![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Happy Holidays. :) ( LAz17 ( talk) 20:12, 28 December 2011 (UTC)).
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Dabnube Swabian. Since you had some involvement with the Dabnube Swabian redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). – Miranche T C 23:28, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Just 70 years ago you would have likely been imprisoned and killed in 8 of the 10 countries you've lived in/been to. I find that interesting. -- ChristianHistory ( talk) 13:13, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
-- ChristianHistory ( talk) 15:05, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
DIREKTOR, you have the document that states that AVNOJ adopted a new flag in 1945, that is the flag with the rounded star. I don't have a source right now, but I have seen sources that state that a different version of the flag existed prior,, but after the Serbian-Croatian friendship flag, in 1942 the Partisans adopted a series of flags with the tricolour and the straight-armed star. Though I will not use it as a source - the photograph who just recently shown me at the Democratic Federal Yugoslavia article is this 1942-1945 flag of the Partisans, but again I will search for a source. As I said, it is known that the Yugoslav Partisans adopted set of flags in 1942, including the Partisans' naval ensign that has a straight-armed star. The Partisans prior to 1942 used a Serbian-Croatian twin tricolour flag as part of their Serbian-Croatian friendship initiative.-- R-41 ( talk) 18:35, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
below this notice, but you should read the
guide to appealing blocks first. v/r -
T
P 14:04, 5 January 2012 (UTC)It's not listed as an exemption.--v/r - T P 19:30, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
TParis, not that I'm complaining I'm not actually blocked, but if I am going to be blocked I wouldn't want to have to wait another week after all this. As I said above, I realize at this point I'm only able to annoy everyone further :), so I'm done with ANI. I haven't been editing anywhere since you posted the block template above, and I wonder if the past couple days will count towards the one week? As far as I'm concerned, I'm certainly not going to edit while I'm supposed to be blocked, whether the block is actually in place or not for the duration.
Another question I'd like to ask you regards how exactly the interaction ban works? For example, if Timbouctou should post an RfM, would I be allowed to respond to that? -- Director ( talk) 10:57, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello DIREKTOR, with this edit, in enacting a consensus of the community reached at the Administrator's Noticeboard, I hereby inform you that you are banned for 6 months from
The discussion leading to the ban may be viewed here. Salvio Let's talk about it! 14:52, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
FkpCascais, I should probably report you for trolling on my talkpage ("nice to see you were blocked"). Please be sure not to use my talkpage to evade your t-ban. -- Director ( talk) 11:53, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Emblem of Yugoslavia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sheaves ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:43, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Nominations for the " Military Historian of the Year" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so here. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the coordinators, Nick-D ( talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:54, 15 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject.
G'day Director, please see my RfM re Fourth anti-Partisan Offensive for my policy arguments against this. I am flagging this because I do not want an edit war over this, but am disappointed that you did not respond to the RfM and have not engaged in any discussion before moving all of these articles. There is no consensus between our key texts on this. Peacemaker67 ( talk) 00:25, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Pozdrav,
Could you please elaborate on why you decided to add a distinct classification? Despite that few primary sources do speak in favor of that, the issue was brought into question numerous times without pushing forward credible literature to back up that side of the dispute (or both for that matter). Er-vet-en ( say) 15:45, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Ustaše, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Croatian Home Guard ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:06, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Ed
[talk]
[majestic titan] 23:52, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Uniform 03.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hammersoft ( talk) 21:24, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi Director, it's a Walther PPK, not a Walter. Peacemaker67 ( talk) 21:51, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Goldstein is nonetheless a locally published source and we do not pick and choose which locally published sources we prefer. It was agreed for them not to be used on both the Chetniks and Yugoslav Partisans talkpages. -- ◅PRODUCER ( TALK) 00:03, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:45, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
If I can't put copyrighted picture of NATO flag.svg can I pin the flag as a {{flag| / {{flagicon| style?? Please answer on my talk page 68.202.26.86 ( talk) 02:35, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Split, Croatia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Snow day ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:42, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
Without any surprise even on this - fairly minor - writer there was the usual and sad discussions about the name. As you were directly involved in the discussion can I understand why the article is named with the Croatian version of the name when in this case it is IMHO quite evident that the Italian (or the Latin name) should be used? For you personal reference consider in Italy on the names of the street it is written "Elio Lampridio Cerva, umanista dalmata XV secolo". Wouldn't be more correct to name the article to the name used for this person when in life and report him as Dalmatian? Also it is surprising to name with a Croatian version a writer that wrote exclusively in Latin and Italian and rejected Slavik? -- Silvio1973 ( talk) 10:54, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Of course it would not be of any relevance that in Italy he was considered Italian, but indeed this is not the case. In Italy he is considered Dalmatian. For the same reason it is not of any relevance that in Croatia is considered Croatian.
