User:VinceB/Blabla

Welcome!

Hello VinceB/Blabla, and Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay.
Here are some good places to get you started:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please be sure to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or just three tildes (~~~) to produce your name only. If you have any questions, or are worried/confused about anything at all, please either visit the help desk, or leave a new message on my talk page at any time. Happy editing, good luck, and remember: Be Bold!

— FireFox • T • 11:23, 5 March 2006

Image copyright problem with Image:1934-brassai-foggy-paris.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:1934-brassai-foggy-paris.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 14:59, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Juro

As a clerk to the Arbitration Committee I've removed your application for arbitration on the subject of Juro. Please check that you have followed all reasonable steps of Dispute resolution and that you follow the instructions on Requests for arbitration in creating an application. --Tony Sidaway 02:57, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I've now created the arbitration case here and informed User:Juro. --Tony Sidaway 16:21, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Magyar őshaza

Szia Vince. I noticed that you moved Hungarian Urheimat to Magyar őshaza. I don't think that was the best thing to do, because one should remember that this is English Wikipedia, and the average English speaker isn't going to understand Hungarian. Would you mind if I move the page back? Thanks. —Khoikhoi 18:44, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

No, "urheimat" is an English word that comes from German, and it describes a sepcific type of homeland, a linguistic one. The title "Hungarian homeland" would be too vague and receives a low amount of Google hits. Next time you want to rename a page, please go to WP:RM. Thanks.

BTW, I'm not so sure if Magyar őshaza (#1 on the map) and Magna Hungaria (#2 on the map) are the same thing.... —Khoikhoi 20:11, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Possible vandalism and personal attack

I would like to kindly ask you to refrain from blanking whole paragraphs, erasing the statistical data you do not like, and changing numbers, as you did here. Please, use the talk page before you make such a substantive change. Other people may consider your behavior vandalism.

Although this is an unrelated issue, I must say that I am quite surprised by your personal attack. First, I cannot be a Slovak nationalist because I am of mixed origin. Second, I am usually trying to reach consensus or at least compromise in sensitive issues. Btw, guess who added sections about ethnic minorities and multi-ethnic character to the articles about Slovakia, such as Banská Bystrica and Bratislava. Yes, it was me, a "Slovak nationalist". Third, most of the articles I have edited are completely unrelated to Hungary and Hungarians. I am creating and expanding articles about towns, castles, and mountains in Slovakia, cleaning up categories in international relations, reverting vandalism in hundreds of articles. Just check my edit count. I am aware that your personal attack appeared after I disagreed with your Request of Arbitration against Juro (which was removed by the clerk anyway), but I really did not expect such a move from your part. I do not remember any personal dispute with you and I do not desire to initiate any. I have no interest in your petty conflicts with other Wikipedians. Have a good day. Tankred 16:35, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

???

What you want to tell me? That "your" encyclopaedia humana should be only source that we should use and that no other source should be used at all, right? PANONIAN (talk) 21:03, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

What my statements you refering to? And one more thing: please do not change my maps. If you think that any of my maps is wrong, just tell me that, and I will correct it, ok? PANONIAN (talk) 21:32, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

And did you saw this map: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Hungarian_migration03.gif Compare the two, and you will see that even your "holy bible" (encyclopaedia humana) map have a arrow pointing that Hungarians moved to Bashkiria from the east side of Urals. What is problem then? Yugra is name used for that territory in medieval Russian chronicles and is used today too and refering to land of Ugric peoples. PANONIAN (talk) 21:40, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

I will correct "Slovakia1850 02.png" map, be patient a little, and as I said, I will correct the maps, you just tell me if something is wrong on them, ok? PANONIAN (talk) 21:43, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, check this map again: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Hungarian_migration03.gif Name for the land east of Ural mountain on that map is "Magyar Oshaza", which do not mean Ugric homeland, but Hungarian homeland. However, I changed the map about Hungarian migration, and it now say: "Yugra (Ugric homeland)" Also, name Bashkiria is an anachronism in the time when we speak about Magna Hungaria (Bashkiria did not existed back then), so this name should not be used on map. And regarding maps, I really do not like when somebody else change them, so I believe it is a matter of your own decency to discuss changes on maps with me first, because I will revert any change on these maps which I consider wrong. In fact, if you want to contribute here with maps, rather draw your own instead to destroy work of others. PANONIAN (talk) 21:56, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

