User talk:Duja/Archive 4

Archives
Jun '04 – Mar 2006 Mar – May 2006 May – Oct 2006 Oct – Nov 2006 Nov – Dec 2006 Jan – Mar 2007 Mar – Jul 2007 Jul – Aug 2007 Sep – Nov 2007

Virginity of archive 4 BUSTED!

Ha! I'm the first to post you a message here! And it's a good one!! •NikoSilver• 21:23, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Slavic origin template

I was refering to the non-existent Category (regarding the template). --PaxEquilibrium 11:14, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Ah, that. I renamed the category — to actually create it, just click the red link on your page and save the category page; it may be even empty. Duja 07:06, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. --PaxEquilibrium 13:53, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

De Administrando Imperio editing

Please, before attempting to edit this article, learn very basic things about this actually nameles treatise of Constantine Porphyprogenitus. I recommend reading the Moravcsik-Jenkins edition.--Mario.radin 16:32, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Yes, indeed, it is I. I was going to send you a message to say that I appreciate your efforts. The article is based on overhead projector slides, and sometimes the too terse style still creeps through. I'm sure it's turning into a great article.

Many thanks,

Mike

Afrika paprika

Afrika made a sockpuppet called User:Zrinski, in an effort to outmanouvre the 3RR rule, but continued by simply editing as an annon (changing IP), which made User:Dijxtra semi-protect the articles he's been edit-warring (Doclea, Travunia, Zahumlje, Pagania). Sadly, he's now back, and after I rv the controversal anti-Croatian (and totally off-the-subject) edits on Croatia, he (albeit frequently criticizing Serbs everywhere, and calling the Serbs in Croatia terrorist, while the Croatian War of Independence War on Terrorism), rv to the anti-Croatian ('Serb-POV) version - meaning that he only wants to rv, and doesn't care for the content. I am greatly disappointed by that - that kind of acting is trollish. Immediate action must be taken now. --PaxEquilibrium 15:47, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I see User:ChrisO blocked Zrinski for good. I gotta run now, but I'll try to deal with Afrika in subsequent days. Duja 15:50, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I'll hold you for your word - but will inform Dijxtra as well (he had previous experience with Afrika). --PaxEquilibrium 16:01, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm very sorry, but the time I spend on Wikipedia in next week and a half will be limited, sorry. I have 2 exams left and I intend to deal with those within this month, AND Zagreb Film Festival is next week, so I just won't have time to deal with Wikipedia issues (except for occasions when I snap and go on editing spree ;-) ). Sorry, Holy, I'll help as much as I can when I'm done with the exams. --Dijxtra 17:10, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

No biggy. Just please put Croatia on your watchlist and rv the POV and ridiculously written stuff there. I think Duja might lend assistence with Afrika. --PaxEquilibrium 20:46, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 9th.

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 41	9 October 2006	About the Signpost

Interview with Board member Erik Möller	Wall Street Journal associates Wikipedia with Grupthink
Account used to create paid corporate entries shut down	Report from the Portuguese Wikipedia
News and notes	Wikipedia in the news
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 16:43, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Čolić

Hm. Are you sure the link should go to Serbia? I think it's obvious that "Serbian" refers to him being a Serb, not being from Serbia, since he's from BiH... --Dijxtra 18:01, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Hm. No. Frankly, the entire affair pisses me off; at times I feel the Wikipedia should ban entire *.yu, *.hr and *.ba IP ranges, and the diasporic users on individual basis, but without repeating the mistake of letting the last survivor out. Yet another article where exact phrasing of person's ethnic background is the sole point of interest. Duja 18:08, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Ehm, did you check out your edit, Duja? You deleted a crucial ")". :) --PaxEquilibrium 21:18, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

I disagree with binding him strictly as "Serbia's". He does sing elsewhere. --PaxEquilibrium 14:12, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

You're kindly invited to write whatever neutral form of the intro you can phrase. This has got out of my powers. Duja 14:17, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Heh - what is the issue in the first place. If that "[Serbia]s" is the main problem, what's wrong with "Yugoslav"? After all, the whole world uses that word still, when it's talking about something common for all ex-yugoslav nations. --PaxEquilibrium 10:32, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Nothing wrong. I "smuggled" that into Meša Selimović already. Perhaps that could be the best. Duja 18:59, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Afrika paprika.... again, and again, and again and again

He's unstoppable. For the nth time he has proven that blocks have no influence with him (reminds me of Hipi). He constantly keeps returning as an annon, not only continuing the edit-warring on those ol' articles, but also on Croats (where you first met him, I think). I just have no idea that a solution is possible, except prolonging his block and semi-protecting those articles (I have already filed semi-protect requests). I feel influenceless on him... Any bright ideas and preferable assistence perhaps? --PaxEquilibrium 18:53, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Patience. What is going to happen is... yes, what just happened. Duja 06:46, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Novi sad, Novi sada

Jugo, please let me know what you think about the theory of Tesla being Vlah origin. I know his article did mention it once upon a time, it has been deleted each time by someone.

In my reading i have come across him being Vlah a few times, some places even called a Gypsy. Can't all be made up, can it?

God Speed Jagoda 1 01:46, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

I already replied here, I'm not sure you saw it (I had to archive my talk page as too long). Duja 06:48, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Duja:

Look, your dirty Yugoslavi doesnt exist anymore!!! And it will never ever exist anymore! No more!

Accept that and listen to me now:

The winners of the Serbian aggression war 1992-1995 is Bosnia and Herzegovina. Why cant you get that? Hahahihihoho 12:12, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

3RR?

As far as I can see I reverted 3 times, not more, each time clearly explaining why I did so. So, why did you warn me (especially as you seem to have accepted my case)? --estavisti 14:39, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. --estavisti 14:51, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Paul Sérusier

Thanks for moving Paul Sérusier ... and for spotting the copyvio ... I'll make a start at rewriting. Stumps 10:04, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Infobox

Your template certainly looks better than mine (Serbian cities 3). We should migrate to it, and at the same time input the available data for each municipality. Currently, a lot of easily available information simply isn't here on Wikipedia (population, plates etc). I mean, the current template is adequate, but the new one is better. The main problem is we don't have any people from various small municipalities who are interested in adding info. Some of these municipalities don't even have a website! --estavisti 10:48, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

:D

Gaspadine, vy gavOrite pa ruski? a ot kad vy ste pachEli zanimati se ruskim jezIkom? :D (Zivio slavenosrpski...)

Uvijek sam na tvom raspolozenju. --VKokielov 21:16, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Я учил русский в школе шесть лет, но забыл много... Сегодня, понимаю что-то, но ты больше говоришь по сербский — почему мне надо трудится? :-). Duja 18:55, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Fala. :) больше = više, лучше = bolje. To je jedina greska. Pa, jedna mala stilska -- "zachem" um. "pochemu". --VKokielov 02:42, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Bosna

Zasto ne zivis vise tamo? Nadam se da nema veze s ratom... --PaxEquilibrium 10:27, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Došao sam u NS da studiram neposredno prije rata (a, pravo da ti kažem, nisam ni namjeravao da se vratim). Duja 18:56, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Ne svidja ti se Bosna?

