Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 12:56, 25 June 2012

WikiThanks

Thanks for your recent contributions! 66.87.0.137 (talk) 13:56, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

DRN-notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Talk:Serbia under German occupation, Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet_investigations/DIREKTOR/Archive#25_March_2012". Thank you. --Peacemaker67 (talk) 12:59, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Invitation

http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Banate_of_Severin Dobitocilor (talk) 08:33, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 4

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Bačka Oblast (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Darda

Syrmia Oblast (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Irig

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:50, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Re: Revert warring in Serbia under German occupation

I suggest you look into Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution. I haven't had time to devote to this myself, but there should be plenty of other editors :) --Joy (talk) 08:07, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

An award for you

Golden Wiki Award You are among the top 5% of most active Wikipedians this past month! 66.87.2.33 (talk) 23:07, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Template

Ispravio sa u ta tri clanka. Boli je nekih polja viska. -- Bojan  Talk  05:30, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Nisam ja, u stvari jesam. Ulogovao sam bota preko svog naloga, a on je ispravljao na hiljade clanaka, nisam stigao sve da ispregledam. -- Bojan  Talk  05:31, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Radio sam to posto sam primetio da mnogi clanci o Srbiji i Bosni imaju samo da je to mesto u Srbiji ili u Bosni u toj i toj opstini i postojao je dole sablon za koordinate. Takav standradiyovan tekst sam iskoristio da dodam sablon i da on iscrtava mapu gde se to selo nalayi. Negde sam dodavao i cirilicne nazive (ne znam iz kog rayloga nije uspelo u svim mestima), kao i medjuwiki veze (jer ih uopste nisu imali), npr Žunjeviće ili sam iskoristi to sto postoji slika na pocetku clanka, npr Surduk. Jos nisam zavrsio, cekam da AnomeBot doda korrdinate u sve clanke gde fali pa da ponovo krenem. Treba jos da se za sela u Vojvodini doda da izmedju okruga i drzave postoji jos i pokrajina. Sve cu to da uradim, samo malo da se odmorim od toga. -- Bojan  Talk  05:44, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Btw, I wrote article Salaš u Malom Ritu, and discovered that Ja sm rođen tamo na salašu is not folk song. It was written by Miomir Petrović and Dragan Mirković (student and his comrade in the show). Branko Bauer met them in Niš and hired them for the show. -- Bojan  Talk  05:58, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Moguovo za Opstinegradove, ovo za statisticke regione mi nije jasno. Mislim da ti statisticki regioni nisu nista specijalno ida i se pridaje suvisan znacaj. Samo sad imam neke privatne probleme, vikipedija mije na poslednjemmestu. Ako moze ovo da saceka do maja recimo? -- Bojan  Talk  19:47, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

1. ovo sam pokusavao, negde sam uspeo, negde nisam, videcu jos da pokusam ugrabiti
2. ne svidja mi se da mesam administrativne i statisticke regione, izazvace zabunu. Izjednacavaju se Vojvodina kao pokrajina, koja stvarno ima samoupravu i Istocna i juzna Srbija koja postoji samo u statistickom zavodu.
3. isto
4. pokusacu
5. ovo mogu sigurno
6. pokusacu, ovo sve zavisi koliko bude uspesna tacka 4 -- Bojan  Talk  06:45, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Ili i Province Vojvodina i Region Vojvodina? -- Bojan  Talk  06:59, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Mislio sam ovako -- Bojan  Talk  07:37, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Poenta je da statisticki nivoi nisu administrativni. To sto ih nalazis na sajtu statistickog zavoda je logicno, jer oni postoje prvenstveno za potrebe statistickog zavoda. Ja sam i dlje za onako kako sam predlozio, da Vojvodinu pisemo dvaputa, dapored pokrajina stoji i zastava Vojvodine, a pored vojvodine kao statisticke oblasti da ne stoji nikakva zastava, -- Bojan  Talk  11:52, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Sad sam se setio da postoji i region Beograd koji odgovara Beogradskom okrugu. Ako pisem razdvojeno statisticke oblasti od drugih administrativnih regija, Province, Region i District. -- Bojan  Talk  12:09, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Ajde da pitamo za trece misljenje. -- Bojan  Talk  08:20, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Dunno. Folks from Wiki project Serbia or somebody who had showed interested in this before. -- Bojan  Talk  06:33, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Hm, Duja? -- Bojan  Talk  20:06, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Not really, but I will do in in that way nevertheless. Later we can reach compromise for Vojvodina and Belgrade. -- Bojan  Talk  02:29, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 11