I deleted "your" map. You changed few letters on map, and you claim that it is "your"? Try to draw entire map (to draw borders, to paint it, to draw arrows, etc), and then claim that it is your. Because of the people like you, I will consider to change copyright tags on my maps in the future from "public domain" to someting else that is not free for changing. PANONIAN (talk) 22:15, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

And by the way, I changed the map in the way you wanted, so what is problem really? PANONIAN (talk) 22:16, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Another personal attack

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. I used this official template because my last reminder did not work. You attacked me in your edit summary: "response because cronologically happened after it ! They were bantered up by the the hungarian beatings in Slovakia. And the flag-burning, and other staff yours did (emphasis added)."[1] I have never been involved in any act of flag-burning and I have never supported such activities. Please, refrain from making personal accusatory comments. Tankred 23:20, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Your personal attacks from September 12

Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by administrators or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you.

This is your last warning before I ask administrators for help. You accused me of POV pushing that did not occur[2] perhaps in order to undermine my credibility. But all edits are archived, VinceB. Here are my only edits of the concerned section: [3], [4], [5]. I did not delete anything. I moved the whole section to a new paragraph and I added information about the official police investigation that you immediately erased. I even encouraged Zello to add information about the girl's version (which contradicts the official version that I added).[6]

You also accused me of calling you 'a sockpuppet, a vandal, a nationalist, whatever and blured with those, who scandaled "death to the slovakians"'.[7] I have never called you sockpuppet. I only said that there is some evidence indicating that User:Árpád might have used sockpuppets. Assuming that you are not User:Árpád, I do not understand your accusation. I warned you that your behavior (you initially blanked whole paragraphs without suggesting such a significant change on a talk page) 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. If you have any evidence of my alleged personal attacks against you, please provide it. Otherwise, your accusation is a personal insult. Tankred 16:38, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed with a tally of 91/1/4. I can't express how much it means to me to become an administrator. I'll work even more and harder to become useful for the community. If you need a helping hand, don't hesitate to contact me. NCurse _work 15:28, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

From Wikipedia: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 is strongly recommended. - brenneman ^{L} 11:54, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Moved from user page to talk

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/VinceB for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. Tankred 01:42, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Hello VinceB. I've briefly discussed this with Tankred, and encourage you to take this not as a personal attack, but as a genuine concern expressed by an editor who has the best interest of Wikipedia in mind. The best way to handle issues of suspected multiple accounts is via a check user request. Then any suspicions will (probably) be laid to est and everyone can get back to writing articles. - brenneman ^{L} 23:01, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Blocked

Blocked: You have been blocked for 24 hours for using sockpuppets to edit war and violate the 3 revert rule, as determined by checkuser at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/VinceB. Edit warring is not an approved method of editing, and neither is logging out to avoid being caught. If you have concerns about article content you should follow the steps of the Dispute resolution process such as third opinion, request for comment, or mediation. Thatcher131 15:28, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Slovan

You just blocked my roommate for indef. Yes, I live in a college --VinceB 01:30, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

And as far as I know, logging in is not a must. I wrote the sign on my userpage that "I nearly always do anonim edits instead of using this account" so accusing me of sockpuppetry or such assumpion that I wanted to avoid the 3RR is false. A: I'm not the only one making contribs from Hungary B: I always stopped at the limit. Check it leisurely. But yes, that's true that I'm quite short tempered. I learned the lession abt this. All what is proven is that I wrote a true sentence on my userpage. And I got a block for it. pff...--VinceB 01:36, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, your roommate can post to his own talk page even while blocked. He can post {{unblock}} and give a reason. The roommate excuse is frequently given, sometimes it is true and sometimes not. I would like the case to reviewed by someone else. Of course, your roommate's account was recognized by users familiar with your editing habits; if he had different interests, no one would have had the idea to check. As far as editing while logged out is concerned, it's not really sockpuppet behavior, but if it is done to avoid accountability for 3RR or other problems then it's wrong no matter what it is called. I will keep an eye on your talk pages to see what other editors think. Thatcher131 02:09, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

