ти се архивира страницата автоматично, сложи следния код най-отгоре:

{{AutoArchivingNotice|age=30|target=./Archive {{CURRENTMONTHABBREV}} {{CURRENTYEAR}}|dounreplied=yes|index=./Archive index|bot=Werdnabot|botlink=User:Werdnabot/Archiver/Howto}}<!-- BEGIN WERDNABOT ARCHIVAL CODE --><!-- This page is automatically archived by Werdnabot-->{{User:Werdnabot/Archiver/Linkhere}} <!--This is an empty template, but transcluding it counts as a link, meaning Werdnabot is directed to this page - DO NOT SUBST IT --><!--Werdnabot-Archive Age-30 DoUnreplied-Yes Target-User talk:Lantonov/Archive {{CURRENTMONTHABBREV}} {{CURRENTYEAR}}--><!--werdnabot-index User talk:Lantonov/Archive index--><!--END WERDNABOT ARCHIVAL CODE-->

(без nowiki границите). Или пък вземи по-простия template от Werdnabot, както предлага Лавеол. age=30 са периода (в дни) на който искаш да се архивира.Lantonov (talk) 09:01, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you all for the help : ) --Gligan (talk) 11:14, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Vidin

Could you please explain this change? --Olahus (talk) 13:06, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Could you please show me the link to the discussion with User:Mentatus, so I can read it? --Olahus (talk) 14:36, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

Stop vandalising since the result of the poll is against your vandalisation. Anton Tudor (talk) 17:48, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

January 2008

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Vidin. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. LightAnkhC|MSG 18:39, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Image

Sure thing! I've restored it and given you some extra time to source it. east.718 at 19:09, January 22, 2008

Vidin

The page Vidin has been protected from editing due to edit warring. Please discuss changes on the talk page; in the future, please consider the dispute resolution process. Note that further edit warring or three revert rule violations may be met with a block.

If you have questions or concerns, I would be happy to answer to them. - Revolving Bugbear 19:36, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes I agree, but my opponent only reverted without discussion and I was annoyed. I know you are right. --Gligan (talk) 19:38, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Sometimes the editing gets tough. I would suggest trying to find some common ground to work from, and starting there. There are also a great many editors who will be happy to assist the situation. (I generally am available for mediation but I am currently already involved in multiple cases.) The important thing is to keep your head about you and remember that it's no big deal.

Like I said, if I can do something for you, let me know. I'm here to help. - Revolving Bugbear 20:07, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

All right, I will keep it in mind and will ask you for help in such cases, thank you : ) --Gligan (talk) 20:54, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I checked out the article Rousse and, I have to say, this is not vandalism; it is a content dispute. Have you considered informal mediation? - Revolving Bugbear 17:00, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

He is obviously not here now but still, please keep an eye on that article and tell me whether I shall revert possible future vandalism myself or I shall wait for you or someone else to do that. Of course I can start discussion on that matter on Talk:Ruse. --Gligan (talk) 17:06, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I will keep an eye on the article. However, like I said, in my opinon this is not vandalism, it is a content dispute. Continued reversion would be inappropriate. I strongly suggest dispute resolution. - Revolving Bugbear 17:09, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Battle of Serres

I can see that I am not the only one complaining about your aggressive editing that introduce non-neutral points of view. To respond to your questions: in battles between nations, the idea of "betrayal" is always questionable. Please cite relevant work before using this work. Feel free to reword the "liberated" word in other places as well. I think that the idea of "liberating" an area will always be subjective, given that some other controlling power has "lost the area". I am fine using the word "seized / conquested" instead of "liberated". Ipeirotis (talk) 19:50, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I did not understand that you are referring to Bulgarian strongholds. The article does not convey this impression. I would recommend to write in smaller sentences and avoid the use of pronouns. The use of "their strongholds and bases" was ambiguous. "Their" could refer both to Byzantines and Bulgarians. Also, refrain from reverting to a previous edition. I have made other changes to the article that are legitimate and are fixing typos, and you have reverted them. Ipeirotis (talk) 23:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

blocked

CfD nomination of Category:Bulgars

Category:Bulgars, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. –-Latebird (talk) 23:21, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Medieval Bulgaria

I saw that you were interested for medieval Bulgaria. Do you know some online book about this subject? --Vojvodaen (talk) 17:07, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok. I'am studying history in Belgrade so I can find some books on bulgarian (I understand a little). Is Zlatarski history of medieval Bulgaria still good book on this subject.--Vojvodaen (talk) 18:00, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Zlatarski is always relevant. --Laveol 18:14, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I am working on the article Vasil Zlatarski. You might want to look at it. It is still unfinished and the text is very raw at the moment but what follows is a critical discussion of all volumes of his history. Lantonov (talk) 07:29, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks.--Vojvodaen (talk) 09:54, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Turks in Bulgaria

I note that you reverted a section of the article without discussion: I also note that you were warned that you could be placed on parole concerning edit-warring on the same subject. I declined a vandalism report on the deletion, since it's not vandalism but a content dispute. Please do not simply delete content without discussion, or use the terms of the proposed parole to carry on a slow-motion edit war. Acroterion _(talk) 19:52, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Gligan is a repeat offender. As soon as his ban ended he went ahead and replaced the entire Ottoman rule section in Bulgaria (which was the original cause for his banishment.) Nostradamus1 (talk) 02:14, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Would you finally cut it with the false accusations and personal attacks. Did you even see what Gligan tried to do on the article. And yes, it was an admin that helped him work it out. --Laveol 10:58, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I already asked you to stop acting as if you were Gligan's representative. An emerging pattern is that you come to the defense of this user in a number of different articles which makes me suspect the two user accounts might be somehow related. Gligan was not even aware that he was banned from uploading images before. I also read that some user accounts originating in Bulgaria were determined to operate on a 24 hour basis out of IP adresses out of Bulgaria. I am getting suspicious. Is it a coincidence that you always come to the defense of this user? He could certainly speak for himself.--Nostradamus1 (talk) 05:08, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 14! TomStar81 (Talk) 04:37, 1 February 2008 (UTC)