At the end of the day it is always the same discussion. Most of the Croatian historiography insists that Italian/Dalmatian ethnicity at the end of Middle Age was marginal. The reality is that it was quite marginal in terms of population, but not in terms of contribution to culture and arts. And not because those people were a better race, just because the most of the nobility preferred to consider themselves as Roman descendent, Dalmatian or Venetian. This issue is very frequent elsewhere. In the XIX century the nobility of Gent (Flamish part of Belgium) considered themselves as French, because the Flamish were the poors. This is perhaps irratating for modern Flamish historiography but does not change the fact that that the area of culture and art of the Gent nobility belongs to Francophony.
Medutin Vrsta Direktor, I am not discussing the Ragusa in the XV century was fairly out of the sphere of influence of Venice (and BTW nothing close in any sense to modern Italy existed at that time). And I do not discuss that the most of the population did not speak Italian/Dalmatian/Latin (albeit your quoted number of 99% it's an exaggeration). I discuss merely that EL Cerva is described here as Croatian (to the point that the main name used for the article is the Croatian one), when even he described himself as out of the sphere of the Slavik culture. Even if we do not give a damn to what Cerva thought he was (and perhaps this is quite legitimate), there is still the issue about the sourcing of your claim.
PS Don't worry, I am not going to start with you the same dispute I had with Zenanarh. If you think that you are right because this guy born in what today is Croatia or because he was a representative of the non-Slavik nobility that was oppressing the poor Slavik people there is nothing that could drive the discussion forward because we would move the issue from History to Politics.
--
Silvio1973 (
talk) 11:50, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Director, I am well aware of this argument. I do not need to be any more convinced that the claim of "Croat" and "Italian" are absolutely inappropriate when speaking of people living at that time. I think I have shared enough this argument in all the different talks (please check my last change in Luciano Laurana talk page). But honestly, under which condition can you consider someone Slavik when he even refused to write in that language?
Concerning the use of the name you know more than me that the use of Slavik to name all people from Dalmatia did not start before the beginning of the 18th century. Elio Lampridio Cerva was not known as "Ilija Crijevic" at the time. To support your claim you should quote sources reporting him as "Ilija Crijevic" at that time.
P.S. On my dictionary (M. Deanovic), Vrsta is the translation of "Kind" or "Dear".
--
Silvio1973 (
talk) 20:22, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Direktor, you play with (my) words here. The language used by the majority of the people in Dubrovnik at the time is almost irrilevant, what counts is the ethnicity of the person. However, I am not convinced that at the time Slavik was spoken in the terms you describe. This is just another feature of Croatian historiography. On the old customs building of Dubrovnik it is still written "DOGANA" and the main street of the city in named "STRADUN". To complete the job of Romance eradication perhaps Croatia should once for all remove all this residual evidence. Let's do this job, this avoid to people like me to born in the future.
In the XV century Dubrovnik was out of the sphere of influence of Venice (fact) but many literate people were still influenced by Romance languages (fact).
It looks that the fact that EL Cerva considered himself as strongly external to the Slavik world is totally irrelevant to you. Perhaps we could give right to someone dead to be what he wanted to be when he was in life.
And let's be very clear, I do not believe in "evil Slavic propagandists". I believe that at some point Croatia took fully knowledge of themselves and arrange the history in the most suitable way.
Yes, the burden is on me and I am not sure that I am going to take it. This is a fairly minor writer, if I can find something easily I might submi some evidence. In this Dalmatia project even when you submit strong evidence such the result of a census or the opinion of the Britannica there is no way to change things, so I do not see how this article could change because I submit the evidence from a minor scholar (I could not find anything of major for such little known writer).
PS I speak Russian, Serbo-Croatian really cannot scare me.
--
Silvio1973 (
talk) 06:19, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Fair point, let's focus on the facts but please avoid any allegation of racism and nationalism with me. Please believe that genuinely it is not the case.