As to the Slovan account, let us compare Slovan's edit[8] with the previous edit by VinceB's puppet 195.56.224.133 [9]. They are the same. Both Slovan and the puppet appeared to support VinceB's particular point of view against PANONIAN. As for the allegedly legitimate anonymous edits, VinceB refused my suspicion that he/she had ever used the 195.56... IPs and he/she even called my initiation of the formal CheckUser procedure a "personal attack" [10]. For being one of two editors who exposed the connection between VinceB, Slovan, and the IPs, I have been harassed at Wikipedia:Personal attack intervention noticeboard and Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. The "personal attack warning" templates have been placed by VinceB on my talk page. I will quote VinceB's reason: "I know that I didn't used sockpuppets, beause I has a username here." Please compare it with the present version "I nearly always do anonim edits instead of using this account". In other words, after the CheckUser confirmed his/her sockpuppetry, VinceB's version of the events was changed from not knowing the 195.56...s into using them in a benign way. I am sorry, but I do not buy it. The use of sockpuppets to vandalize articles[11][12] and to create impression that a controversial edit is supported by more than one editor[13] is not legitimate at all in my opinion. Therefore, I must oppose any relaxation of the measures (unblocking Slovan). On the other hand, I would like to believe that VinceB has learnt his/her lesson and his/her future edits will be more constructive. Tankred 21:51, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

We live in the same flat. I spoke about you and your behaviour. Of course we share opinions in some ways. Tankred, you are simply trolling now. --VinceB 12:09, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Otu2 is your or PANONIAN's sock/meatpuppet? --VinceB 17:44, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

I have never used any sockpuppets, but feel free to initiate the CheckUser procedure to prove it. After I reviewed Otu2's edits, I am pretty sure that even the country of our IPs will be different. I would like also to recommend you not to delete relevant information, such as a note explaining why the number of Hungarians living in a city increased from 8% to 40% in 30 years [14], a well-sourced description of a political party as nationalist by leading political science journals (e.g. Party Politics) and mainstream media (e.g. BBC)[15], or the historical context of the current events[16]. If you keep going in this way, I will have to ask a third party to review your disruptive edits. Please, do not forget, that you have already been blocked for sockpuppetry and you have a long record of vandalism and personal attacks (up to Npa3). Please, learn a lesson from your last block and try to be more constructive. Tankred 19:54, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

You have received many warnings in the past. You cannot just blank whole paragraphs, including numerical data, because of your political views.[17] And why are you constantly erasing geographic names?[18] This is an English Wikipedia and you should use English geographic names, not the Hungarian ones. This is really your last warning before I ask administrators for help. You are wasting time of other editors which could be spent on writing articles. Tankred 20:09, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Blocked 48 hours

You have been temporarily blocked from editing for vandalism of Wikipedia. Please note that page blanking, addition of random text or spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, and other deliberate attempts to disrupt Wikipedia are considered vandalism. If you wish to make useful contributions, you may come back after the block expires.

This block is primarily for edit warring after a previous block and repeated warnings. There is an open debate about blanking such notices from one's user talk page, so I do not name these blankings as a reason for blocking. However, in more general terms, that sort of blanking doesn't really gain you anything - I still read the posts through the page history and it didn't look good when I searched for mitigating factors that might shorten or negate the block.