Are you sure "Yugoslavian" is grammaticly more correct than "Yugoslav"? --PaxEquilibrium 19:33, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Znas nesto od ovome?

Nikola Tesla... He refused to receive the Nobel prize which he had to share with T.A. Edison. In 1942 the American Supreme Court decided that Tesla invented the Radio, not Marconi. Vidim da i jos danas kazu da je Marconi izumio radio, jadan je "nas" narod kad i ono sto su izumili nije njima dano. Dalo se Taljanu i jos dan danas Taljani slavu tog Marconija. Kakva je to pravda, kako niste to javili na site Tesla i Marconi. This is important ane needs to added.

Bosna je bila ljepa samo je nju rat unistio ali rat je unistio i cjelu bivsu Yugoslaviju. Zalosno jer nije trebalo to ..mogle se sist za stol i pricat a ne pucat. Za Bosnu treba vrimena i dollara..ali nadam se da ce biti ok. Jagoda 1 03:54, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

RE contribution

I have revised my contribution for "RE". Evidential verification for my claim can be furnished if needed.

Translations

Per request:

I can't bear it any longer. If I happen to be online and there's a problem, I'll act. If you want, however, mention that other 3RR violation that he committed against me a week ago. I let him go then, but now I regret it, coz I don't see him understanding using good-will. Let him make as many rv's as he wants, from now on I'll be reporting him at every chance, until he understands he is not allowed to do whatever he wants. (comment by Miskin)

I voted, yes, everything OK. [note, on the municipal elections in Greece yesterday] He was punished by 8 hours [block] to become more civil. Neither I can stand his edits. Look at my talk to understand what I've been through. To make it stop, I had to "close" the conversation as a poll! (my comment)

I hope you realise that none of these edits contain any 'conspiring actions'. Unless ofcourse, we consider 'conspiracy' Miskin's good-will attempt not to disclose Dahn's other 3rr violation in English (so that someone else may not report him). It seems that more than three users (including me) have a big problem with Dahn's unilateral persistent actions and huge comments of no actual content. I dare not respond one word, because everytime I face a whole essay as a response (diffs on request). Furthermore, our fellow editor, is repeatedly committing WP:3RR and WP:NPA against us (diffs for both on request). Despite this, we have kept the level of conversation according to WP standards, always having WP:AGF in mind. The rest is history-telling, and by no means future-planning-in-cooperation (i.e. 'conspiracy'). •NikoSilver• 15:24, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I never really suspected nor hinted at the "conspiracy". Ghirla does have a history of problematic behavior, but that still doesn't mean that his (polite if not AGF) request at translation had to be met with such vigor... unless there's something I don't know (I just saw Ghirla's and Yannis's talk page, and the WP:VPP thread). Do you refer to Dahn or to Ghirla by "your fellow editor"? Duja 15:31, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for intervening. I think they should all cool it off and be more productive instead of trying to stir this up. Corrected to "our fellow editor" (slip of the hand, sorry). •NikoSilver• 15:41, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

"Slip of the hand", eh? Why should I trust that, you brdzeni re? Duja

Indeed, I wanted to insult you by calling you a fellow, you virgin molester of innocent peasants! •NikoSilver• 16:08, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND

Duja, what the fuck do you know about "rere"? You know nothing because you’re a wannabe linguist. You think I'm just going to let you write off my claim as "nonsense". The reason it's nonsense to you is because you haven't developed a sense for keen discernment. I agree with the Wikipedia protocols and guidelines for the intake of information, but I don't agree with you editors thinking your on some divine level. You type act as if you’re empowered behind the fake Wikipedia credentials or your institutionalized educational achievements. When in reality, you should empower yourselves with knowledge of self and disable the reliance of information needing to be documented on main stream media in order for it to ring true. Anyway, in the future I will edit "RE" again, and maybe instead of you swatting it down, you can maybe assist me in grooming this piece so that it will be in accordance to Wikipedia guidelines.

I do understand, actually. The Wikipedia is not about the truth, but about verifiability, you know. I do act as if I'm empowered behind the fake Wikipedia credentials and my institutionalized educational achievements. You're welcome to enlighten the world with the truth on a blog or your own web page, but not here. The catch is, the corrupted Wikipedia community has also empowered me with means to stop your attempts of spreading the truth and keeping it down to widely accepted lies. Translation: if you try to insert the real truth about origin of word Re once more, you will be blocked from further editing. Duja 09:02, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Please check...

Hope you're online. Kindly check if you can semi-protect Genocide denial. An anon persistently removes the Armenian Genocide. I'll rv for now, but can't say if the version will stay. Thanks. •NikoSilver• 20:05, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Clevelander beat me to it. Please check about semi-protection. •NikoSilver• 20:10, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 16th.

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 42	16 October 2006	About the Signpost

Wikipedia partially unblocked in mainland China	$100 million copyright fund stems discussion
Floyd Landis adopts "the Wikipedia defense" as appeal strategy	News and notes: Logo votes begin, milestones
Wikipedia in the news	Features and admins
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 17:46, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Sveti Andrija

Was it a wild shot or you know something I don't? ;-) I didn't disambiguate it since I just can't figure out which one it is. Why did you choose the Rovinj one? --Dijxtra 17:58, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I cross-checked reference no. 23 in the list article and the three island articles. If the reference no. 23 is wrongly put, then I'm wrong too—at least, it's consistent :-). Duja 06:55, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Bingo! Yes, the peljar page clearly identifies it... thanks! --Dijxtra 07:32, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Barbarossa

I wonder why you're so fast renaming the article. The period (6 days) is not enough for many users to involve in the voting. Only 8 users voted with 5 support and 3 oppose. Regards, E104421 11:36, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

The standard practice is to leave it open for 5 days (see WP:RM), and I was cleaning its backlog. Many RM's have much less votes than that. As for the vote count, there was 1 SPA on the oppose side, giving it 5:2. I said in the closing that it was a close call; I also reviewed the arguments below the RM (frankly, not the ones above), and found that the pro-move argument referring to other WP:RS and common name in English had merit (not that the oppose votes hadn't, but IMO weren't articulated well); article naming according to well-known nicknames have numerous precedents. Duja 11:54, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, the voting process is too short cause even the main contributors of the article could not involve in the process. If you check the page, 3 users opposes and 5 users supports the change. Furthermore, there are many other arguments opposing the issue which you never interested in. In my opinion, as an admin, you should have read all these and counted more correctly (5 to 3). In addition, the last voters (tekleni and hectorian) always work together if you seach their contribution histories you immediately realize. They always pushes the same pov. This kind of quick voting process only favors the wishes of the organized users (team work). For this reason, I do not find quick processes fair. Regards, E104421 12:17, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

