Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 07:12, 30 May 2006

Please post new messages to the bottom of my talk page. I will respond here unless you request otherwise. Thank you.

Archives
July 2005 – December 2005 January 2006 – April 2006

Vandalism

Some user from 212.2.181.217 removed part on Nikola Tesla article. I've reverted it. Jakiša Tomić 15:59, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Put one of those vandalism warnings to his talk page. If he does that again, put another one, threathning to block him. If he does that for the 3rd time, drop a note here, and I'll block the guy. --Dijxtra 16:04, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Multiple Accounts

I liked what you proposed about the distinction between people who use multiple accounts and do not violate Misplaced Pages Policies and Guidelines and those who use multiple accounts for the purpose of of violate Misplaced Pages Policies and Guidelines. Too many users take the position that any use of multiple accounts is something to be persecuted. Here is an example . PoolGuy 04:16, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

A consensus of editors is behind your proposed action. The time is right to move ahead. As per the talk page discussion, I am placing the following table on the Misplaced Pages:Sock puppetry page. Please help edit it and the rest of the page to match.

Thanks, Dragon's Blood 03:53, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. You've made some great improvements to the policy. Distinctions are now clearer without reducing information about the spirit of the law. FT2 has proposed a table that clarifies things even more. A few of us are working on it at his talk page. We would appreciate your input: User_talk:FT2#Legal_category_clarification. --Dragon's Blood 16:49, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm updating the WP:SOCK page with FT2's table, so just make any changes there. --Dragon's Blood 17:14, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

RFCU

• So, shall we put this one to WP:RFCU? --Dijxtra 12:16, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Is that a message for me? I thought RFCU was last resort, no? - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 14:05, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Yes, that's a message for you. CheckUser is a last resort, but the accused states that he did not engage in sockpupperty and says he's ready for CU... so, I think we need to drop the charges or take him to CU. --Dijxtra 14:28, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
      • OK... Well, he admits it on the IP's talk page, in plain sight. But I can take him to CU. Not really sure how to, but I bet I can follow instructions... - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 20:17, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
      • Done, though I don't understand why that was necessary. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 20:31, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
        • We'll the thing is that he might be right: there is a possibility that he used that IP only once (as a dinamic IP) and that he didn't use it for sockpuppetry. Therefore, we need a CU... --Dijxtra 20:59, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

(From my talk page.) I can't speak to your being referred to WP:RFCU; that's outside my knowledge. As to your request, we've got certain procedures about CheckUser. For one, we don't like revealing IP addresses as a matter of privacy. We make an exception only in cases of egregious policy violations. Your request didn't cite such violations. If you can demonstrate such I'll naturally reconsider. Furthermore, the user in question has admitted that he and the IP are one in the same. In such open and shut cases a checkuser really isn't needed. Mackensen (talk) 23:53, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry for my formatting errors, I am relatively new to wikipedia editing. Max 15:55, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

User:Frys104 and Socks

Hi Dijxtra, I appreciate the time you took with me in regards to the case of Frys104 and possible sockpuppetry. Although you did take time to review the case, I felt the situation was not moving along quickly enough (the vandalism and sockpuppetry started back in February and continued off and on until now), and eventually asked another admin. The case is now, as far as I can tell, closed, with the other admin deciding "looks like a clear sock and fair number malicious edits". User is now blocked. I thought I'd let you know so you didn't spend any additional time on a case that's now wrapped. Thanks.--Firsfron 09:21, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Hipi Zdhripi

Nije Duja imao probleme s njim koliko ja - zaprijetio je da ce mi bombardirati kucu i pobiti roditelje. Plus to, rekao je da treba istrebiti Srbe i sve koji staju na put Albanskom Kosovu. I jeste - njegov sockpuppet je blokiran (User:Zhdripi Hipi), kao i on (User:Hipi Zhdripi). Evo jos jednog sockpuppeta: User:Kanuni, onda tu je valjda jos i User:Kurac, User:HashimLopa (koji je nazivao Albance Turcima i pitao sto oni hoce od srpskoga Kosova, a onda nastavio znas-vec-sto). Mislim da je User:Ejte najnoviji nick Hipijev. --HolyRomanEmperor 15:27, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Could you semi-protect ({{sprotected}}) my user and talk pages? Hipi Zhdripi is stalking me again... --Asterion 13:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. He is really a pain... Regards, --Asterion 13:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