Hi. When you recently edited Banat of Temeswar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Principality of Transylvania (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:10, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

English

Please use English per WP:SPEAKENGLISH. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:23, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

where exactly? PANONIAN 18:24, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

On your own Talk page and, for example, here.--Bbb23 (talk) 09:28, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, WP:SPEAKENGLISH says that "it is preferred" that I use English, not that I am obligated to do that. Anyway, I only had private conversation and small disagreement with colleague from sr Misplaced Pages about exact interpretation of Serbian territorial organization law. If you think that this subject is interesting to you, the problem is whether Vojvodina should be presented in two lines or in a single line in infoboxes since it is an autonomous province and also an statistical region. By my opinion, two things are same, i.e. Vojvodina is "an statistical region which have status of autonomous province" and therefore, infobox should have a single line named "Province / Region" for Vojvodina, while User:BokicaK claims that two things are not same and that we should have two separate lines - one for province and another one for statistical region. So, Bbb23, if you think that you can help in this disagreement, you are free to do so. PANONIAN 04:30, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Guidelines are meant to be followed unless there is an overriding reason not to (see WP:PG). I don't see that you have any good reason not to write in English per the guideline.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:15, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 18

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Kingdom of Syrmia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Soli and Usora

Banate of Belgrade (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Banate

Banatski Despotovac (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Habsburg Kingdom of Hungary

Bački Jarak (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Habsburg Kingdom of Hungary

Srpski Krstur (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Habsburg Kingdom of Hungary

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:27, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Category:Regions of Azawad

Category:Regions of Azawad, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. 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. --RJFF (talk) 10:49, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Category:History of Albania during Ottoman administration

Category:History of Albania during Ottoman administration, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. 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. Pichpich (talk) 12:54, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 25

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Temerin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Pest, Tolna and Habsburg Kingdom of Hungary

Nova Pazova (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Palatinate and Habsburg Kingdom of Hungary

Banatska Topola (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Habsburg Kingdom of Hungary

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:13, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

April 2012

Your recent editing history at Serbia (Territory of the German Military Commander) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Tiptoety 17:46, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

1RR at Serbia (Territory of the German Military Commander)

Per the discretionary sanctions authorized in the Digwuren case, this article is subject to 1RR. Reverting more than one time in a 24-hour period may result in a block or a ban from this article and its talk page. All reverts should be discussed on the talk page. This is a bright line, not an entitlement, and reverting exactly once per day is considered disruption, and users doing so are subject to being blocked. Please see this notice about recent edit warring. Editors wishing to make controversial edits are strongly advised to discuss them first. Cheers, Tiptoety 01:26, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

under construction template over at Serbia (Territory of the German Military Commander)

G'day again, PANONIAN. Can you give us a clue as to what exactly you are reconstructing or expanding at this article? Thanks. Peacemaker67 (talk) 07:06, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps you can check history of my edits? I also planned some other expansion. Anyway, I think that these personal tags are stupid idea, so you are free to remove tag that I posted. But, you should also remove the one that you posted - you can expand article without that tag, right? PANONIAN 10:24, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Thanks! Comparativist1 (talk) 19:36, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Accusation of stalking

I hereby ask you to delete from the discussion of my user page your completely unfounded accusation, which constitutes as far as I am concerned a personal attack. --FocalPoint (talk) 19:06, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

I clearly disagree with your one-sided decision to change all categories of "Ottoman-areas" to "History of areas during Ottoman administration". I have proved that there are several references to "Ottoman-areas" and therefore, I am reverting your edits. This includes Ottoman Hungary as well all your other edits in the Category:History of the Ottoman Empire by country. As far as the Serbia (Territory of the German Military Commander), I have not edited the article at all and I have participated in the discussion, without taking sides. If you believe that accusation of stalking is a tool to stop other editors from participating in editing Misplaced Pages articles, I must inform you that this is not correct, it looks rather an attempt to abuse Misplaced Pages policy. As for the offer not to change non-Central European countries related articles, I am very sorry to hear this and I will not participate in any sort of such "deal". It is only a matter of references, not preferences. I am asking you to discuss the issue in Category talk:History of the Ottoman Empire by country. I am asking you again to remove the accusation of stalking, which I consider to be a personal attack. --FocalPoint (talk) 20:18, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