WP:RM process is not as thorough and long as e.g. WP:AfD because less harm is potentially done. 5 days is the standard period; it might be short, but you're certainly welcome to raise the issue at Wikipedia Talk:Requested moves. I correctly discounted the User:Serali's vote, because it was clearly a single-purpose account. 7 votes is generally more than enough to close a RM; I've closed ones with 2 or 3 if I found the reasoning sound.
I happen to be aware about issues of (allegations of) Greek (and Turkish) editor team-tagging, but I also saw Turkish editor Baristarim support vote, and I had no reason to suspect the nomination and votes to be in bad faith. Duja 12:41, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm not accusing anybody. However, if the aim is to provide comprehensive and neutral information, the process itself should be fair. I did not aware of User:Serali's situation, cause i could not see any comment about this in the talk/discussion page. Then, this makes total 7 votes with 2 oppose and 5 support (of 2 due to the team). By the way, i'm not supporting anybody in the turkish/greek conflicts but just myself. In addition, i'm trying to be out of these issues. Should i start another concominant voting process in order to enlarge the period? E104421 13:35, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. Restarting the RM immediately after a previous one was closed is generally frowned upon, as a violation of WP:POINT. Frankly, I don't see so big deal that it's worth pursuing the matter: the current title is not wrong (neither the previous one was), case closed (until new evidence is presented). I really don't know if it's formally possible to appeal a RM, akin to the deletion review. If you feel like it, I recommend asking at WP:RM talk. Duja 14:00, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I do not know this. As i stated above, my aim was to enlarge the period. The deal is not so big, but the main contributors of the article are absent in the voting process. That's the reason i find the period too short. Anyway, ignoring the team and the single purpose user, the result becomes 3 to 2. Maybe better to adopt the new name Barbarossa (Ottoman admiral). Regards, E104421 14:21, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

OK, E104421, that's it! after this and this, this is the 3rd time u are accusing (or implying) me of povish edits and cabalist behavour... I would kindly request u to stop spreading false info about me. Regards Hectorian 21:01, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, i'm just wondering why i'm confronting hectorian and tekleni all the time on the same pages. That's it. Furthermore, i consulted Khoikhoi, cause he knows hectorian and tekleni better. I just wanted to know his opinion. There is no bad faith in it. E104421 22:52, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Mr. Admin

I have sent thee an electronic mail. Kindly respond likewise. Sorry if the notification is redundant and your respective application rings when you receive it. I have a remark on my talk regarding this issue to avoid trollish users (like me) from notifying about e-mails... •NikoSilver• 13:11, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Contract bridge laws

Just to say that I like your new article on Laws of duplicate contract bridge. In particular I think you have done an elegant job of summarising the key points of call-out-of-rotation and similar laws in a clear, neat and concise way. Hyperman 42 23:01, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Alas, I didn't have much time lately to work on bridge articles, and the wikiproject is a bit stalled... Duja 11:55, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Problem

Pošto si sada administrator, hteo bih da ti skrenem pažnju na nešto. User:Gene Nygaard pomera imena nekih članaka bez prethodne diskusije o tome i uklanja slova koja nisu iz engleskog jezika. Na primer pomerio je članak Čadca District u Cadca District (i još mnogo drugih članaka). Plašim se da ako počne da "radi" na člancima o bivšoj Jugoslaviji, da ćemo umesto Čačak imati Cacak, umesto Niš ćemo imati Nis, itd. Pošto imam Kolinsov atlas sveta na engleskom, tamo su geografska imena u raznim državama napisana slovima koja se koriste u toj državi, a ne samo engleskim slovima. Dakle, ne moram da ti objašnjavam da je to što on radi pogrešno i loše po Vikipediju. Da li možeš ti kao administrator da ga upozoriš da to ne radi ili da kažeš nekom drugom administratoru i slično? PANONIAN (talk) 00:55, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

И ја сам то приметио. Не само што штети многим чланцима, још је и бахат кад то ради. Најгоре је што има 22,000 измена, па ко зна шта је све погорш'о. Можда неко треба да му објасни како се прави страница за преусмеравање, јер се често правда да таква страница није постојала. --estavisti 02:16, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Ma bre, ja ne znam, čovek je ili lud ili glup. Treba ga lepo blokirati i rešen problem. PANONIAN (talk) 03:56, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

E, Dujo, i molim te poveri ovaj članak na normalan naslov: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prva_vojvodjanska_brigada_(school) Kreten ga je sjebo i sad ne mogu da ga vratim na staro. PANONIAN (talk) 04:00, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Aj bacite oko vamo. --Dijxtra 08:56, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

E konačno nešto da počne da se radi u vezi toga. PANONIAN (talk) 11:49, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Problem (bar privremeno) izgleda riješen. Panonian spavaš li ti ikad? Da ja tebi dam svoj password pa dežuraj noću umjesto mene... :-) (Ama će me desysopuju iz istih stopa). Duja 11:54, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Velis, aj da bude neke koristi i od mene a ne samo da ispunjavam Antine zelje, a? :-) --Dijxtra 15:02, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Pa ne spavam baš puno. U zadnje vreme imam problema sa kičmom, pa posle 4-5 sati spavanja počnu da me bole leđa. Jebem li ga... :)) A što se Vikipedije tiče, trenutno imam 1,231 stranicu na mojoj watch listi pa jedva to stignem da sredim, da ne pominjem i tvoj deo, Dujo. :) A što se Ante tiče, nisam nešto pratio njegove edite u zadnje vreme, nadam se da neki problem može da reši i sam. :)) PANONIAN (talk) 03:33, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Stjepan

Stjepan Mitrov Ljubiša. Not "StIjepan"... --PaxEquilibrium 18:47, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Infobox Serbia

Let's try to reach a final consensus with regard to the new template. [1] --estavisti 00:13, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Muchas gracias

Hey Jugoslav, thanks a lot for supporting me in my recent RfA. It succeeded, and I am very grateful to all of you. If you ever need help with anything, please don't hesitate to ask. Also, feel free point out any mistakes I make! Thanks again, —Khoikhoi 04:40, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Thunderman

Thunderman keeps reverting all edits of anyone who holds a view different to his, even if his edists are completely wrong! I know there is no way to really stop this sort of behaviour, but maybe you could give him a short block for breaking the 3rr on Differences in standard Serbian, Croatian and Bosnian, Latin alphabet among otehrs. Thank You. - [rts_freak]

Yeah, it is rather annoying. On the BiH country article, he odstinately keeps reverting a footnote that mentions that the kuna (accepted in Croat areas) and euros (accepted everywhere in BiH), with the hysterical explanation that paying in a foreign currency is illegal, which is probably wrong and certainly irrelevant. Edit history --estavisti 12:45, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll keep an eye on him (the articles are already on my watchlist); I grabbed the nice weather for the weekend so I wasn't active on the WP. Duja 20:10, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi Duja!