No problem. But, I must inform you that protection of talk pages is done only for short periods of time. Therefore I'd like to ask you to ask me to unprotect your talk page in a week or so (I'm 100% sure I won't remember to do that by myself). What you can do is email me in a week and I'll silently unprotect the talk page. If you decide to do that, then you should remove the template from the top of your talk page right now so he doesn't notice any change when I unprotect your talk page... --Dijxtra 13:45, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

No problem. I will. I think I managed to clear things a bit with him anyway. Regards, --Asterion 17:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Question about Hipi's sockpuppets

I noticed last night he has been removing sockpuppet tags from some of the accounts he was charged with using. Is there any way these accounts could be permanently tagged and blocked? (Well, not sure if it really matters) Which ones are the usernames he was found to be using? Also, isn't User:Kurac an obvious {{usernameblock}} candidate? I have suspicions there are some new ones (throwaway accounts). As he has left me alone and did not reinstate his personal attacks on his userpage, I am not too bothered but I still find this quite disruptive. Thanks, E Asterion 07:12, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Serbs of Croatia - problem with Jacov

Hi,

I see You are one of the admins.

Well, I have the problem with user Luka Jačov, and since I saw You comunicating with him, I would kinfly ask You to bring him to senses.

On page Serbs of Croatia , I proved that only 7,000 people in Croatia on 2001 census declared them self as speakers of Serbo-Croatian, and since the same census showed that there are more than 200,000 Serbs in Croatia, I believe it's quite wrong to say that Serbs in Croatia speak serbo-croatian. Most of them reported to speak croatian and some of them speak serbian (that is proven fact, not my interpretation).

Please, help bring this issue to an end.

I see that you also list your self as speaker of serbo-croatian, but I hope that your will not put your personal political views before facts.

Regards and thanks in advance!

--Ante Perkovic 15:15, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

See, the thing is: Luka is rather hard to talk to. He wrote some nice articles and he seems to be quite an inteligent guy, but he also seems to have problems with Misplaced Pages being founded on WP:CITE. And this kind of guys are hard to talk to. I will ask him to stop the edit warring, but I don't think that will influence him. What you can do is try to use Misplaced Pages policies against him. He seems to be eager to break some of them: I notice you both broke WP:3RR on Serbs of Croatia and I notice he did some personal attacks (calling you an idiot). I will now: 1) ask him to stop removing references and attacking ad hominem, 2) report you both (it wouldn't be fair to report only him, right?) to for breaking WP:3RR (I will not block you myself since you were kind enough to talk to me, I'll leave to others to decide if you should be blocked) 3) start watching the article and protect it if you two do not stop edit warring. I know that's not what you wanted me to do, but me taking part in edit war on Serbo-Croatian language is enough edit waring for this week... --Dijxtra 15:35, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi. Ante Here. You did the right thing, I do not object to what you did. And, I will not make any changes to articles until my blockin expires.

But, I don't really understand how it is possible that I was being blocked, and JAcov, who laso broke WP:3RR, who did some personal attacks and who have the problem with Misplaced Pages being founded on WP:CITE is not blocked. That is really hard to understand.

He is blocked. See here: .

Other thing... since You said that Jacov has the problem with WP:CITE, I believe that You, as an admin, don't have that problem, so I would kindly ask You to REV Serbs of Croatia and change the article according to cited sources. I would do it myself, but I can't.

Elephantus did that for you ;-) If Luka persists in edit-waring after his block expires, I'll take further meassures. --Dijxtra 20:28, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Regards, Ante P.

172.173.1.89. Evo ti Hipijev sockpuppet - potvrdjen. Mozes li to srijedit? --HolyRomanEmperor 19:16, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Rijeseno. Obzirom da je IP, blokirao sam ga samo na 24 sata. Rado bih blockao i ostale njegove sockove, no jednostavno nemam vremena sve ih prouciti... BTW, "e" u "srediti" nije refleks glasa jat, tako da se ne reflektira u "ije" u Hrvatskom, nego osta je "e" ;-)

An appology

I owe you an appology. The Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets project just got started and I'm the only admin taking part in this project. There fore, it's all up to me to decide. And I don't want to make any hasty decissions. That's how I do things. Slowly but thoroughly. And I sometimes do it a bit to thoroughly. I mean, I don't want to make wrong decissions. I needed to persuade myself that the guy is a sock, but I might be asking to much. Now I know that I should ask for fewer evidence and that I shouldn't hesitate to block so much. Therefore, I appologise to you for taking so much of your time and I promise I'll try to not to be such a pain in the ass in the future ;-)