I hope in the future you'll use your knowledge of Hungarian history to improve pages - the English language edition of Wikipedia could certainly use such help. Unfortunately it doesn't aid the project or English-only readers to change names into versions that rarely get used in this language. Respectfully, Durova 21:52, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

I used talk pages wich were ignored by User:Tankred. He deliberately uses very emotional words and phrases wich (in enwiki) istantly creates a negative image about me, without knowing the ongoing situation between us. And makes a false image about me and abt the backround of my contribs (for ex: well known vandal). I already sent him warning templates to stop calling me a vandal. I'm not able to discuss with him, because he's not talking with me, I always tried to find a solution. Check anywhere. He clearly stated hatred against me several times, and he wants to kick me out of english wikipedia to defend his fakes and lies. (I proved that they are fakes and lies.) (He also faked a source) Not negotiating, not talking just attacking. His first edit on my discussion page was similar. My contribs are all were sourced, I wrote it on his discussion page also, and in the articles (as refs). Deleting them is vandalism. Check.

B: I wrote on my userpage on sept 5. that I do mainly anonim edits. Then he accused me of sockpuppetry on oct. 10 for using IPs. pfff I was clearly stated it on my talkpage. My roomate was blocked indef. Thanks to Tankred he does not want to participate in this wikipedia anymore. --VinceB 14:14, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Since I believe that VinceB's arguments are a bit misleading and his accusations against me unsubstantiated, I must briefly comment on them. As for his sockpuppetry confirmed by ChceckUser, a biref overview of the case can be found here. As for the previous vandalism, all VinceB's edits and the warning templates that he removed from his talk page can be traced back. Just to give you a handful of examples, he has blanked whole paragraphs[19], changed geographic names into their Hungarian version (hiding all the official non-Hungarian names)[20], and made subtle nasty changes of numerical data[21]. After he was warned, he just pasted the same warning templates to the talk pages of User:PANONIAN and me. He has also made failed attempts to use the formal procedures against at least three different users who disagreed with his disruptive edits (reporting false incidents, vandalism, personal attacks, and initiating investigation or arbitration). All those attempts failed and VinceB has been blocked by two previously uninvolved admins for sockpuppetry and edit warring. As for the alleged "fake source", this accusation by VinceB's sockpuppet (and now repeated by the puppetmaster himself) is non sense and I do not understand what he means by it. He does not like the descripion of Fidesz – Hungarian Civic Union as a nationalist party, but this description is now supported by four references to the leading academic journals and BBC. Neither of them is "fake" and this fact can be easily proven. Please, do not unblock VinceB. Normal editors of the articles about Central Europe need some rest. Tankred 18:54, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I gave sources (-s!) for all of these. You? Not. For Didesz, yes but you mislead that (or with a stronger word: faking that). That's the point. Normal editors of the articles about Central Europe need some rest, so you should calm down and stop this disguisting broadside against me. --VinceB 04:46, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Segitség

Juro megint akaratoskodik. Letörölte az írásomat a Administrative divisions of the Kingdom of Hungary-ról, és mindezt magarázat nélkül (jellemzö rá). Kérlek segíts! Öcsi 19:07, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

You are using this template in the wrong namespace. Use this template on your talk page instead.

On the other hand, you may edit the page also. It's not mine. But note, the far right is very very divided, and often hates each other. (for ex: Bonehead & Skinhead) An MIÉP and Jobbik and other ("real") nationalist parties describe fidesz as leftist and more often treasonous party (no need to go further you can read it on the front page of the MIÉP, for ex) On the third hand, I am concerned, that you and (Tankred also) are mixing patriotism with nationalism, since the first one is not an established concept in Central Europe, and frequently mixed with nationalism. --VinceB 17:12, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Blocked for 1 week

Since the last block expired you've done very little other than blank my previous block notice, resume edit warring, and lodge block a request at WP:3O against other editors. If other editors do behave improperly then you're welcome to post a request in the usual places such as WP:AN/I and WP:PAIN. However, your actions have the appearance of a retaliatory attempt at petitioning unfamiliar administrators to block particular editors and of attempting to disguise your own history of warnings and blocks.