I will explain slowly to you about all my edit wars on Wikipedia so that you understand that I am writing the VERIABLE truth.

1. Bosnian language:

Bosnian language does not use cyrillic! If you look at office building and so one you will se that they are not using cyrillic unless they must use the serbian language which "sadly" is a official language in Bosnia. Thunderman

Bosnian does not use Cyrillic in practice. The official language policy accepts both (it's for political reasons I know). Duja

2. Latin alphabeth:

Bosniaks also usted latin alphabeth and they become muslim by the tursk who also used the latin alphabeth. Easy to understand.Thunderman

Wrong. Turks started using Latin alphabeth during Atatürk's reign, few decades after they left Bosnia. Duja

3. Cyrillic alphabeth:

As I stated before, Bosnian language does not use Cyrillic.Thunderman

As I stated before, it uses Cyrillic de jure but not de facto Duja

4. Bosnia and Herzegovina:

Kuna is not accepted in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It is like saying that Norwegian kronor is accepted in Sweden. It is not. If somebody in the most nationalistic Croatian parts of BiH use Kuna, its up to them, but ut is not videly ACCEPTED IN BIH.Thunderman

I payed a bill myself in kunas on a Serb-owned gas station near Banja Luka. I certainly used Euros in several occasions. So, theory is one thing and practice another. If I may summarize—do you know the joke with Mujo and Haso ending in "*ebo ga ti, važno je da se para vrti."? :-) Duja

5. Bosnian genocide:

Srebrenica massacre DID occure. And ICTY DID rule that as a GENOCIDE. Easy to understand... Thunderman

No one denies that. Is that tragic fact worth mentioning in every single article related with Bosnia? I'm not saying you're doing that, but I noticed the tendency... Duja

6. Differences between Serbian, Croatian and Bosnian language:

I mentioned that before. Bosnian does not use Cyrillic. Thunderman

See above. Duja

Well, that is all, I hope you understand this fact and that you do not see me as a vandal.

I'm not seeing you as a vandal—as a tiger perhaps. Duja 06:51, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Pozdrav Duja! Thunderman 22:43, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

First of all, let me say Thunderman accused me of not being a Bosniak, which I find offensive and rude. In fact, I'm starting to believe he is not a Bosniak, and if he is, he is embarrassing all of us! Now to counter what this hysterical fanatic has stated -

• Bosnian language does uses cyrillic. These days it is becoming increasingly unpopular, but that does not change teh fact that historically it was used and still is used.
• Latin Alphabet: Thunderman seems to be mistaken about the spread of Latin alphabet, as Bosniaks did not use it until some time in the early 20th century, so to say it was spread to Bosniaks any earlier than that, is incorrect. Also he stated it spread to Bosniaks, by the Turks, but it is easy to find out that even the Turks did not use latin until after Ataturk's reforms.
• Cyrillic alphabet: as I stated before, Bosnian does use Cyrillic.
• Kuna is actually accepted in Bosnia-Herzegovina. And no, it is not like saying "Norwegian kronor is accepted in Sweden", becasue BiH and Croatia have close historical, cultural, and political ties and those two countires are in a completely different relation to each other. Besides that, it's a fact that in Australia (I live in Autralia) you are allowed to pay with New Zealand currency.
• No on is saying Srebenica did not occure, But Thunderman keeps changing the article to a highly POV version. He keeps putting that "at least 8000 have died" which has not been verified but "estimates are as high as 7000" has been verified. Also in eevry single article relating to former Yugoslavia, he has the tendency to insert that "fact" every where regardless if the article is actually relevant.
• Differences between Serbian, Croatian and Bosnian language: As I mentioned before, Bosnian does use Cyrillic.

Anyway, I hope you understand all this. It seems Thunderman is just an internet troll who loves to insert POV just to inflame people. I wouldn't be surprised if he is banned for his repeated disruptions, constant vandalisms, constant POV, uncivil edit summaries and of course, trolling. Anway Duja, have a good day, and Thanks for your time! - [rts_freak]

Please refrain from terms like "hysterical fanatic". As for the Srebrenica massacre article, I watch it with a half-eye, and the number (one or another) was clearly sourced there. Duja 06:51, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Duja:

I will put up sources in my edits at Latin alphabet, Cyrillic alphabet, Differences between Serbian, Croatian and Bosnian, Bosnian language, Bosnia and Herzegovina and a couple of more articles.

Just so you know.

Pozdrav // Thunderman 12:33, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Early closure of Seattle, Washington -> Seattle move request

There may have been other legitimate reasons to close the voting after only 24 hours, but only WP:SNOW was cited:

The result of the debate was No consensus, early closure per [[WP:SNOW].

I read WP:SNOW and it definitely does not apply. There are 9 votes supporting and 15 opposed, that's way too close to declare it doesn't have a "snowball's chance" of succeeding after only 24 hours. Consider the snowball test:

• If an issue is run through some process and the resulting decision is unanimous, then it might have been a candidate for the snowball clause.
• If an issue is "snowballed", and somebody raises a reasonable objection, then it probably wasn't a good candidate for the snowball clause.

15 to 9 is hardly "unanimous". Please consider this to be a "reasonable objection". Again, if there were other reasons to close the move, they should be cited, not WP:SNOW. Thanks. --Serge 18:30, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

I just saw your comment at the closing of the move request at Talk:Houston, Texas, where you wrote:

No consensus. While, personally, I favor the proposal, this really comes close to WP:POINT. If LA didn't pass, Houston et al. certainly won't . This becomes a waste of time for all of us, and I urge the discussion to be continued at WP:NC or wherever, to reach a global consensus. Future polls of this nature might be closed per WP:SNOW. Duja 07:42, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps you are not familiar with the recent successful moves of Chicago, Illinois to Chicago and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to Philadelphia? And, again, the voting results here are were far too close to 50/50 for WP:SNOW to apply. Please do not confuse WP:POINT with an uphill battle:

What the snowball clause is not

An uphill battle is an extremely difficult tactic but potentially winnable. For instances of genuine contention in the Wikipedia community, it is best to settle the dispute through a full process. This should not be done merely to assuage complaints that process wasn't followed, but to produce a correct outcome that requires the full process. Allowing a process to continue to its conclusion may allow for a more reasoned discourse, ensures that all arguments are fully examined, and may maintain a sense of fairness. However, process for its own sake is not part of Wikipedia policy. (Source: WP:SNOW#What the snowball clause is not)

Thanks. --Serge 18:55, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Serge, I have (a certain) understanding for your mission, but you know equally well as I that:

• The RM was doomed to end in "no consensus". The tally at the closure was something like 14/16.
• There's a parallel vote in progress at WP:NC:CITY which already covers the one at Houston.
• The same arguments are repeated over and over again. When repeated that many times, this leads to heated discussion where rational points get lost and votes are being casted out of spite rather than out of rational reasoning.