Direktor, I did not write that the most of the people in Dalmatia were not Slaviks (infact I said the opposite, please check the discussion we are having at the very beginning). Also I did not write that those people had no culture before the the 18th century (or whenever), I clealy meant in the 18th century Croats started to have the full knowledge of the modern concept of nationality. And there is nothing racist in this affirmation, indeed the very same thing applies for the Italians or the Germans.
Let's come to the reason, the real reason. This writer used to write in Latin and clearly stated that he belonged to the Romance area of culture (I can quote what he wrote, but I guess you know it already).
Ivan, the fair thing would be to move the title of this article to the Latin version of the name (indeed the original one) and direct both the Italian and the Croatian version of the name to the Latin one. As things are right now, it is even not possible to make a search from his Italian version of the name. Do you consider this fair?
If this proposal does not seem sound to you, yes we stop the discussion here. Our positions would be then too fare to get to any compromise.
P.S. Concerning the conception I have of Dalmatian culture, yes it is different from the one of Croatian historiography. But please consider that it is legitimate to have some doubts about the fairness of Croatian historiography. An example? It might even be that Marco Polo did not born in Venice. But from there to consider his life belonging to Croatian history there is quite a distance. On facts like that is built-up what I could call "legitimate doubts".
-- Silvio1973 ( talk) 08:57, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Direktor, I am not pointing you because I consider you responsible of anything. It is just a side note to make you understand why I have perhaps some doubts when Croatian references are used to justify facts. Another example? It is not my fault if in some academic circles in Croatia there are historians supporting their thesis using chromosomic comparative analysis. Unfortunately, such facts happen and it is unavoidable that they contribute to creates a general climate of doubt about the fairness of modern Croatian historiography.
OK let's remain on the matter.
Of course the real reason it's not because he wrote in Latin. Please pay me some respect even if I am only a person of average culture. The most of the people used to write in Latin untill the the 16th century. Newton wrote in Latin but this did not make him Romance. Latin was used as a language of convenience because the language of literates.
But here the facts are different. EL Cerva clearly stated that he belonged to the Romance culture and refused in quite straight terms Slavik language and culture. And was educated in Rome. These are facts, but one could still claim that he was Slavik because his family was Slavik. Are you really sure of this? Again here we do not speak of claimed nationality, but of the name to use. And again it is not fair that it is not possible to make the search on en:wiki typing "Elio Lampridio Cerva".
You write in English but you are Croat. But if tomorrow you will start exclusively to write in English (and of course if your books sell a lot) and affirm that you refuse Croatian culture, in two centuries you will be considered an English writer. Ok, you might be considered also Croatian because you have perhaps a Croatian passport, but at the time of EL Cerva that stuff did not exist.
PS I have made a modification on the main article. Give a look and if you want to keep the previous version please justify with a valid source (or if you really feel the actual source is valid just undo my edit, don't be worry I will not insist).
Hi. When you recently edited Ivo Tijardović, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fascist Italy ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:56, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello I think we had a misunderstanding. I explained it better this time. Sry for the misunderstanding. regards Seader ( talk) 01:49, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Why is that important to push Serbo-croatian in all those articles. You must have talk page agreement for all of those, you see that your edits are reverted. Give us the reasons for that, i dont see those. And i am speaking for article Serbia, primarily. :) -- WhiteWriter speaks 21:57, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
No problem, but do you realise that YOU started with this? Why do you call me Silvio? Don't do to the others what you do not want they do to you. Kind regards. -- Silvio1973 ( talk) 17:23, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
My user name is Silvio1973, not Silvio. I called you with your name (alleged) because you started. However, I will refer to you as Direktor. No problem. -- Silvio1973 ( talk) 18:07, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
It will not happen again, but please do not call me with my first name. I dislike you to take such proximity. --Silvio1973 (talk) 18:17, 18 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Silvio1973 ( talk • contribs)
Hi. When you recently edited Yugoslav Partisans, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fascist Italy ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 18:45, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
Per the continuing debate, is it true that all laws of BiH were repealed by the Dayton accords? — kwami ( talk) 10:15, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Ed
[talk]
[majestic titan] 09:41, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Stop editing without consensus. BoDu ( talk) 11:57, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Just like that "I think this is actually the correct CoA" [1]? You think? Without any source? [2]-- Bracodbk ( talk) 20:18, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Zdenka Janeković Römer: Okvir slobode, page 364.: After the Treaty of Zadar 1358 political reasons prompted the nobility that in the crucial moment of independence take the Coat of Arms of the new sovereign. Hungary, Árpáds (Apradovići) Coat of Arms with red and silver beams was adopted in the Republic of Ragusa as their own, so it stayed after the termination of state ties with Hungary. Luccari Giacomo (Jakov Lukarić) mentions that in the 17th century voting urns in councils of the Republic were labeled with the original red and white beams. Although recognized as a declarative character of subordination sovereignty of the Hungarian king, Coat of Arms with silver and red beams was conceived and used as a sign of the sovereignty of the Republic of Dubrovnik.