WP:AE

This a notification to inform you that an WP:AE discussion related to you is taking place. -- ◅PRODUCER _(TALK) 09:18, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

PANONIAN, please make comments in your own section which is called 'Statement by PANONIAN'. AE is not a good place for threaded discussion. It is hard to get a clear view of your thinking if you scatter things everywhere, including the admin section. To address other people you can include in your comment @User:Smith: 'My reply to Smith is..' if you want. EdJohnston (talk) 17:27, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

OK. PANONIAN 17:34, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for yor e-mail Panonian. There's no need to e-mail me; you could have approached me on my talk page. The two points you raise are, honestly, very minor differences of interpretation - NOT MATTERS FOR REPEATED EDIT WARRING. This is why I believe that Director's conduct in the few days we've recently been in contact has been *much* better than yours, and why I agree with User:Blade of the Northern Lights that you do not sufficiently hold a WP:Neutral Point of View to edit any Serbia-related articles. Yes, Director's conduct has been bad as well, and yes, he has a repeated block log record as well. But in the time period under discussion, your conduct - especially accusing an Australian editor of being a sockpuppet of a user halfway around the world from him - is, honestly, far worse.

Look, let's do it this way. I would STRONGLY advise you to avoid, COMPLETELY, editing ANY Serbia-related articles for at least two months. That would be with or without any formal sanctions on you - it would be evidence of good faith. Meanwhile, if you wish, I will find an appropriate noticeboard for the two issues you've raised with me, invite, at least, the four previous users who were involved in the last discussion (Producer, Director, Peacemaker67, and myself, possibly others), say explicitly that I'm raising a point you're concerned about, and guide or try to guide the issue to a resolution. If you like this idea, while this is underway, MAINTAIN SOME SELF-CONTROL, and DO NOT COMMENT - I'm quite capable of arguing your point of view to reasonable limits.

PLEASE CONSIDER STRONGLY not editing ANY Serbia-related articles for some time. Kind regards Buckshot06 (talk) 20:55, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

OK, I've just read the final result of the AE discussion. Do not edit any Serbia-related articles from now on, or I will be obligated to block you. However, if you wish me to raise the two issues you raised with me by e-mail, please say so here and I will do so. Cheers and best wishes Buckshot06 (talk) 21:58, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

I just want to make 100% clear you know the scope of this ban; if you have any questions about it at all, let me know and I'll respond as quickly as possible. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 02:11, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

OK, you're allowed to focus on Serbian geography and demographics, as long as they're in modern times; i.e. adding the most recent population for a town or region or adding details about a major river or forest. Politicians from the last 20 years are also fair game. I hope that clarifies things; if you have any other questions, or a question about a specific edit if you're not sure, leave me a message. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 10:21, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edits to ANI and AN3

Given that you were just sanctioned under ARBMAC, I'd think you'd want to steer clear of anything that could potentially be construed as a violation. I'm not going to block you this time, but if you continue at either venue or do so in the future I will. So consider this your warning. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 23:13, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

OK. Thank you. PANONIAN 07:47, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

DR.Márki Sándor

http://en.wikipedia.org/File:Gesta_hungarorum_map.jpg

The map was mdepicted in the Révay encyclopedia (a Hungarian Encyclopedia) http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/186603/encyclopaedia/31993/Encyclopaedias-and-politics The map was created by Dr.Márki Sándor , who depicted the imagination of Gesta Hungarorum. However Dr.Márki personally as a historian denied the existence of Vlachs (Romanians) in Transylvania and Present-day Romania before the 13th century. Dr. Marki also noted that opinion on the page of the Encyclopedia where your map is located. Therefore your caption is misleading.

Panonian, you are invited!