Blocks tend to get longer and more frequent when objectionable behavior continues with no sign of improvement. Per Wikipedia:Disruptive editing, you could be subject to a topic ban or site ban if this goes on. I recommend you seek a mentor from Wikipedia:Mentorship. The topics where you edit seem to be important to you and I'd rather see you develop into a productive editor. Respectfully, Durova 17:25, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

The deletion of your request at WP:3O was done by an uninvolved editor in good standing, who explained the decision in the edit note removed trolling.[22] I reviewed that user's last 500 edits and saw nothing about Hungarian nationalism, but did see numerous housekeeping edits to various pages. Durova 17:35, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Then how to dissolve this problem if I can't write it there? Where to ask for? Note, that I am able to play out the block(s), but I never did it. I always made referenced edits, I showed my references to those two also, see their discussion pages. I several times clearly proved how misleading their interpretations of this situation, and the describing of me, and my behaviour. Thus, I'm the one, who's edit waring and adding nonsense (sic!)... those two not even warned. Or at least asked for a source to verify their statements... --VinceB 17:39, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I'd be willing to shorten your block to 48 hours if you agree to the following:

Enter Wikipedia's mentorship program.
File a formal mediation request for your dispute.
Leave messages, warnings, and block notices on your talk page (with reasonable exceptions - if someone uses obscenity then of course it's fine to refactor or delete).

If that sounds fair to you, please respond. Durova 17:42, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

BTW your edits weren't always referenced, and in one instance I noticed since your last block you removed a citation request template without supplying a citation. Durova 17:44, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

1: never heard abt metorship before, but sure, ok 2: Sure, I've tried the third view yesterday, but was deleted calling it "trolling". (why?) What's the assurance, that it wont be deleted for the same reason from other places? 3: I've seen that many user talkpages are rubber friendly, there's even a template for those, but I was unable to find it so I simply stated it here. I didn't knew that it is instead illegal.

OK, I revert template and warning parts on my talkpage. Note, I replied on all of them, giving disproofs for most of them. (but those were ignored, and I didn't knew that time, where to report - still not really, as can be seen on WP:3O.) I several times lost in wikipedia administration, so I would be happy, if you help me getting to the right pages, places and methods. Thus, I see this one sided. We three are all dirty in the equal size. I'm not the only "bad guy" in this case. I can not understand, why all my actions were ignored peviously.

In one phrase: absolutely OK, but I need assistance. Thanks. --VinceB 17:57, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Block shortened to 48 hours

Okay, I've shortened your block. You can request mediation here: Wikipedia:Requests for mediation. Your mentor should be able to answer most of your questions about navigation and site policies. Note that you have to request the mentor. I already posted the link above. You might also like to read the essay Wikipedia:No angry mastodons, which I created after a long conflict at my first article.

A good number of editors have some trouble when they first join Wikipedia. I hope you'll give this your best effort and act on advice and guidance from experienced editors. Check back with me in a month at my user page. I'll review your activity and if it looks like you've turned things around I'll post a follow-up note of support here at your talk page. Best wishes, Durova 18:44, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

About the WP:3O request, it probably got a bad response because it looked like an aggressive petition for administrative action rather than a request for impartial feedback. You'll get better results with mediation if you read the archives and imitate successful examples. Also, a note offering the olive branch to the other editors in this dispute would be a good move. Durova 19:37, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi Vince

I've received some serious allegations at my user talk page.[23] What do you have to say about them? Durova 17:03, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Adoption