Well, Zdenka Janeković Römer, Ivan Mustać, Jakov Lukarić (Giacomo Luccari), Vito Galzinski, Milan Rešetar, Frane Čizmić, they all agree that Coat of Arm is red and silver, sometimes red and white, and during the 18th century rarely blue and red (made by mistake according to those who have studied history of this Coat of arms). I have plenty of different pics with red and silver, or red and white (white symbolizes silver) from catalog of the exibition of history of Coat of arms of the Republic of Ragusa:
and only two with red and blue Coat of Arm. What else do I have to do to prove you that present Coat of Arm of the City of Dubrovnik is based on historical one with red and silver stripes? If anyone wants this pics please send me a mail.-- Bracodbk ( talk) 15:43, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Dalmatia and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
Thanks, Whenaxis talk · contribs | DR goes to Wikimania! 01:01, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
The plain Yugoslav tricolour flag-map is appropriate for the Yugoslavia-stub template because it is about Yugoslavia as a whole, not just the SFRY. The plain Yugoslav tricolour is not a royalist symbol, it is the same as the pan-Slavic flag and was used by Yugoslavists, it served as the flag of the rump Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the plain Yugoslav tricolours are seen used today by supporters of a state of Yugoslavia. Besides, the SFRY flag was based on this flag, it simply put the Communist Red Star on top of it. A plain Yugoslav tricolour can represent Yugoslavia from its beginning to its end.-- R-41 ( talk) 17:46, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. -- ◅PRODUCER ( TALK) 12:26, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
Please apologize. I am very offended that you disrespected and insulted my efforts to create the Yugoslavian coat of arms symbol that took me hours to make. After I listened to you and you spat upon me over a minor disagreement - I am outraged. You don't have to apologize, but I am offering you a way out of being reported for violation of WP:CIVIL - if you ignore or delete this like the last comment - I will report you, I don't care even if I get reprimanded because I won't put up with this kind of work abuse - if you are a good person you shouldn't spit upon people who are are working with you on something when they have listened to almost everything you requested. Now please apologize and let's restart positive conversation on the flag issue.-- R-41 ( talk) 01:39, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Unitary National Liberation Front is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unitary National Liberation Front until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Nobody Ent 11:10, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is " Template:Yugoslav Axis collaborationism". Thank you. -- BoDu ( talk) 10:02, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
Don't be too long out there in the real world... Peacemaker67 ( talk) 10:04, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Dalmatia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dalmatian ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:38, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
Sssshhh! *rubs jam on your nose like the dormouse in alice in wonderland*
Your recent comments had uninvolved people in a tizz thinking a textual fight was about to break out commenting on dispute resolution volunteers talk pages. Your contributions are very valid, and appreciated, but stop scaring the newbies! :D In disputes, people tend to be emotional, and may take tongue in cheek witty comments out of context and have a bit of a wobbly over it, and as some parties involved are clearly pushing an agenda rather than understanding the policy implications, it could very easily get ugly. I apologise for contacting you personally about it, but you seem like a wonderful contributor so I thought you ought to know first hand that someone is :( and may have taken your comment out of context. <3 BaSH PR0MPT ( talk) 03:16, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Template:Yugoslav Axis collaborationism has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
BoDu (
talk) 16:30, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
From your edit moving the "State Security Service" to the "Department of State Services" I believe you have not read the act establishing the agency. The National Security Agencies Act of 1986 (Decree 19) and the the SSS Instrument I of 1999 (General Abubakar invoked his powers under section 6 of the NSA act to define the objectives of the SSS before transition to civil rule)only recognizes the "State Security Service" and not the Department of State Services. The DSS is a cover name used by the organization because it is in reality only a department within the presidency.
