Misplaced Pages

Thank you for your contributions, you seem to be off to a good start. Hopefully you will soon join the vast army of Wikipediholics! If you need help on how to title new articles see the naming conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the manual of style. For general questions goto Misplaced Pages:Help or the FAQ, if you can't find your answer there check the Village Pump (for Misplaced Pages related questions) or the Reference Desk (for general questions)! There's still more help at the Tutorial and Policy Library. Plus, don't forget to visit the Community Portal. If you have any more questions after that, feel free to ask me directly on my user talk page.

Additional tips

Here's some extra tips to help you get around in the 'pedia!

• For Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines see The Five Pillars of Misplaced Pages and What Misplaced Pages is not.
• Find everything in the Directory.
• If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.
• Introduce yourself at the new user log.
• If you're bored and want to find something to do, try the Random page button in the sidebar, or check out the Open Task message in the Community Portal.
• If you have edits from before creating an account try this.
• To Upload Images with the correct Copyright tags.
• Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~), this will automatically produce your name and the date.

Be Bold!!

You can find me at my user page or talk page for any questions. Happy editing, and we'll see ya 'round.

Successful RfA

Bratislava

thanks for the contribs/edits in twin towns of Bratislava. dusoft 12:16, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Great Moravia

I have finally looked at the Nitra issue. Of course, you are right: the documents only mention the bishopric of Nitra, the "physical" seat of the archbishopric, at least in 880, was the town of Morava (i.e. probably Mikulčice). This is a nice example of the damage that a nationalist vandal (Knieza, because that has been his addition) can cause to the wikipedia - he constantly repeated "Nitra-Nitra...", and I have unwillingly "adopted" his wrong statement into my brain. Juro 03:42, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

L of S

Finaly someone removed all those nonsense long desriptions. Good job. Thanks. (Although Andy Warhol still remained :) ) Jurohi 21:06, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi there! Sorry for taking a while to answer. I haven't check SK stuff for a while, so it took me a bit to get back :) I understand very well your feelings when having to deal with these 'authors'. Tipicaly they are people unable to write an article, so they realize themselves this way. I also lost several hours trying to reason with such folks, but it is realy tiring and frustrating to spent more time arguing than writting something usefull. (You could check the last 2: Dezo Hoffmann +talk and my talk page, just above your lines...) Anyway, this IP guy is not worse our time. He clearly presented his level of education, especialy with the last frases about bryndza. The one refering to Bratislava as Poszony in 2006, does not deserve any serious consideration. I didn't comment on LoS talk page, since I wanted to avoid starting|continuing that useless discussion. However I will watch more carefuly and you will have all my support if needed. I admire your patience and calm, that alowed you to maintain such a polite style :) Good luck. Jurohi 04:32, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi body. Don't worry, I am checking quite often and I will. I have seen funny arpad's menace. The guy did 3 edits... Pretty arrogant. I already wrote you my opinion regarding 81.ip. Trying to reason with this people is just a waste of time. Just rv. Cya Jurohi 13:46, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Hradisko

I have noticed that you translate "hradisko" with "hill fort" (e.g. in the Great Moravia article). That is a wrong translation, because a "hillfort" is at best a subtype of a hradisko. The word is difficult to translate, but the best translation is "fortified settlement" or "castle mound", but the former is better. Juro 23:17, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

The word "hill fort" is used in English summaries of several Slovak books and articles about Great Moravia (for example in Štefanovičová, Tatiana (1989). Osudy starých Slovanov, Bratislava: Osveta.). Although the hill fort is a subtype of "hradisko", as you pointed out, most hradiska can be described as medieval hill forts because of their dimensions, purpose, and architecture. Sometimes, Slavic hradiska even incorporated fortifications of older prehistoric hill forts (e.g. in Devin Castle). Unfortunately, there is no article about hradisko and the expression "fortified settlement" is too general and vague. Therefore I use the word hill fort as the closest substitute for hradisko whenever the actual hradisko was a hill fort. Of course, few settlements (e.g. Mikulcice) cannot be described as hill forts and I tried to avoid the use of this expression in such cases. Tankred 23:38, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Slovakia tourism

Thanks for your great editions to the article Tourism in Slovakia. As you might have noticed, another user has caused some revert and edit wars; examination into the user's background shows plenty of cases of article ownership behavior and slight incivility towards other users. All that aside, please visit the talk page and comment on the merits of keeping the film Hostel mentioned in the article. At this point, we need other user's opinions so that the edit war does not resume when User:Juro returns (he was blocked last night for 3RR violation). Thank you! -Husnock 14:39, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Municipalities in Slovakia