Hello, VinceB! I see that you have expressed an interest in being adopted by an experienced editor. I accept your request, being an experienced editor myself. Whether you want to learn about wiki markup, find something to do, or just talk to somebody, I'm the one you can talk to - just leave a message on my talk page. Good luck with Wikipedia! Daniel Olsen 03:59, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Of course I'll still adopt you. Working with non-controversial editors is nice, but I'd be hapy to help you too. It seems there's been a good amount of POV pushing between you and other users. My advice is to steer clear of the users you've been having problems with, and remember that they are not angry mastodons, they are just trying to do what's best for wikipedia. I advise that you read Wikipedia:NPOV tutorial for tips in how to make sure POV conflicts don't pop up. I'm not taking sides in this dispute, but I'll help mediate it if necessary. --Daniel Olsen 02:07, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Looking at Anti-Hungarian sentiment it seems there haven't been any more problems (yet), just make sure that everything is sourced and that all sides of a controversy are shown. The talk page is always your friend. --Daniel Olsen 02:16, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Jó ez az adopció? Öcsi 14:36, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Your userpage

VinceB, may I ask you to remove the personal attack "Some agressive guys, who simply lost their mind in these cases, and misleads everybody, shouting vandal at anybody, who do not share their (false) ideology : User:Tankred, User:PANONIAN, User:Juro" from your userpage, please? Thank you in advance. Tankred 01:52, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

All right, thank you for hiding my name in a comment. If anyone wants to know that you are talking about me, he/she has to click on "edit". What an interesting solution. But it looks definitely better than an overt personal attack and admins do not click on the edit button, do they? I am really impressed. Tankred 02:12, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the complete removal of the derogatory comment from your userpage. I appreciate it. Tankred 02:36, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Üdvözöllek!

Szia! Azért írok, neked, mert látom sok mindenben egyezik a véleményünk. Neked is meggyült a bajod egyesekkel.:( Olvasom, hogy az ELTE politológia szakára jársz. Ez a másik ok, amiért írok neked. A jövőben én is ugyanott, ugyanazon a szakon szeretnék hallgató lenni, ahol te. Írhatnál néhány talán nélkülözhetetlen információt, milyen is ott az élet. Meg lehet, lenne pár kérdésem is hozzád, persze ezzel kapcsolatban. Persze nem szeretnék tolakodó lenni, és ha időd vagy esetleg kedved nem engedné meg, nyugottan visszautasíthatod a kérésem. Ha még is úgy döntenél, írsz, akkor légyszíves add meg az ímél(okkal írom helytelenül, megtudod, miért) címedet, a válszodat még ide a wikipediára várom, az én címemet majd a válaszomból tudod meg. Ha nem felelnek meg az utolsó feltételek, kérlek jelezd azt is. Üdv!
HunTheGoaT 09:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Szepes/Spiš

Dear VinceB -

Please be careful when you edit articles about places which are now in Slovakia - I have noticed your tendency to give precendence to former (Hungarian) names. You are not always accurate - e.g. Levoca was known initially by its German name, not its Hungarian name - but in any case the convention is to use on English WP names which English readers will recognise and give such names priority (you can of course always make a comment in the article pointing out former names). This is not anachronism - it is just common sense, and far less confusing for readers who are not fully informed about the background - which is of course what WP is for. I shall be interested, by the way, to see whether you are succesful in creating a page for Szepes county which is different in any way from the Spis article (apart from Hungarianising the names).

Best regards, --Smerus 20:57, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Fidesz and SNS

IF I understood the edit summary of your edit, in which you flooded Slovak National Party (current party) by strong words and references to Hungarian NGOs and European partisan NGOs (such as the so-called World Socialists), well, you did it as a kind of retaliation after you were not able to remove the description of Fidesz as a nationalist party. I really want to be wrong, but this interpretation is quite obvious since your edit summary is "per fidesz". Well, I will repeat myself, but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a battlefield. I am fine with the description of SNS as ultra-nationalist because I do not agree with SNS and the likes of them. I am a bit uneasy with the word "neo-fascist" because neo-fascist parties are prohibited in Slovakia. It seems that the World Socialists' website (the reference added by you) does not know this. What do you think? Is the World Socialists' website really an authoritative source? I also decided to remove two other references added by you because they do not call SNS a neo-fascist party as you tried to pretend. Please, check your references before adding them to an article. And the last comment: if you want to write an encyclopedia, try to use relevant sources (such as the academic journals and credible mainstream media - for example the ones used by me and other editors in the Fidesz article) and try to avoid partisan websites. Tankred 23:58, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