Please cross check and make necessary amendments. If you have been mislead by the agency's overt use of the DSS name in recent times, please don't. They have only resorted to the DSS name in a bid to shake off the negativity associated with the SSS name due to the long years under the military. The agency still writes ALL official correspondence, presents their budget and prosecutes cases with the only name recognized by the law, the State Security Service. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lamodele ( talk • contribs) 17:57, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
DIREKTOR, can you please just tell your reason why you find this first image better then the new one at the talk page, since you initiated the discussion. -- Wusten fuchs 13:08, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Ed
[talk]
[majestic titan] 02:06, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Sorry that I had to partially revert your changes, but I felt/feel that saying a section of shoreline is small is something that should only be done with a reliable source saying as much, especially since it tends to imply unimportant (which is actually contradicted by Slovenia having the 4th largest port by cargo in the Adriatic!). I think that the reader can read the table of shoreline lengths (and other info) and decide for themselves. Allens ( talk | contribs) 22:19, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Landesfarben Croatia-Slavonia.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Cloudbound ( talk) 17:14, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Please, participate in the discussion. Removing sourced informations is not good. -- Wusten fuchs 17:22, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
A smile for you
You’ve just received a random act of kindness! 66.87.0.137 ( talk) 13:31, 31 March 2012 (UTC) |
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is " Talk:Serbia under German occupation, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/DIREKTOR/Archive#25_March_2012". Thank you. -- Peacemaker67 ( talk) 13:01, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
![]() Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite Hello Director. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click
HERE to participate. You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 11:20, 5 April 2012 (UTC) |
Your recent editing history at Serbia (Territory of the German Military Commander) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Tiptoety talk 17:47, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
You have insulted me and my integrity with this post. I am asking for apology. -- WhiteWriter speaks 17:56, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
Per the discretionary sanctions authorized in the Digwuren case, this article is subject to 1RR. Reverting more than one time in a 24-hour period may result in a block or a ban from this article and its talk page. All reverts should be discussed on the talk page. This is a bright line, not an entitlement, and reverting exactly once per day is considered disruption, and users doing so are subject to being blocked. Please see this notice about recent edit warring. Editors wishing to make controversial edits are strongly advised to discuss them first. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 01:25, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
I opened thread about you here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Constant_personal_harassment_of_User:DIREKTOR PANONIAN 18:50, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Ed
[talk]
[majestic titan] 23:57, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Stop with these threats, insults and harassment. Leave me alone already. PANONIAN 21:00, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Look PANONIAN, I'm prepared to grant that this territory was called "Serbia" for short. I'm prepared to discuss what this thing was called, but I'm not prepared to talk about what it was. It was not a country, it was a German Gebiet des Militärbefehlshabers. One of many in occupied Europe. As such, it requires the appropriate infobox, with the appropriate flag and insignia, and the appropriate official name in the infobox and lede. It is absurd to continue talking with you about puppet states. And I'm done beating my head against the wall there. I propose once more that you collaborate with Peacemaker and myself on applying the sources to the article, and do not WP:DISRUPT such efforts. I'm sure you can provide valuable input in the further development in the article, but your idea of a fantasy puppet state is a delusion. It just was not so. -- Director ( talk) 23:29, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Now, now Director, I may in fact be insane, but how could you know that? Don't start an argument with me to prove I'm not your meat or sock puppet... In terms of 'infobox former subdivision', I believe I am correct, that is the recommendation of the coordinator of the Wikiproject, and it is persuasive and is why we should use that infobox. As far as the rest is concerned, I'm with you. Peacemaker67 ( talk) 12:05, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
PANONIAN, as you can see, I'm tired and annoyed, and I want to get to bed. You came here asking what my problem is, and telling me to cut the crap. My problem is you are disrupting efforts to bring this article in-line with the sources and other articles of the same type [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23]. Do you, or do you not, intend ever to concede to have the article use the appropriate infobox? Please answer. -- Director ( talk) 13:27, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
Director, please stop moving articles without discussion. Peacemaker67 ( talk) 02:42, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi. I just want to say that you forgot to revert my edit here: [26] PANONIAN 08:16, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