Hi mate. No seriously I cannot complete the entire Slovakia project in one go!!!!!! What I have done is first set up the regional categories. Then I have started to go through creating the district categories within each region. These will all be neatly set up. Both categories are needed so readers can look at the villages in each district but also see the entire list on the page for each district. This is a long long long task so please have patience. No one else is bothering to help me yet an entire country is practically missing. I will not contradict myself. I will be consistent but probably no one will ever thank me for my efforts!! James Janderson 20:08, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi actually it won't take that long to start stubs. If you look at what I've done so far you will see I am doing a valuable job. But almost an entire country is missing from the project which I am amazed that nobody else is willing to help, even a little. Perhaps I will start to win more respect from other wikipedians. ThanksJames Janderson 21:53, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

CheckUser

Could you PLEASE formulate the request there (tell me when), and add the following users (basically those I remember and currently from the Magyarisation article): User:Erdelyiek, User:Bendeguz, User:Vay, User:Alphysikist, User:Al345 , 195.56.21.118; 195.56.248.241 , 195.56.240.67, 195.56.236.67 (the last 3 from the M. Hell article), 195.56.16.245, User:Khoikhoi, User:Kelenbp, User:Adam78, User:Fz22, User:Zello (the last two are not so urgent). I am quite sure most of these are the same person....Ah, and you should also ask User:PANONIAN for support. Juro 22:09, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Answer

About your question: well, I never asked for CheckUser before, but I think you could ask for it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/Help:CheckUser I am well aware of this problem with Hungarian nationalists on Misplaced Pages (they recently started to "work" on Serbia-related articles too) and something certainly should be done about this. However, as I said, I never asked before for user checking. As I saw recently, this sockpuppet have more than one IP adress, thus I do not think that CheckUser service would be much helpfull. But it worth to try anyway. PANONIAN (talk) 23:52, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Slovakia

Hi I am currently compiling a List of villages and municipalities in Slovakia. Once this is complete I can continue to go through the villages and start wikipedia stubs on them all. You seem to have a good knowledge of Slovakia PLEASE feel free to help me out not with the list (because I know where I am) but with the articles. PLease respond so we can discussErnst Stavro Blofeld 09:30, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi thanks for the appreciation and help. Is it possible that the info boxes like in Italian comunes could be used on each of the municipalities using data from that statistics website. It even has the postcodes which would belong in the statistics box. I am going to need some recruits though!! Know anybody else who could help. User:Punkmorten did say he would help me. Could you message him and suggest what needs doing?. Also I have written a little note at the top of the list of villages in Slovakia page to avoid the town village municipality confusion. That list is now almost complete but needs alphabetizing Ernst Stavro Blofeld 09:59, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Slovakia

Thankyou for the praise. Yes while I am enthusiastic about starting new articles as quick as possible I know that the prime aim of wikipedia is content and providing info rather than articles existing so going through will be slower but I reckon it will be of a much higher quality. Once the bones are laid down (already they look like respectable stubs) they need to be researched further and written into fuller articles later. See Čaňa for my latest. This is how I plan them to develop. In the end I reckon about 95% of geo-entries in slovakia will be mine. I have complted compiling the list of Slovakian villages just needs cleanup. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 17:01, 16 September 2006 (UTC) -

Urgent

Could you please add some confirmatory comments on Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Thanks. I have been blocked again. User:Juro

Reply

You are wrong, see etitorial resumes. And my userpage. Stuff were moved, wich means deleted from one page, and pasted to another. Check. As I see, some nationalist asshole got harpen up by my action(s) also, sorry for that. I asked for removing the arbitration against Juro, because I wanted and want to ask for a third opinion first. It was a bit of misunderstanding both from me and Tony Sidaway also. See things properly please, before you start calling anybody a vandal.