You're invited to be a part of Misplaced Pages:WikiProject University of Belgrade, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to the University of Belgrade. To accept this invitation, click here! Articles related to other universities in Belgrade, Serbia and Southeast Europe may be discussed as well. This helps share information and foster knowledge about higher education in the region.

Novi Sad

Tvoje podatke za stanovnistvo Novog Sada su pogresne. Procitaj jois jednom tvoj link pa ces videti da je preko 300.000 Nado158 (talk) 15:25, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

A kakva je razlika izmedju ukupno popisana lica i ukupno broj stanovnika? Sto je razlika tolko velika i de su ti ljudi? --Nado158 (talk) 15:55, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Uredu, upravu si. Pozdrav :) --Nado158 (talk) 20:07, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Re: Croats of Vojvodina

Isn't it obvious? Discuss it on the talk page. Please don't make a habit of asking me as if you need some deus ex machina administrator intervention every time there's an issue, first use the fine talk pages and everything will be fine :) --Joy (talk) 14:11, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Josif Rajacic.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Josif Rajacic.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:01, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Može, M8R-ul9fhu@mailinator.com, što si iransku zastavu postavio na userpageu bog te tvoj.. --Zoupan 06:48, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Hungarian and German names for Slovak cities

Please attempt to get a consensus somewhere before sweepingly removing the German and Hungarian names from all Slovak city articles. I can't agree that they're "irrelevant" since they were commonly used in English in the past, have a read of the Treaty of Trianon, for example. Looking at the recent edit history it might be a good idea to do this on Talk:Bratislava - filelakeshoe 20:16, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

This is why sowing the wind (and reaping the whirlwind) is NOT a good idea....

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. -- CoolKoon (talk) 18:39, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

A comment to your "friendly advice" from ANI

your edits are obviously POV and there are obviously other people who do not agree with such edits and due to that, I am sure that such people will revert or delete your edits as soon as they get chance. - Yes, I'm aware of that, and that's why I make sure to source ALL the statements I add to any of the articles properly.
So, the only way in which you can keep your POV here would be to fight over it for many years, but even that would not be guarantee of success - Well, sometimes it DOES feel like it, exactly because of all the nationalist POV pushers out there who (like you said) strive to remove content I've added on sight. And that's the problem: they don't want to CHANGE it, only to remove it. This is why most of the editors who've done this have "vanished" throughout the years yet I'm still here.
just imagine that in the near future Slovak users ensure numerical superiority in Misplaced Pages. Where your POV would be then? In Recycle Bin, of course. - Now I REALLY doubt this. There aren't nearly enough Slovak editors for the Slovak Misplaced Pages alone (hinted by the sorry state it's in) so it's even less likely that there'd be a massive influx of Slovak editors to the EN WP. And even in an unlikely situation that Slovak editors (with a keen interest in history topics) would come by the dozens, they have many things in common with you: they're immune to reason, love to replace academic/solid sources that oppose their ideology with fringe theory sites meant to promote patent nonsense (and which don't come even close to being reliable sources) and become rather rude when one starts to question their motives/disagrees with them. Thus these editors would sooner or later get blocked themselves even without my assistance (take User:Juro for instance: first he's been indefed on EN WP by the help of others, then went to DE WP -which isn't edited by the Hungarian editors from here-, where he's been subsequently blocked too). So the odds are strongly against the nationalists, whether you like that or not.
You do not have to worry about me in "your owned article" anymore since I certainly have something better to do in my life - Well, you've been topic banned from Serbian history articles, thus I won't be surprised to see you appear at other Hungarian history-related articles too.

you also wasting your time in Misplaced Pages in general: - I have to disappoint you regarding the prospect of disseminating Pan-Slavist nationalist lies too: they've been spread for too long and their crimes went silent and unnoticed for too long. Various Slavic (mostly Slovak and Serbian) propaganda materials about the history of Hungary have been circulated across the globe for too long without the remote possibility of offering at least a NPOV let alone a counteropinion. Fortunately all the cruelties have been well-documented (and many of them well-researched), so the stories will hopefully start to live a life of their own. And when that happens, no amount of counter-propaganda will be able to stop it, because they can't stand a chance against truth (not "perceived" truth which's basically lies disseminated as truth, but a well-documented and properly sourced truth). -- CoolKoon (talk) 12:34, 25 June 2012 (UTC)