This a notification to inform you that an WP:AE discussion related to you is taking place. -- ◅PRODUCER ( TALK) 09:18, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
WhiteWriter speaks 13:51, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
WhiteWriter speaks 13:55, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi DIREKTOR, I agree map colours are important in clarity, but unless you can give a valid reason for changing them then making changes is purely personal preference. You cannot make a statement like "it objectively looks better" without some kind of reasoning as statements on how something looks are by definition subjective unless properly qualified. The reason that the neutral grey was chosen for the other countries on the map is because the map is not of them and to have another brighter colour distracts from the map of the country/territory being shown. This is valid reasoning and has been used successfully on all other maps I have made on Wikipedia. None of the other maps has ever been criticised or changed by other editors for the reason of the background being the wrong colour. But if you have a specific reason for the background colour of these maps to be different, then please let me know so we can discuss it and reach a compromise. I am still trying to make changes to the maps while I am co-ordinating with other users which is impossible if you just keep removing my version. Also the source map used to generate these maps is at a higher resolution and uses some vector graphics. So your edited version loses quality by definition as you are working from the rendered version. BUT! Just to say, I am quite happy to change the background colour if you have a specific valid reason for it. It will be better if we can keep the map editing on the same original source version otherwise we will end up in the mess before with the infobox maps we used to have. XrysD ( talk) 15:37, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
WhiteWriter speaks 17:49, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
WhiteWriter speaks 19:22, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Bloody hell, Director. Do you mind? Here I am making inquiries about the details of the merge and you are just doing it over the top of me. Not even an 'if you please'? Peacemaker67 ( talk) 12:33, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
WhiteWriter speaks 15:16, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
You might want to consider using the {{ Edit protected}} template with regards to your comments on the Template talk:Country data Nazi Germany page. -- Thefrood (talk) 18:58, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Olympic template fixed but have you looked at Template:Country data Germany? -- Thefrood (talk) 16:31, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
I've pointed Justice and Arbitration toward WP:DRN and I'm requesting you participate or initiate there. Leaving a notice on the talk page of the article would be appropriate once initiated. After I left a note on his talk page, he left one on my talk page, so I think he gets the point that the language needs to be dialed back a notch. I have no opinion as to the content or merits of the discussion, that is to be decided at DRN. I would only ask that you go there and be objective and let the clerks do their job, and try to overlook minor incivility when possible and just focus on the merits of the discussion. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 16:56, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
Iskažite molim vas svoje mišljenje na temu. Hvala lepo/lijepo. -- Модернист ( talk) 17:30, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Ah Split... rasadnik genijalaca :) Još jedanput, hvala vam puno na komentaru i podršci. Bok -- Модернист ( talk) 00:04, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
C'mon, i dont think we should be in any kind of conflict. Direktore, talk to me, listen to me, and we will solve anything possible! And our disputes are not that big, mostly about minor, or medium content edits. I will give my best, but please, try to follow. I dont want to report anymore, and i would love that (only) two of us can find some good way to coedit. I am mostly not involved in any serious conflict on wiki, except with few of you. Therefor, i want to sort this out. Follow me, and talk to me in a AGF way please! -- WhiteWriter speaks 12:31, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
this is a warning to you, too. Uncle G ( talk) 14:41, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Can you please have a look at this discussion? Are you aware of reliable sources that discuss mass killings under Tito, and strongly link them to Communism? Thank you in advance. -- Paul Siebert ( talk) 05:28, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Ed
[talk]
[majestic titan] 14:33, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
Template:User Split Riva has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Kumioko (
talk) 18:13, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
Why you delete? I represent all the versions. Соколрус ( talk) 21:36, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
OK with me... DeCausa ( talk) 18:55, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Start writing edit summaries on glaringly controversial edits for a change. Mass removal of text isn't warranted by default except on WP:BLP violations, and even there it's annoying without a modicum of an explanation. -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 15:23, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi there, my name's Peter Coombe and I'm a Wikimedia Community Fellow working on a project to improve Wikipedia's help system. At the moment I'm trying to learn more about how people use and find the current help pages. If you could help by filling out this brief survey about your experiences, I'd be very grateful. It should take less than 10 minutes, and your responses will not be tied to your username in any way.