Tons of blending are in these articles, and most of them are in, and you, Juro or PANONIAN always puts them back. :S For example this sentence's place is in the article abt hungarian language. I just started to make a "clearing" by simply putting the sentences, where they should be, and also deleted some povs. Hope you won't dispute, that I know better my country's history than foreigners. Anyway, my main source is this, made by Enciclopedia Humana. Hope you'll accept it, because it is the basis of my edits, for ex changing numbers. Anyway, I just restored, wich you linked for me, because - hmm - Juro was the one, who put in those numbers, with just a "??" for a resume. Sorry, but I can't get it seriously. --VinceB 13:02, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Here are some more staff. I hope we can work together. --VinceB 13:24, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I am happy that you decided to use talk pages before you make controversial edits. As for the numbers that you mentioned, Juro did not put them with the "??" summary. He restored them after an anonymous user (86.122.81.189) changed these data without any edit summary. As to the sentence from the Hungary before the Magyars that you pointed out, the sentence is factually true and makes a nice transition to other articles about the more recent history of Hungary. As to your source, I certainly cannot (and do not want to) dispute it because, unfortunately, I do not speak Hungarian. But I know that statistical data in this field are generally disputed and for example, the estimates of the number of Magyars who settled in the Carpathian bassin have an incredibly wide range across the scholarly books. Misplaced Pages should mention all relevant estimates. I hope we will discuss all major changes on the concerned talk pages with other (mostly Hungarian) editors in order to reach consensus. Tankred 16:22, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Nope, you haven't read, what I linked. Just reading the title makes it clear, what language is it in. And - from the fact of being part of a lexicon - its also fully provable, and NPOV. Numbers are all shown, from the smallest (25) to the highest (1mill). No need, to double the 25, and I can not understand why is it so important. Official estimates are 500-1 million, any other disputes goes after. --VinceB 10:22, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Nope, yours means Slovaks. Slovak nationalists are also slovaks, as you are also a Slovak. Remember: you immediately called me a sockpuppet, a vandal, a nationalist, whatever and blured with those, who scandaled "death to the slovakians". I gave you nothing for those. Should I go back and one-by-one gave a template? I find it quite ridiculous. Please read and think through what I write properly. This is not the first time of such a misunderstanding between us. --VinceB 23:32, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

I have never called you sockpuppet. I only said that there is some evidence indicating that User:Árpád might have used sockpuppets. I warned you that your behavior (you initially blanked whole paragraphs without discussing it first on a talk page - and I am happy that you started to use talk pages) may be considered vandalism by other users. I do not remember any occasion when I called you a nationalist. And I have never implied that you belong to the group, which yelled "Death to Slovaks" in a Hungarian soccer stadium. I reread what you write and the word "yours" is still there. Well, if a Slovak kills someone, I am not a murderer, am I? If there are some Slovak nationalists out there, does it means they are "mine"? Tankred 23:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

WP:NC(GN)

I apologize for spamming your talk page, but since you had contributed in the past to the WP:NC(GN) proposal, which is currently ready for a wider consultation, I thought you might want to give it another look now and, hopefully, suggest some final improvements. Thanks. --Lysy 22:58, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Treaty of Trianon

Well, right now I am little bussy with work about Serbian cities and districts, so I did not read new posts on the Treaty of Trianon talk page. Since I saw that nobody change the article itself, I was not much interested what they write on the talk page, but when they start to change article, I will start participating in the discussion. :) Also, it is possible that not all of them are sockpuppets of the Hun Tomy, in fact by my opinion there are 2 or 3 Hungarian users behaving like this: one is from Sombathely in Hungary, another one is from Vojvodina (possibly Subotica), and there is maybe another one. All of them creating numerous sockpuppets and posting nationalistic content. PANONIAN (talk) 00:10, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Also, the fact that one nickname is registered few months ago, but used right now does not mean that it is not sockpuppet. A smart vandal could register 5-6 nicknames and then use them after few months when he need them. Do not underestimate this guy. :) PANONIAN (talk) 00:23, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi thanks for the appreciation. Its not that I expect a standing ovation I mean I'm sure many users are doing great work on existing articles its just that nobody seemed to notice. Usually when starting lots of new articles somebody sends you are message or something but nobody did. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 08:38, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi

I got your message. You make me really sad. If you think by inventing Slovak history it will make life
nicer...be my guest. The only people in Slovakia who belive this unproovable bunk are highly
uneducated or blinded by hatred.  I do not want to revert history...what hapend is long
 passed..Slovakia never existed before 1921. There are no original documents you can cite....if you
find any I will belive you. I totally understand that it can get very frustrating......If you think it
is good to give references to unknown webpages and sources its on you....but it will never be but
lies.  --Csabap 05:16, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I must say I am a bit surprised by your reaction. I warned you that some of your edits may be considered vandalism and I listed the articles, in which you deleted relevant information. For example, you deleted the fact that Grassalkovich was a Croat and you deleted the sources of an entire article . We usually do not do that because it would decrease quality and verifiability of an article. Articles should cite their sources. Perhaps you believe that countries and nations can miraculously emerge from nothing and that Slovaks and Croats have no history because... I do not know, perhaps they arrived to Slovakia and Croatia in 1921? :-) As you perhaps realized, I had no problem with your beliefs, but with your edits against the actual policies and style of Misplaced Pages. I would like to recommend you to write or expand articles instead of deleting information that you do not like because of your political views. Tankred 21:37, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I did go after Grassalkovich and the article was right so I did leave it alone. About deleteing references: links to nationalist webpages are not references, books that no one can find are not references. A proper reference can be looked up....If I refer to a Hungarian book it is always one that has an english edition and even beter online. I do this because I know not manz people around the globe know Hungarian. I always refer to books writen by accepted autors (academic people). What the Slovaks are doing is propaganda.....I found only one normal reference to a book writen by the Slovakian Academy...and thats it...no english translation, but at least it was something...--Csabap 13:43, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I did not write that article, I am just protecting its integrity. It is generally better not to delete any sources used write an article. As to books in other languages, you are right that it is quite annoying. But many articles about Central Europe cite mainly sources in native languages because most books will simply never be translated into English. Tankred 15:03, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