You deleted two articles written by IRR activists, wich by yr words are "spam". I want to know why are they "spam"? I haven't deleted the BBC article from the refs as "spam". Campaigning to rehabilitate a fascist leader is something, what even nationalists does not do, but only neo-fascists. They always try to wash Slovak fascists. [24], [25], [26], WSWS is a left-wing journal, stating that in Slovakia, there's a "...coalition between social democrats and neo-fascists..." What else to say? "Spam"? IRR is a worldwide organization, WSWS is a online newspaper of an also wwo. [27]. --VinceB 10:38, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Have you read my edit summary? Perhaps you should because you will find your answer there. First, I did not remove your reference to the World Socialists. Second, I deleted two references that did not describe SNS as a neo-fascist party, though you used them to support such a description. Btw, campaigning to rehabilitate Tiso does not make you a fascist, but a revisionist. It is quite similar to the Horthy case in Hungary, but (contrary to Hungary) other relevant Slovak political parties did not endorse those activities of SNS. Do you consider all the Hungarian parties celebrating Horthy's re-funeral fascist? I guess not. Look, I did not delete your controversial description of SNS as a neo-fascist party (although I believe it is factually wrong because the only Slovak neo-fascist party has been abolished this year as required by the law). But I removed those references that do not support your claim. Try to find other, more relevant and explicit references. I am sure there must be plenty of them. Tankred 16:06, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Horthy wasn't fascist, but Tiso was. Read: Miklós Horthy and Jozef Tiso. See, again a mistake in your knowledge of history. Or read: "Horthy was not a fascist dictator". John Lukács: State, nation, folk. Lecture on politology at The University of Omniscience, 24. oct. 2005. Hv a good day, and learn history. :) You'll see for ex a misinterpretation and misleading at here. See? If holocaust memorial does not state H as fascist, you should not too. I always seen you acting the same as this, wich is why I told you what I told you abt yr history knowledge, and the other things abt misleading. ~~Maybe~~, not maybe, I was harsh. Sorry, that's my style.

Try to get rid of yr preconceptions. --VinceB 16:40, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

I haven't stated them as a neo-fascist, anyway. The are 'often described as' because of actions like this, linkned by me, above. --VinceB 16:50, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, study of fascism is sort of part of my qualification, so I consider your comment really funny. There are several competing definitions of fascism, but to summarize them all, one school of historians argues that Horthy, Tiso, and Franco were fascists. According to another school, they were authoritarian conservative leaders (and only Italy and Croatia had genuine fascist regimes) There is also an ongoing discussion regarding the differences between fascist and Nazi regimes. Of course, there is no obvious answer because all those claims are based on different definitions of fascism. But really, there was little difference between Tiso's and Horthy's regime. That is why Hungary and Slovakia are almost always put into the same category in the relevant books. Perhaps you can find some books written by Western historians about this in your university library. The political bias of historians from Central Europe is quite understandable, but does not reflect the main discourse in the field. Tankred 16:56, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh, but (for example) at Fidesz they do. I see. You should write something abt you on yr userpage. Very huge differences were between the two regimes. --VinceB 17:02, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Vandal reporting

Hi VinceB! Thanks for reporting a vandal to the administrator's noticeboard. However, a more appropriate place for reporting vandals is WP:AIV; you will get a much quicker response there. —Mets501 (talk) 17:49, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

those userboxes, and keeping out of wars...

I just noticed some userboxes on your page that I believe I created! Glad you like them enough to add to your own page! :)

PS I've noticed the many disputes between you and certain users and I'd just like to encourage you to be as level-headed and calm as humanly possible when dealing with them, and others who give you trouble. That's what I try to do, as I've found out that getting angry and making unconsidered statements just gives one's adversaries more "ammunition". :)

Here's to being patriots, not nationalists! :) K. Lastochka 22:07, 13 November 2006 (UTC)