Thank you for your time,
the wub (
talk) 18:09, 14 June 2012 (UTC) (Delivered using
Global message delivery)
Please don't switch unnecessarily between different varieties of English. There was nothing wrong with this article as it was, and there's a clear notice on the talk page stating that the article is written in British English. Ta. — JonC ॐ 10:32, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
On the ByzantineEmpire infobox map.png, the middle map is wrong. You can see the correct territorial extent in these maps: Map Byzantine Empire 1025-en.svg and Map of the Byzantine Empire. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 18:51, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
File:Hsu.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot ( talk) 04:24, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Ed
[talk]
[majestic titan] 18:47, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
pricas o cetnicima a nigde ne spominjes Pranjane i spasavanje preko 500 americkih pilota. Sve se desava od 1943 pa do 1944. po istoriji cetnici su tada vec presli na stranu nemaca, a eto gle cuda oni spasavaju Amerikance od Nemaca ... http://www.ong.ohio.gov/stories/2009/08_August/story_20090825b.html STRASNO da se to nigde ne spominje. Prvi gradovi oslobodjeni u ex YU su bili oslobodjeni od strane cetnika itd itd Koliko ima logike da Srbi posle 2. sv rata saradjuju sa nemcima... ? Istorija nije sve sto procitas 89.172.76.1 ( talk) 00:38, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello, DIREKTOR!
Template Lang-sh (Serbo-Croatian) I have replaced with Lang-hr (Croatian) or Lang-sr (Serbian) with right because:
-- Ivan OS 10:44, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
očito nisi shvatio poruku. nama ovo nije zabava nego posao. stoga prestani da laješ o srbima i srbiji i ostavit ćemo te na miru. i ovo tvoje pseto neka također prestane lajati (jer obaviješteni smo da je to tvoje pseto). u suprotnom, viđaćeš svoju sliku i ime na zanimljivim mjestima na internetu. onaj sajt za upoznavanje je bio samo demonstracija. ono što slijedi je to da ćemo te na internetu predstaviti kao srbina koji piše protiv hrvatske države, tvoje ime i slika će se pojaviti na političkim blogovima i forumima a imaćeš i svoj osobni politički sajt gdje podržavaš mladića i karadžića, zalažeš se za obnovu republike srpske krajine i pišeš protiv hrvatske države i to na hrvatskom jeziku. ljudi iz tvog okruženja će prije ili kasnije to pročitati i teško ćeš ih poslije uvjeriti da to nisi pisao ti. a neko od tih tvojih hrvata može i da te prepozna na ulici i namlati. razmisli da li ti to treba u životu? je li djetinjasto podjebavanje srba po vikipediji vrijedno tolikog blata na tvom imenu? izbor je tvoj, dečko. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Warhammer76 ( talk • contribs) 11:40, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi Direktor,
I'm not sure if you're back from your Wikibreak yet but I'll send you this message anyway. My specialty is editing sports articles which I like and usually stick to. I started however this article on Nikola Kalabić as I've just recently heard of him and noticed he doesn't have an article. Knowing your expertise is (Yugoslav) history, I wanted to ask if you know more about this guy? I'm trying to get info from the Serbian Wikipedia translated. He seems to be a controversial fellow and I'm not quite sure which side he was on?
All the best,
Tempo21 ( talk) 22:22, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
Well, I didn't have bad intention, just consider this, a guy born in Austria-Hungary, lived in USA, witnessed the colapse of Yugoslavia, a state which he never saw. What does he has to do with Yugoslavia? -- Wustenfuchs 20:54, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
Hope you made good use of your off-wiki break. Peacemaker67 ( talk) 06:37, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Ed
[talk]
[majestic titan] 09:12, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
File:Josip Broz Tito 50s.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot ( talk) 04:08, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
G'day DIREKTOR, An observation about the various 'Military Administration in...' articles. If you do a Google Books search for "Gebiet des Militärbefehlshabers", you get hits for:
I am starting to think all these 'Military Administration in...' articles are misnamed. They should all be 'Territory of the Military Commander in...' articles as they relate to a territory, not just a military administration. The military commander in these occupied territories was the supreme authority (as much as that was possible with the Byzantine chains of command and control that existed thanks to Hitler's NSDAP divide and rule strategy. It was he (ie Bader, for example in the Serbien one) that issued the overall 'Verordnungs' for the occupied territory, not the chief of the military administration (ie Harald Turner). Peacemaker67 ( talk) 09:19, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
Please stop to revertmy changes or I will report you. Discuss it on talk page. Nemambrata ( talk) 21:20, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
How could that possibly be the case? Since when does ARBMAC dictate content decisions? Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:13, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Direktore,pretpostavljam da znaš i hrvatski jezik.Zašto ona slika ne valja- "Druze Tito.jpg" ? Jel nešto nije dobro postavljeno ili? Cromen ( talk) 17:48, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi Director,
Having followed the evolution of Yugoslav-related topics on Wikipedia for many years now I would like to express my gratitude for your efforts.