If it is of any comfort for you, this case has made me understand that I need another hand at this project. Therefore I'll now embark on a search for an admin who will be willing to help me and who will make sure we do not get in situations like this anymore. Sorry for the mess I caused... --Dijxtra 13:40, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Please don't apologise for being one of the few admins to actually look over the case (the case was originally skipped on every page I originally listed it). I think it's good you're thorough, so that a good user doesn't get accidentally blocked. In this case, however, a quick search thru any of the "three" users' histories would have shown many patterns of abuse (legal threats, page blankings, removals of warnings, impersonation, vandalism) to the same ten or so pages at nearly the same times, a clear sign of sockpuppetry. I'm just really glad the case has been resolved, at long last! However, this user is clearly persistant, and since there are at least three other questionable accounts that edited those pages, which I may monitor, this saga may yet not be over.

Good luck with the sockpuppet pages, and I hope you're able to find an admin to help you. There's a lot of abuse at WP, and with over a million pages on .en, we've all gotta keep a vigilant eye on abuse. Good luck! --Firsfron 21:05, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

TW, "e" u "srediti" nije refleks glasa jat, tako da se ne reflektira u "ije" u Hrvatskom, nego osta je "e" ;-)

Eh, zar nijesi cuo za Crnogorski (uvIJEk naj-najprenaglasena ijekavica)? ;) --HolyRomanEmperor 21:51, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Suspected Sockpuppets....

I was trying to fix the Martin Van Buren sockpuppet case. Being that a Checkuser was requested and was proven to have been on the same IP. So if you would close the case (However you do that) It would be appreciated! Sorry for the inconvience, Mahogany

No problem, I just sloces it ;-) --Dijxtra 22:24, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Request for Investigation

Hi, I removed your request for investigation from WP:AN since it appears to have been settled. Here's a copy if you want to archive it: I'm not sure if this is the right place, but I'll give it a shot: I'm not sure if this guy is vandalising or not. All he does is put links to external links section. Which is fine, but he puts only one, same, web site. Which is not fine, but then again, his links in fact are relevant. Sooo, I'd like some more expirienced admin to take a look at his contribs and tell me whether I should warn him not to do that and revert his work or leave the guy alone? If this is not a place to ask advice on whether something is vandalism or not, please direct me to such place... thanks, Dijxtra 22:01, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

   * This is spam. The links should be removed and the user warned. If he wants to contribute, he is better off contributing with prose, not links to his website. --ZsinjTalk 00:38, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

WP:SUSPSOCK

Sure, I'd love to help out. Looking at the current open case about Oldwindybear and Stillstudying: I personally think (s)he, Oldwindybear, is not a sock puppet of Stillstudying, but my guess is as good as anybody else's. I think, personally, that the only way to confirm whether or not Stillstudying is a sockpuppet is to finally go to CheckUser. Let me know what you think; if it's easier for you to reply here, then reply here. Thanks, Kilo-Lima| 17:54, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I won't open up a RFCU until you have contacted me beforehand and, if it goes to it, the decision of other admins. Thanks, Kilo-Lima| 11:16, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Hm, after some thinking I came to conclusion that we should probably just close this case without the CheckUser. The evidence is pretty weak and only thing User:Stillstudying did was discussing. In case of future abuse we should take those two to RfCU and se if they are the same person. But for now I think we might just drop the case. Do you agree? I mean, if we both think that he's not a sock puppet, then I think we shouldn't bother the CheckUser guys and just close it. --Dijxtra 12:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

OK, then I will just close it as inclonclusive and contact the two of them. Thanks, Kilo-Lima| 12:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

C-c-c-c

Take a look at User: C-c-c-c. See his user-boxes just for example but you can take a look at other of his "contributions". He doesn't understand warnings about personal attack and he keeps removing it constantly. Can you give him a warning as admin? Jakiša Tomić 09:00, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Noup, I can't. For 2 reasons:

1. Unfortunately, removing warning templates is not considered vandalism. Yes, I know, that is a real shame, and if you ask me, I'd block people for removing warning templates from their talk pages. But I can't since some people think you can do whatever you wish with your talk page.
2. You made a personal attack on him. And now you are asking me to warn him about personal attacks. No way. Sorry. --Dijxtra 10:11, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Of course, my personal attack after bounch of his is same as his personal attacks.