You cite that "process for its own sake is not part of Wikipedia policy". Exactly my point. In how many places this discussion should be repeated? You had a success at Chicago and Philadelphia, but, having failed at LA, you know that Houston would fail too. You kind of proved the point, but what I see now at the talk pages that many at the oppose side come and vote just out of spite. Trust me, I would like the convention changed as much as you do (well, OK, I exaggerated, not as much obviously). I really don't see a point of letting the discussion at Talk:Houston, Texas run further except for the sake of process wonking—it would be a flogging of a dead horse. Duja 07:12, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Montenegro position images

Good that you fixed that. I also didn't know what was wrong, that's the reason I did not include those images in the Infobox Montenegro when I uploaded them. Thanks for fixing that, I think that it is better to have the exact location of the city designated, instead of the whole municipality. Greetings from Podgorica! ;) Nije bitno... 20:05, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Belgrade

You may be interested in Belgrade's FA nom. Please do not vote in favour simply because it is an article about Belgrade, but rather on the article's merits. If you feel that it is not good enough, please vote against. --estavisti 05:49, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 23rd.

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 43	23 October 2006	About the Signpost

Report from the Finnish Wikipedia	News and notes: Donation currencies added, milestones
Wikipedia in the news	Features and admins
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:19, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Infobox Serbia

It's all great, just two small things.

1. The town/village thing - I know I'm being pedantic about this, but imagine reading an article and all the way through it's a village, and then in the infobox it's a "town"?
2. The mayor's party could be included in brackets after his/her name, although in 99% of cases s/he is going to be from the largest in the skusptina grada (so presumably the first in the governing parties), this just makes it clearer for the uninformed reader.

That aside, you've done a great job! --estavisti 14:38, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

1. <ironic>{{sofixit}}</ironic> :-)
2. Could be done, but seems easier to enter it literally in the infobox—besides, some mayors are independent candidates.

I played a little with AWB and it seems that it could do the migrating job well. Population of missing data will probably have to be done manually though. Duja 14:51, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I was just going through some stuff in AWB, and I realised we don't have Category:Municipalities in Serbia, which is something else that needs to be handled. Currently, all the municipalities are in "Towns, Villages, Cities of Serbia". So, this should be added through the template, if possible (which I think it is). For the mayor's party, I know some are independent, for that we could put n/a or independent etc. The reason I'm suggesting this is that the party information tells you more about an obscure mayor (as all municipality mayors are), than the mayor's name. Take Petrovac, Serbia. For all I know, Radisa Dragojevic is a Radical, Democrat, Serbian Democrat, SPO, NS etctc. As for the town village thing, I can't be bothered to pursue it any more. :-) --estavisti 16:16, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Re mayor's party: it seems easier to type mayor=[[Petar Petrovic]] ([[Yogi flyers party|YFP]]) than mayor=[[Petar Petrovic]]| mparty=[[Yogi flyers party|YFP]]. Re the category: there are populated Category:Municipalities of Vojvodina and Category:Municipalities of Central Serbia. Duja 06:42, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, guess who spent the early morning with a big list of opstine and AWB? ;-) --estavisti 07:03, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Duja 07:23, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Can't believe I just noticed. We need optional parameters for other local names (i.e. Hungarian names for some towns in Vojvodina) --estavisti 03:11, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I took care of that already -- there's optional name_alt argument. Duja

OK, so we're agreed on everything. I can do Central Serbia, and you can do Vojvodina... Sound good? :-) --estavisti 00:09, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

mu operator and modal mu calculus

See Talk:Mu operator for my comment on the recent merge. If you only made the merge because of Wikipedia:Requested moves then you can safely ignore this remark. CMummert 16:30, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

2002 census

Where can we find Serbian 2002 census data? (Number of Yugoslavs is what interests me) --Dijxtra 07:03, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

http://webrzs.stat.gov.rs/axd/en/popis.htm. Good that you told me because the bureau changed the website; I updated the reference in Serbs article, but I've got a feeling that the links are broken in several more articles. Duja 07:09, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Great, thanks. And, thanks for referencing the Balasevic thing, I plannedto dig out the quote he said on the concert (I have the concert at home), but I just couldn't find time... BTW, I think that Djole could be a great article if we referenced it out... --Dijxtra 13:51, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, okay...

Okay, since you're giving me no choice... Yeah, I guess we might just as well go for it now. Thanks again! :-) But if you can, give me a bit of time preparing my answers and stuff, so don't take this as the "official" word of acceptance yet. Can we prepare a page somewhere undisturbed and get the process running on the weekend, maybe? Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:13, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

U.S. city convention vote

Since you left a comment in the "Not Yet" section of the city convention proposal, it has been revised to no longer merge U.S. with Canada. Please reconsider your vote here. --Serge 20:08, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

The New York Sun move

Duja,

I noticed that the talk page wasn't moved along with the article, so I went back and tried to redo the move but I got the same results you did. Do you know how to get the talk page contents moved as well? (I checked the box, but it didn't appear to have any effect). Dasondas 12:47, 27 October 2006 (UTC)--

Fixed, thanks for spotting it. Duja 12:52, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Harvatov

Yet another reincarnation of this vandal. --estavisti 21:22, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I just reverted vandalism of your User and Talk pages as well by this user. // Laughing Man 20:58, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Also, I happened to notice that Template: Infobox Serbia conflicts with navigation boxes based on Template:Navigation. It would be good if you could fix it :-) --estavisti 23:56, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Comparing {{Infobox Serbia}} with {{Infobox RS}} (which doesn't have the same problem, although it's based on Infobox Serbia) might help you get to the root of the problem. --estavisti 00:57, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Could you be more specific? "Conflicts" in which sense? Duja 11:38, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Sockpuppet

Daj molim te blokiraj ovog: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PANONNIAN To je sockpuppet Arvatova i kompromituje me. PANONIAN (talk) 22:57, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Harvatova blokirao ja, Panonnian-a neko drugi. A da vi to prijavite na WP:AN/I u mom odsustvu? :-) Duja 20:14, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks...