British colonies as separate civilization

Where does Huntington claim this? The description of CARICOM on pp. 131-33 of his book seems to suggest that it is part of the West (as opposed to the other Caribbean nations which are part of Latin America). Christopher Parham (talk) 02:35, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

In his original article, Huntington claimed: "Civilizations may involve a large number of people, as with China ('a civilization pretending to be a state,' as Lucian Pye put it), or a very small number of people, such as the Anglophone Caribbean." Unfortunately, I have not his book right now, so I cannot check to what extent he contradicted himself. Perhaps we should distinguish between the article and the book in the list of civilizations because there are more inconsistencies. Tankred 02:50, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I don't know that the book contradicts that at all...merely the book doesn't state it and leaves itself open to other interpretations. I'm satisfied, thanks. Christopher Parham (talk) 06:15, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Names

Hi Tankred, sorry for the late reply, I'm pretty busy these days and sometimes I can only put in a few minor edits here and there. I didn't check all the names in Árpád dynasty, just the one you had updated (since I was watching the page and that was where it changed). I agree that the current state of affairs is not quite in order. Bratislava, however, is a special case in this respect, since it is a name invented in the 19th century, as opposed to most other cases where the modern names evolved from a historical one (for example Varadinum - Nagyvárad - Grosswardein - Oradea). If you think you can formulate a clear and fair convention about which name we should be using as the primary name for these settlements, please do - Zello had tried to cooperate with Juro to work something like this out, but (1) Juro was (or is) apparently generally unwilling to compromise in matters he considered important (not denying either his expertise on a few subjects or his general editorial efforts), and (2) both of them seem to be off Misplaced Pages at the moment. I'd draft a proposal myself, but I feel short of both time and domain knowledge to pull this. KissL 13:41, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Personal attacks

From Misplaced Pages:Personal attack intervention noticeboard

This situation is more complex than that which can be dealt with within the auspice of that notice board. Dispute resolution (perhaps with a quick stop at request for check-user) is strongly recommended. - brenneman 11:54, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

From User talk:Aaron Brenneman#User:Tankred

Copied from other talk page

Thank you for your message. But can you advise me please what I can do with the personal attack warning templates that User:VinceB put on my talk page after I filed Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets/VinceB? I believe he/she violated the Misplaced Pages policy while using these templates because I have not commited any personal attack (as I explained here and User:PANONIAN supported here). It was clearly VinceB's revenge. I am afraid he/she will ask to block me just because I have those templates on my talk page. But I do not know if it would not be a case of vandalism if I remove them. I do not know what to do. Do you think you can help me somehow? Thanks a lot in advance. And if you need explanation or clarification of any of my actions in the past, please feel free to contact me on my talk page. I hope this dispute will be over soon. Tankred 15:07, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

End copied section.

Thank you for taking the time to reply. I see you've got several concerns, I'll try to address them in turn.

• You being blocked. Don't worry too much, it's more difficult to get blocked than that, and placing a template in the manner that you did is not usually considered a personal attack. It's important, however, to remember that in the event that you are wrong it will certainly feel like a personal attack to the other user.
• Removal of templates. As to removing the template, this is an area that is frought with controversy. My approach is to simply leave it in place, perhaps with a politly worded reply. However, users have traditionally been given wide latitude in this regards in all but the most pernicious cases.
• Moving forward. The best way to progress any concerns you have with regards to alternate accounts is via checkuser, as linked above. In fact, that's probably a necessary and sufficient condition to ending any drama. It's also always a good idea to avoid as much as possible personalising any issues, and to attempt to view any dispute from the other user's side while presuming that they are a decent fellow.

De-escalation is a difficult thing. But I find that a large percentage of wiki-friction arises from simple misunderstanding, often predicated on facts not in evidence. Just proceed slowly and cordially, and don't let it distract you too much from article writing.

brenneman 22:14, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your helpful answer. Tankred 01:24, 10 October 2006 (UTC)