You really didn't need that ad hominem attack. The point is: if you are civil, and he isn't, then everybody will be on your side. If you're not civil, people won't look good at you. It's as simple as that.

Može se kako ubit akaunt na Wikipediji, jer bi ja to svome napravio? Jakiša Tomić 11:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

U kojem smislu ubit? Mozes zamolit admina da ti obrise user page, talk page i da te blocka indefinetly. Al, ja ti to nebi preporucio. Ukoliko te zanima moj savijet, evo ga: nemoj raditi ono sto te zivcira. Ima ljudi koji ce revertati velikosrpske vandale. Ja to recimo uopce ne radim, makar me uzasno iritiraju. Jer znam da ima ljudi koji se manje zivciraju od mene i koji ce to raditi umjesto mene. Vrlo rijetko ulazim u edit warove jer znam da kad jednom udjem u tako nesto, nema izlaska. Zato ti je moj savjet da se maknes od Balkana. I da pises o matematici, Letu 3, Toy Dollsima, o mjestu u kojem zivis, o bilo cemu zanimljivom sto nije Balkan. Da suradjujes sa singapurcima, brazilcima i juznoafrikancima na clancima u koje se nece uplest razni ultranacionalisti i zivcirat te. Wikipedija je super stvar, steta je odreci se osjecaja da si napravio nesto zbilja korisno samo zato jer neka se hrpa budala ima potrebu svadjati oko broja zrtava na Blajburgu i u Jasenovcu. Ko da ce to ista promjeniti. Nemoj trositi zivce. Ima ljudi koji imaju deblje zivce od tebe i koji ce nastaviti boriti tvoje "bitke" i ako ti odes pisati clanke o autohtonim vrstama bilja u Velebitskom podrucju. Ljudi cesto zivot shvacaju previse ozbiljno. Nemoj i ti biti medju ljudima koji rade tu gresku ;-) --Dijxtra 13:01, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

OK, Dijxtra - mislim da nijesi ovo do sada znao - uklanjanje warnings-a sa svoje stranice jest verzija vandalizma. User:Croatian_historian je mnogo puta blokiran zbog toga, a User:Ilir_pz je primio dosta upozorenja - u oba slucaja su admini vracali warnings-e i dodavali nove. Znaci, ti C-c-c-c-a mozes slobodno blokirati ako nastavi da sklanja upozorenja (ukljucujuci i tvoje upozorenje na to). Bog! --HolyRomanEmperor 18:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Smile!

HolyRomanEmperor has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk pages. Happy editing!

WP:SOCK reversion and protection

You might want to notice that your entire revision of WP:SOCK has been reverted and the page protected. --Philosophus 19:31, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Please notice, also, that the non-admins who tried to stop her were called sock puppets and banned without any evidence. --4.238.85.76 17:46, 16 May 2006 (UTC) P.S. See also my comments on AN/I.

error

You are in huge error! About Josip Broz you have a wrong point of view! Do you know how many children from Croatia Broz killed in Bleiburg?

Broz was never on Bleiburg. Nor he ordered executions. If you have sources confirming otherwise, please cite them.

If you are communist is natural our incomprehension!--Jxy 18:31, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Your lack of good faith is disturbing. I'm not a communist, but even if I was that wouldn't matter. You submit a lot of historicaly incorect data to Misplaced Pages. You provide no references. Please read WP:CITE and stick to it. Thanks. --Dijxtra 18:43, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Problem with AIDbot

Hi there. I've just been running the (usually wonderful) AIDbot, and had a problem with it. I ran it at approximately 22.30 UTC on 16 May. Four articles had "stays until" dates of 16 May, and it told me that "nomination expired 1 day(s) ago", when they were going to expire 90 minutes later. Perhaps its not using the correct time zone? Cheers, Pruneau 23:00, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that must be it, it's probably because of the timezone on my server. I'll fix it when I catch time... Thanks for the note. --Dijxtra 23:02, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I've actually found another, more serious bug. The bot failed to notice that the nomination for Željko Ražnatović had elapsed yesterday. It might be the weird letters in the name. Pruneau 18:01, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

inventions

Your historic data are inventions, not mine! Study history, you don't know history!--Jxy 00:01, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