... for that, cher Inspecteur Clouseau!! •NikoSilver• 13:24, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Let me give away a secret (but please don't spread it too much): there's a site called Google which can be used for that purpose. Duja 13:48, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Wow! Promotion to chief-inspector effective immediately! •NikoSilver• 14:57, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Reply

Take a look at this example. In the meantime, I managed to track it down to the lack of anything in the coat of arms rubric. When something (picute/text) in inserted there, the problem disappears. Oh yeah, Infobox RS does have this problem, as it turns out. --estavisti 16:07, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I'll take a look. It probably has something to do with some table line not properly closed, but it's a bit difficult to track down due to a lot of ugly "escape" sequences. Duja 16:23, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, I just saw that removing the third "}" in Template: Infobox RS caused the same problem even when there is a grb. Thankfully, I happened to be editing the template anyway, and noticed it when I was quickly testing some changes. --estavisti 16:32, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

I think I fixed it (on Infobox Serbia). I had the CoA embedded in a sub-table, but it was unconditionally open via {| but only conditionally closed (|}) if coa parameter was present. Hmm, I wonder why I made a sub-table in the first place... Duja 16:35, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. I did something on Template:Infobox RS, but I'm not sure if I did the right thing -- the templates are not identical. It seems that the culprit was the missing terminal |} from a table, but I don't have time to test. Please give it a try and revert to the previous version if I made it worse; these things can be really mind-bogging. Duja 16:40, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Nah, it's good. I just had to insert colspan=2 for the grb, which had moved to the left column. You're right about these things being mind-boggling though.... --estavisti 17:01, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

The same thing (colspan=2) should be probably done for Serbian CoA rather than that silly embedded table. But I gotta run now, I'm hungry... Duja 17:04, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 30th.

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 44	30 October 2006	About the Signpost

Wales resigns chair position as reorganization underway	Hypothetical valuation of Wikipedia scrutinized
Work underway to purge plagiarized text from articles	Librarian creates video course about Wikipedia
Report from the Japanese Wikipedia	News and notes: Commemorative mosaic started, milestones
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:34, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Unblock

Please see my message; here, and here. Regards Mustafa Akalp^TC 08:42, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

• Dear Duja,

Thanks for your calm message.
I dont want to contribute these attack war any more.Finish.
As you can see I posted my message which include my apologies/thanks and my point of views(I think,this is not uncivility). There was no attack to anybody. I said;"I have right to require an excuse from these users for those words.".This is not means "I require" from this and that Users.
No responses or All responses are welcome like yours one.But to take a "reaction" from an admin User,seems not suitable for me and I perceieved that I am obliged to response to explain what is wrong in that message.
Here my response to that User(not all users), is there any uncivility or is there any attack to anybody.
It is a surprise to me that another/unrelated user puts his (subjective/unneutral)response to that talk page. I dont know really that this behaviour is ethical and wiki rules permits it. Anyhow, from my side there willnot be any response or message to that user or anybody else related this matter.
Thanks again for your neutrality and contributions in my case.
Regards. Mustafa Akalp^TC 13:39, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Ulaanbaatar

Hi. I'm not sure there was a good reason for the move. Sure, there were more votes but the reason was "Use English". But Ulan Bator is no more an English word than Ulaanbaatar is. Usage by the news media seems evenly split but official usage by various government agencies, including the UN is almost completely for Ulaanbaatar. So I don't think a good enough case was made for the move. --Polaron | Talk 15:50, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

I read the "use English" argument (which I personally hate) as "use the most common name" and I assumed most voters were after that. I saw your comment at the RM, but I didn't find it compelling enough to get against the majority. Duja^► 15:58, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

The thing is, it is also not the most common name so that doesn't work either. It looks more or less evenly split based on Google searches (with a slight advantage to Ulaanbaatar). The situation is similar to Peking vs. Beijing. The name is the same but the romanization was officially changed. --Polaron | Talk 16:23, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. You seem to be right, I should have done the homework better. Still, I can defend my closure by the votecount (albeit, admittedly, I always see the people who voted there gathered wherever voting invoking WP:UE is mentioned). I'm not sure how to proceed though. In addition, I fixed a zillion double redirects so it's not easy to revert the thing even if I wanted to. Duja^► 16:44, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

I posted a comment at WT:RM to get a wider opinion on the matter. If the opinion is to uphold the move then I'll accept it. Also, there are about 10 double redirects that you missed (out of 22). If it is reversed, I'll volunteer to fix the double redirects myself. --Polaron | Talk 16:50, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Malakas

Dear Duja, Please check Malakas article, some paragraps are exactly copied from External malakas link .Is there will be a copyright problem or not? Regards. Mustafa Akalp^TC 14:01, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

William Cavendish

Hi, I have moved WC, the coutier to William Cavendish (courtier) and have disambiguated the appropriate links to William Cavendish. But I can't do the second step in your suggestions, since I haven't adminrights. So please would you move William Cavendish (disambiguation) to William Cavendish? Thanks for your work and help. Greetings ~~ Phoe _talk 18:35, 2 November 2006 (UTC) ~~

Thanks for the move! ~~ Phoe _talk 15:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC) ~~

Number Changes

Hi Duja. I stopped commenting on the Croats page because I've gotten sick and tired of this anon completely ignoring the argument. Yes there are sources for the numbers he gives but they are not appropriate to the scope of the article. The upper number sources only gives the estimate of how many Croats LIVE abroad (and then he arbitrarily added them to the census popularion to get 9 million). The number of Croats who LIVE abroad is a big number because Croats form non-citizen workers in many Western countries, but that does no subtract them from the current population. Just like in Romanians, the Croats are being counted TWICE for one person. In addition to that the lower number focuses on ethnologue reports. The article is about ETHNIC Croats not simply anyone who speaks Croatian as a second language (or even as a native language). That would be the equivalent of estimating the ethnic English population based on how many people in the world spoke English. The ONLY good referecnes for statistics by the Croatian ethnic group are census numbers (and even they include great grandchildren like you mentioned so even THEY are ovestimates - but all the ethnicity pages have standardized their use so theres no reason to not use them for the Croats page.)

You're right, I didn't know Montenegrins focuses on the RESIDENTS of Montenegro. Frankly though, I think thats ridiculous. The Serbs are already represented in the Serbs article, why do self-reporting Montenegrins not get an individual, equivalent page? I move to change the focus on Montenegrins on only those professing a Montenegrin ethnicity. Why would you disagree with this if you do disagree? I changed back the Croats number but will wait until we can reach some kind of standard for the Montenegrins article. Horvat Den 10:08, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Montenegrins focuses on the residents of the Montenegro (specifically, Serbs of Montenegro and Montenegrins of Montenegro) because it's the only sensible way to go, as they have common history, language, customs, culture etc. How do they differ except in political opinion? How would one otherwise explain huge variations in census numbers from 90% Serbs in 1909, through 90% Montenegrins in 1948, to the present situation? Artificial divisions do not imply artificial organizations of articles. Duja^► 20:18, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