WP:SOCK

Hi Dijxtra, I saw your apology on the talk page. Don't feel bad about it because Zephram is very good at what he does. I've been taken in at least twice by him: once when he posted a sad, romantic story about a lost love of his and I wrote to thank him for sharing it (when, of course, it was made up, as was the persona); and a second time when I blocked one of his sockpuppets only to have him engage me in e-mail correspondence, complete with what he said was his real name, all of it very convincing, so I unblocked him, and it later transpired it was him after all. :-) SlimVirgin 00:27, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Dijextra, I just came to your page because I felt you must have had a frustrating few hours fighting a battle on your own. Although I was (and am) on the "other side", I want to assure you that nobody thinks you're the problem; the problem is Zephram. Hopefully, things will be a bit calmer tomorrow. :-) AnnH ♫ 01:12, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you both. It is nice to see that although I lost my temper, you decided to drop me a kind note. I appreciate it and assure you that I have learned a lot from the episode which happened yesterday. --Dijxtra 10:09, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your note, but truly, don't worry about it. I'm sorry about the time you invested in it. Perhaps if you come back to the talk page with the proposal, we can all look at it together to make sure any Zephram-Starkisms are removed. :-) SlimVirgin 10:12, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

As above. I'm sorry Zephram wasted your time like that; he's very manipulative and often quite convincing, so don't feel bad. I'm sure there was some value in your work, and perhaps we can work to re-introduce those specific elements. Jayjg 17:22, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I do not plan reopening this discussion, but I'd like to state that Zephram didn't influence me all that much... If you read through my RfA, you'll see that I had some missunderstanding over sock puppet terminology with editors other than User:Dragon's Blood. So, he didn't have to persuade me. And he didn't persuade me, I decided to propose changes in policy on my own, because I thought that WP:SOCK needs some fixing. And I still think that WP:SOCK needs rephrasing and that the changes I proposed are excelent. And I'll propose those again, unchanged. The bit where I was wrong was:

1. not contacting people on enwiki mailing list and on WP:AN/I and informing them of my proposal (hence lack of consensus)
2. not monitoring changes to WP:SOCK (hence this sad, sad episode with Zephram rewriting the policy after I did the initial rewrite)

Both errors were result of my misconception that people who are interested in policy read the talk page of the policy and watch the policy page... Therefore, Zephram didn't manipulate me, I'm quite hard to manipulate (or at least I like to think that way), he just sneaked in unnoticed. I'm still quite sad that everybody seems to think that I was manipulated and that Zephram did a trick on me, but I'm affraid that my effort to clear that out would do much more harm than good (and further degrade my already dammaged reputation, instead of restoring it). But, oh, well, sometimes life's not fair, I learned that quite some time ago... --Dijxtra 17:53, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Problem with organised gang of serbian vandals

Hi,

I'm trying to deal with serbian vandals, but they just don't want to discuss enything. We are dealing with 2 or 3 vandals and 4 or 5 sock-puppets. Can I relly on You to help us deal with it. If You will, I'll make sure to represent You entire case.

Please, help me stop vandalism. I'm being patient with them, but endless reverting is no good to noone.

Can You help? If You don't have time, I will understand :(.

Regards, Ante Perkovic

Please, do present me with the case. I assure you that I'll try to help you. Only problem is that I'm going on a trip Friday morning and will be back on Monday. So, I'll do what I can before I leave, and will continue helping you after I return. But during the weekend I won't be able to help you. Now, please present me with your problems... --Dijxtra 09:11, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok, here it is...

Druing the last few days (week, at most), there is a much greater activity of the anti-croatian propaganda, and all of the contributors are "new" users with good understanding of wikipedia.

All of those new users exibit the same patterns of behaviour:

• The edit are limited to very small number of articles dealing with Croatia, where they trying to push some highly POV ideas
• 90% of their edits are reverts
• they don't wany to discuss their changes (reverts) on talk pages and their explanations are limited to coments visible on history listing
• their edits are full of weasell and peacock words
• they don't read other people's edits, but revert them to their last version, even if there is some new, undisputed contribution
• Some of uswrs showed quite a formidable knowledge of wikipedia rules just 24 hours after first log! (sock-puppet?)

About 1 or 2 of users of this type apear daily, so it would be reasonable to suspect that we are dealing with 2 or 3 vandals and around 10 sockpuppets. This type of activity is rissen enourmously in last weeks (sinced 12 or 13yh of May), so it must be coordinated within small group of vandals with extra spare time.

I suspect that Bormalagurski (who has the history of sock-puppeting) is in this team, or in contact with them. Ther is also possible that we are dealing with a few sepparate groups, but equaly stubborn ;).

Anyway, let's see personal profiles of those sockpuppets:

• Serpen (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - First log 14 February 2006, then almost silent until 13 May 2006. Since then, he made almost 30 edits and all of them were REV's. Only 2 non-REV edits were strange complains to Elephantus () accusing him for personal attack (unsourced, plase see links Serpen provided). Hi never discusse any of his revers on any talk page! Very stubborn in POV pishing at Minefields in Croatia, but unwilling to discuss it.
• Petrinja (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - first log 10 March 2006, then completely silent (!!!) until 14 May 2006. This user is limited to reverts. He never discuss his reverts.
• SradkaW (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - first log 26 April 2006, quite active since 10 May 2006, limited almost solely to rev's, never discuss on talk pages.
• AsianCrucky (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - first log 15 May 2006. He did some edits unrelated to Croatia, but most of edits are of type described above (see Serpen). He also never discuss anything on talk pages, but just make endless reverts. Hi showed quite a god knowledge of wiki rules, when he reported my 3RR less then 18 hours after his first edit. He learns fast, don't You think ;)? Yet another sock-puppet, I suppose.
• Maayaa (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - first log 16 February 2006. Keeps trying to push very POV things on Minefields in Croatia. Somewhat willing to talk. However, ignored recent discussion on Talk:Minefields in Croatia.
• Urvatia (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - first log 15 May 2006 - limited solely to reverts, never comments his edits.
• Nelodkan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - first log 10 March 2006, reactivated 13 May 2006 - bunch of reverts, unwilling to discus any of his changes, avoids talk pages... typical.
• WuBaja (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - first log 16 May 2006 - vandalising Battle of Vukovar

That would be it regarding the worst of the vandals and their sock-puppets. As You can see, ther campaign started around 13th of May (4 days ago), and they keep popping out daily. So, this must be either coordinated, or we are dealnig wit bunch of sockpuppets (more propable).

There are some more in my list, but their vandalism is ussualy limited to 1 or 2 articles, so I don't want to bother you (yet).

The list of pages being vandalised is very long:

• Aloysius Cardinal Stepinac
• Ban Jelačić Square
• Battle of Vukovar
• Croatian Spring
• Čapljina
• Dalmatia
• Danke Deutschland (song)
• Knin
• Milan Nedić
• Minefields in Croatia
• Nedić's Serbia
• Rudjer Boscovich
• Serbophobia
• Vladimir Žerjavić

As You can see in talk pages of these attacked pages, we (me, Elephatnus, Zmaj, FirstLine, Mir Harven...) wasted quite a lot time trying to discuss subjects, but other side is practicaly ignoiring us. I believe their only purpoise here is to spread dirty lies about Croatia. We really need attention of an admin, be it You or someone else. The laest think an admin can do is to analyse their contribution and warn them that revs and changes must be discussed, and not endlesly repeated without nay explanation.

We need to get rid of these vandals, so we can continue to write articles and contibute to wikipedia in ussual way. Bunch of frustrated serbian teenage vandals who avoids any kinf of discussion is certainly not the most appreciated type od users here. I hope.

I thing it would be very bad for wikipedia if this teenage gang succeds in proving that stubborn reverting and POV pushing works if You just mennage to gather enough sick people who will follow you.

There is 2 more (or just one, if the other is sock-puppet) users trying to hide serbian crimes from WW2):

• Respos (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - first log 14 May 2006, works on Nedić's Serbia (which he tried to hide with unrelated redirect) and ZBOR, where
• IoSat (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - first log 16 May 2006, propably the same person as user:Respos. Just compare the contributions!