But then why have numbers for them at all? These listings are generally reserved for ethnic groups and not simply people living in a state. Plus I'm sure there are Montenegrins who will argue that Montenegrin was and is a distinct ethnicity with its own distinct language, and even though both you and I think thats silly, it would merit the ethnic group statistics more than one for the entire popularion for the state. In the 1920s, the Macedonians were counted as Serbs in the Yugoslav state census. I think its on the Yugoslavia article, or one of the republics articles. My point is, if we have those statistics at all, it makes more sense to pull a Moldovans thing than just list the entire population of the country. Horvat Den 04:27, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Because it's generally interesting for a reader to know how big is an ethnic group in general. I fail to see a big deal you're making out of it; since the definition of ethnic group is vague in general, the numbers will also be vague. In many cases, they're overblown, yes. Somewhat paradoxically, Montenegrin ethnic question is different from the ones in other ex-Yu republics: both "Serbs" and "Montenegrins" from Montenegro fiercely claim that Montenegro is their nation-state and homeland (unlike e.g. Bosniaks from Serbia or Serbs from Bosnia), and more resembles the situation in e.g. Nordic countries; take a look at Swedish-speaking Finns as a parallel. Besides, Finns does a similar thing. Duja► 20:40, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

And also, the bloat on the Irish people page isn't really a big bloat. The Irish are the kings of the emigre. In America, honestly like every third person has Irish ancestry, and it's even more thick (though lower in overall population) in places like Australia and Canada. The Irish form unbelievably huge diasporas. It's been like that for centuries. Horvat Den 10:11, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Now you're contradicting yourself. The "overestimate" of Croats does not come from non-citizen workers in Western countries ("gastarbeiters" as we call them here); they're not counted twice, for the most part, as AFAIK censuses distinguish them. The cause is the same as the "Irish bloat": those are ancestors of emigration during the late 19th and throughout 20th century: largely South America, USA and Australia. Even a casual read of the article Croats would tell you that. Thus, the counting difficulty is the same: does a English-speaking grandson of purely Croatian immigrants, of Croatian surname, of a father who barely speaks the language and Angloamerican mother, but knows his origin and goes to vacation in Croatia, count as a Croat? Etc. Etc. Note that both numbers are clearly sourced, and, as I told at the talk page, it's better to let readers decide. Duja^► 20:18, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not. Have you taken a look at the sources that are used and the indirect methods in which they are used? Take a look at the first one: [2]. It's an ethnologue report. Don't you think its inappropriate to be using the number of Croatian language speakers around the world for the number of ethnic Croatians?! That's like using the number of French speakers for the number of ethnic French people. Not everyone who speaks Croatian is a Croat, especially not those who speak Croatian as a second language. Now, the second source: [3] only makes a parenthetical comment saying (4.5 million Croats and people of Croatian heritage live outside of the Republic of Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina). This number was unflinchlingly added to the current Croat population in B&H and Croatia to come up with 9 million. These are very bad, error-prone indirect measures. Here it is very possible that Croatian workers abroad were mention in the 4.5 million. Please, reconsider your support for these statistics, because I think they are very very faulty. It would be great if you could support to return to the original census totals. I do not wish to argue but I really can't accept this type of method for finding out population totals. It's easily morphed by nationalism. Horvat Den 04:27, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

No, I don't think that the number of Croatian language speakers is inappropriate. Comparison with French is entirely inappropriate; Croatian is not spoken by non-Croats, especially out of Croatia (and number of non-Croats in Croatia is fairly small). Besides, I don't think ethnologue counts the second language (although they have other problems with their statistics). About the second source, I agree it's problematic; however, the problem with strict application of censuses is that the South-American countries don't have census entry for ethnic origin. If you can read Croatian, take a look at the source for Argentina (which covers pretty much all the numbers in circulation) and they're all wildly varying guesstimates. I can agree that some 6 million is a reasonable number (easily reachable if you just sum up the source figures); like I said, the 9 million is probably applicable only if one "counts the blood cells". That's however the figure which is reported by Croatian diaspora associations and government organizations; the article discusses that in more detail and I just added it to the infobox to stop the edit war. Duja► 20:31, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Kosovo

There are two edit wars ongoing at Kosovo War and NATO bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Could you semi-protect those two pages (it's largely fuelled by IPs)? It would be good if you could make clear that edit-warring and POV-pushing are not acceptable, especially in light of the Arbritration Commission's ruling. --estavisti 18:35, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 6th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 45	6 November 2006	About the Signpost

Arbitration election campaigns begin	Blogger studies Wikipedia appearance in search results
Intelligence wiki receives media attention	Report from the German Wikipedia
News and notes: Foundation donation, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:10, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your support!

Se la face ay pale, la cause est... Se la face ay pale, la cause est... 23:42, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

If I'm a bit pale in the face now, it's because of the amazing support during my recent request for adminship and because of all those new shiny buttons. And if in the future my use of them should not always be perfect please don't hesitate to shout at me any time, sunset, noon or sunrise.

Hey Mr. Perforator

Re this, thanks, but the anon didn't vandalize. Fixed now, click next diff. :-) •NikoSilver• 11:53, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

The "rollback" button is too tempting to use even in the cases of good-faith edits which seriously screw the articles. :-) Duja^► 12:25, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Should have used it here too. What's with your sig? You have a triangle stuck on it like a feather. I suggest you drop the <sup> tags and make it look more like this, rather than this. •NikoSilver• 13:06, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

We're apparently capable of reading each other's minds: I changed it half an hour ago. Duja► 13:08, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

...see [4]. Duja► 13:11, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Ahhh, those infalibus idioms... (or should I say inphallibus?) •NikoSilver• 13:57, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Opinion please

I've formulated a proposal and need to know what NPOV people like you (muahahahaha) think about it. See User:NikoSilver/Disputed regions - Summary style (and click talk for your comments). The proposal is a result of a lengthy debate/poll in Template talk:Countries of Europe, but it extends obviously beyond Europe, so I made a subpage before I post it in WP:VPP. Thanks. •NikoSilver• 22:55, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Фали...

...карта за Алибунар.--estavisti 03:13, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

...i za Sremske Karlovce. Vidio sam, ali nisam stigao da je dopravim. Evo sa'ću. Duja► 07:33, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Mali poslić

Pozdrav. Imam mali poslić za tebe: Demographics of the Kingdom of Hungary. Molim te promeni naslov tom članku tako da na kraju nema tačku. E, i još dve stvari, da li možda znaš imena nekih poznatih ličnosti koje su živele na Novom Naselju (osim Dare Bubamare koju sam dodao u članak Satelit). Bilo bi dobro da članak o Novom Naselju ima i imena poznatih stanovnika (ako takvih ima :)). I imaš li neke podatke o fudbalskom klubu Mladost jer hoću da napišem članak o tome. Da li imaju oni svoj web sajt možda? PANONIAN (talk) 04:51, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Demographics sređen. Što se tice poznatih ličnosti, evo naprimer ti i ja :-). Sad ozbiljno—ne znam ovako na prvu loptu nikog značajnijeg (dođavola, jedva poznajem i sopstvene komšije a kamoli Naselje), a tek o Mladosti ništa. Duja► 07:43, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. --Öcsi 10:28, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Result of Armenia strawpoll

NB This poll has now closed, it being Friday 10th November and about 10.30am where I live. The numbers are as follows:

• Support 6 (although User:Hamparzoum's existence has been disputed by User:Tekleni.
• Neutral 1.
• Oppose 10.