Thanks for your time!! :) --Ante Perkovic 11:32, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Just went thorught the things you noted, and I must agree we have a problem here. If you can wait until Monday (I'm leaving tommorrow morning and I have to go to sleep now), please do, and then you and I can present this problem to WP:AN and ask what to do. If you can't wait, you can do it yourself... your call... I'm sorry for being so slow, but the trip I'm taking tommorrow needed some preparation so I don't have any free time on my hands. Sorry for that. --Dijxtra 22:09, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

In the meantime, I'm trying to deal with this through civilised discussion. I don't expect to solve all the problems, but I hope to decreas the amont of job You or some admin will have to do. Some of these people seams willing to talk, after cooling their heads :). I was about to propose that You leave this issue to me until at least monday. Have a nice weekend :)! --Ante Perkovic 05:24, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh, by the way, some of these users (that I believe to be sock-puppets) stoped their activities after I made this detailed analisys and not even one new "user" popped out. I like to believe that i made this happen :)). --Ante Perkovic 05:27, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

But, just for the short time. I did some research and found more than 30 potetnial sock-puppets, most of them active just that particular day. So, this avalanche of anti-croatian sock-puppets (or individual vandals, whatever) continues...

On the other side, we managed to find a compromise on small number of pages, but many pages are still attacked on daily bases.

Ante Perkovic 11:10, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Socks

Hey man, I don't really have much time right now. I've sock'd the puppets user page. I will be keeping an eye on that to make sure he does not remove it. Should the edit warring get more out of hand (particularly if its clear that he is using the system to violate the 3RR or something) I will take it to RfCU. I have readded the disputed tag. The article could still do with a lot of cleanup though, "bestial" isn't particularly encyclopaedic writing ;) - FrancisTyers 13:55, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Just to add to this, he is still going at it on various pages adding the exact same information. I have warned him twice on his user page, but he is still not willing to discuss anything. I have contacted another moderator and got the initial page locked down, but the user simply adds the same info on the other pages. I really think he has been given ample warnings about this, and should be banned (either permanently or for a cooling off period). Thanks --Zivan56 19:58, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Wrap around issue

Hi Dijxtra,

After adding more information on the Croatian coat of arms page, I notice that now some of the text is not wrapping around & is behind the NDH CoA picture. I do not know how to fix this. Can you offer any advice?

Thanks in advance, croatian_quoll 02:34, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

How about now? --Dijxtra 08:22, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Wikiproject Former Yugoslavia

Hey Nikola,

I was just wondering if you were willing to put some time and effort into reviving our WikiProject. It needs some serious CPR. I suspect revising our article improvement drive system could help, and also trying to engage people in some interesting topics which are easy to research, but not covered adequately, would be a good new start. E.g. we did a great job on Ante Marković. Cheers --dcabrilo 05:12, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

sock-puppet

Hi,

Please chack if these two are the same nad block them both, if needed:

• Rockiee21 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Rockie21 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Regards, --Ante Perkovic 11:00, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Pantherarosa

Hi, this user has been making numerous personal attacks against me. The situation started with Pantherarosa making attacks on another user, to which they brought it to the attention of WP:PAIN. Pantherarosa began attacking me when I asked him/her to not remove warnings from his/her talk page. However the admin who looked at the case pretty much tossed it out the window because he felt I wasn't nice enough when asking Pantherarosa to stop attacking users. The situation has continued to escalate, so I'd like another admin to take a look at it given the fact that the admin's conduct was inappropriate to the extent that I've brought the matter to WP:AN/I. The user has already created sockpuppets (one of which has been indef banned) and has made personal attacks on WP:AN/I as well. Given the persistance of this user and the number of blatant attacks after being warned, I ask that a stronger ban than what a minor personal attacker would receive, as I think it's fairly safe to assume Pantherarosa will continue if (s)he receives just a slap on the wrist.

The following are the diffs of personal attacks made by Pantherarosa: edit summary blatant attack

Paul Cyr 20:23, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I see you reported the guy to WP:AN/I and that there's a discussion going on there. And that the guy is making personal attacks even there. Therefore, he will surely be blocked, but I don't think it'd be OK to block him now since his case is currently discussed (if I block him, he won't be able to discuss). But, I'm quite sure he'll get blocked now that the case is on WP:AN/I... --Dijxtra 20:34, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

OK, I'm just starting to get concerned because the discussion has been going on for days without admin input on my original complain. Paul Cyr 20:42, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Tributaries of Danube

Hi! I wouldn't mind the template getting deleted, it is indeed quite uselss and it's very hard to determine what's a major tributary and what is not. The list+category seems like a better idea, but I just added them although I knew for the discussion, just to make the template more comprehensive for the time it survives :) Todor Bozhinov  → 10:38, 29 May 2006 (UTC)