As such, no mandate has appeared for making the requested changes to the article. As previously advertised, Caligvla and I are taking a break from this dispute for a week. After this, the case may be taken to the mediation cabal, although I hope to avoid this eventuality. Walton monarchist89 10:42, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Rotkvarija

E, ajde molim te pomeri naslov Rotkvarija (Žitni Trg) u Rotkvarija. Pričao sam o tome sa Goranom, pa pošto smo zaključili da Rotkvarija i Žitni Trg nisu isto, onda ću napisati poseban članak o Žitnom Trgu a ovom treba promeniti ime. PANONIAN (talk) 15:25, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Evo mislim da sam pobrisao sve viškove i sredio redirecte.

...oči mi ubeleše od Infobox Serbia municipality... mislio sam uradiću Srbiju za 2 sata a drljam ceo dan... Duja► 15:32, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

E znaš šta, mislim da smo se zeznuli. Evo baš sada sam našao jednu mapu Novog Sada, gde se naziv Žitni Trg odnosi na potpuno isto područje kao naziv Rotkvarija na drugoj mapi. Goran je tvrdio da je Žitni Trg samo deo Rotkvarije, ali nije. Ta dva su sinonimi. Pa ako ti nije teško samo da vratiš na stari naslov. :) Ja ću srediti redirekte. PANONIAN (talk) 15:38, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

A što ne ostavite jedan naziv u naslovu? Mislim da se "Žitni Trg" češće koristi u poslednje vreme. Duja► 15:41, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

E ne moraš da vraćaš, vratio sam sam. Za ovo izgleda ne trebaju adminska ovlašćenja, ali za prvu promenu su trebala. Inače u literaturi o Novom Sadu koju imam koristi se više naziv Rotkvarija, tako da mislim da bi ipak trebalo ostaviti oba imena, kao i kod Novog Naselja. PANONIAN (talk) 15:46, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Da, možeš da vratiš iif je stari redirekt nastao pomeranjem date strane... tako nešto (tj. ako ima samo "Moved" u history logu). Duja► 15:52, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Kikinda

U članku Kikinda novi infobox i sadržaj se preklapaju (bar u browseru Opera 603). Može li nešto da se uradi da ne bude tako? PANONIAN (talk) 01:55, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Jel' sad bolje? Nemam pojma, radim naslepo jer nemam Operu a na Firefoxu je OK; probaj da eksperimentišeš sa dodavanjem i brisanjem elemenata iz Infoboxa. Može biti "bug" u kodu šablona, a možda i bug u Operi... Duja► 20:43, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Pa nije bolje. Bilo bi bolje kad bi infobox bio uži za 2 cm. :) PANONIAN (talk)

Evo malo sam suzio, skratio sam predsednika opštine za opštinu. Kako ispadne tako malo širine za sve zajedno? Na 1024x768 i normalnom fontu, sa sve sidebar-om, kod mene su razmaknuti dobrih 6-7 cm. Duja► 17:04, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Pa tabela je sada podnošljiva u smislu da ne preklapa reči u sadržaju ali još preklapa okvir sadržaja (da je još 8 milimetara uža bila bi savršena). Što se tiče predsednika opštine, glupo je da piše samo predsednik. Možda je bolje da umesto toga napišemo "mayor"? Kraće je i približnije je značenju onoga što hoćemo da kažemo. PANONIAN (talk) 21:25, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok, mislim da sam sredio sam. Sada je dobro. PANONIAN (talk) 21:34, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Recent move of A. J. Cook

Thanks for taking the time to move A. J. Cook, I appreciate it. —B33R ^{Talk • Contribs} 23:46, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

vandalism-like page move

Hi Some normal user "reverted" i.e. circumvented your admin page move http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Finlandswedes&diff=84847660&oldid=84803373 --Espoo 05:35, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

He did it again. --Espoo 22:11, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

That block

I think we should go ahead and unblock. PMA seems to have gone offline, who knows when he'll come back. And I now see he has quite a history of rather harsh, questionable blocks that have been overturned. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:19, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Agree. Duja► 14:31, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Infobox Belgrade

Please don't remove the "old" infobox, which deals with Belgrade's municipalities more specifically than the general template can. --estavisti 02:06, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Why? What's the specific? Duja► 07:37, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 13th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 46	13 November 2006	About the Signpost

Full accessibility, dramatic growth reported for Chinese Wikipedia	ArbCom elections: Information on Elections
Report identifies Wikipedia as a leader in non-US traffic	News and notes: Board passes four resolutions, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:05, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey!

Dontcha dare touch my article again with your offensive threats! PS. The Epsilons paid for this! •NikoSilver• 23:21, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Heheh, I thought you like to be teased... Duja► 08:40, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Just a quick thanks for responding to Meno25's concerns on my talk page :-) —Mets501 (talk) 19:08, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Царински рат

Hey, could you merge Pig War (Serbia) & The Pig War, under the first title? Thanks --estavisti 05:16, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, wikibreak—but you don't need an admin anyway (see WP:MERGE#Performing the merger), it's just copy & paste. Duja► 10:16, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

High Card Points

Hello,

You reverted a change that i made to High Card Points, where i established that there was another use for "HCP" which at the time redirected to High Card Points, whereas in a crystallographic context "HCP" is clearly Hexagonally Close Packing. I was of the opinion that more people would be looking for high card points than hex. close pack. so i added the otheruses tag.

You are right that hex. close pack. has nothing to do with high card points, hence it was "other uses".

Subsequently its now a disambig page, but i think that reverting was not needed, and a talk page submission would have been a better route.

Seeing as its resolved there is little need to continue this, other than a point on style/policy. Thanks User A1 08:41, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

It was long time ago, so I barely recall on which article it was; the close packing was a redlink then so I just reverted it. In any case, it seems OK now except that few bridge links lead to dab page HCP. Duja► 10:18, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

pitanje

nestao si -- kada se vracas? --VKokielov 02:12, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

GiorgioOrsini

See User_talk:Dijxtra#GiorgioOrsini

Dijxtra ima dispute s ovim korisnikom, pa ne bi bilo u redu da intervenise (pitah ga), no ti mozes da bude medijator. Tip je ocito internet trol. --PaxEquilibrium 12:43, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 20th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 47	20 November 2006	About the Signpost

One week later, Wikipedia reblocked in mainland China	Military history dominates writing contest
News and notes: Wikibooks donation, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:28, 21 November 2006 (UTC)