As you'd be aware, the political climate in the area is such that an unbiased and relatively accurate account of historical events is hard to maintain. I would go so far to say, that considering the amount of exile funded propaganda, you are more than holding your own.
This is not merely a task of sourcing sound and academically accepted literature, but a monumental undertaking that would have taken much of your time over the years. You've repelled an endless barrage of our unfortunate and misled youth, and for that I sincerely commend you.
Many of us take the time to read trial proceedings or foreign military and intelligence documents, but very few donate their time to uphold the facts in the face of Balkan nationalism. For what its worth, I'm sure that your contributions have gone a long way in educating the new generation. Heck, unlike their predecessors with libraries, at least they have access to the internet.
Again, thank you.
Chechachi ( talk) 14:33, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, and your participation in this discussion may be critical to finding a resolution. The thread is " Talk:Slavonia". Thank you! EarwigBot operator / talk 18:29, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
The first line in the Dalmatia section of the Rough Guide to Croatia says: Stretching from Zadar in the north to the Bay of Kotor (now part of Montenegro) in the south, Dalmatia possesses one of Europe's most dramatic shorelines, as the stark, grey wall of the coastal mountains sweeps down towards a lush seaboard ribbon dotted with palm trees and olive plantations. The full citation is Bousfield, Jonathan (2010). The Rough Guide to Croatia. Penguin. p. 263. ISBN 978-1-84836-936-8. The Rough Guides are a travel book series that are generally considered reliable. You will find them pretty widely cited in the Wikipedia. If you click on 263 above you can view the scan of the page from which the quote comes. -- Bejnar ( talk) 03:07, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Peacemaker67 ( talk) 06:20, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Pavle Gregoric.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 ( talk) 15:52, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Dragutin Haramija.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 ( talk) 15:52, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Antun Milovic.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 ( talk) 15:53, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Zvonko Brkic.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 ( talk) 15:53, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Jakov Sirotkovic.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 ( talk) 15:53, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Savka Dabcevic-Kucar 70s.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 ( talk) 15:53, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Ed
[talk]
[majestic titan] 00:45, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.
In this issue:
--The Olive Branch 18:57, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello! I appreciate your involvement with Central Croatia and other articles on Croatian regions - some of them are on my watchlist, but the subject is really out of my depth, and I'm at a loss regarding what to do with IP edits. Could you keep an eye on them? Central Croatia has just been reverted. GregorB ( talk) 12:09, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators ( about the project • what coordinators do) 08:51, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
Not unlike the whole "can be described as Dalmatia" argument, you're pushing the boundaries of the concept of a personal attack. I'm questioning your flawed argument, and when you keep repeating it even after saying I'll fix the Zadar County bit when I return and after it's been debunked at length, I have no alternative theory as to its origins than it being a plain old grudge. -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 13:57, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
I'm sorry if it offends you that I accuse you of such a thing; it offends me that you would accuse me of an ad hominem. -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 13:59, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
I agree, but I like to do things my way. Peacemaker67 ( talk) 13:23, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
There is a discussion at WP:3O relating to an issue you have been involved with. Peacemaker67 ( talk) 04:32, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Peacemaker67 ( talk) 07:21, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello. There is a report at WP:AE with which you have been involved. Thanks. Peacemaker67 ( talk) 02:43, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project and/or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Nick-D (
talk) and
Ed
[talk]
[majestic titan] 20:31, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
File:Jovan Marinovic2.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot ( talk) 04:13, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
File:Milan Pirocanac crop.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot ( talk) 04:13, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I would appreciate if you could strike your comment please.-- Antidiskriminator ( talk) 08:31, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Nick-D (
talk) and
Ian Rose (
talk) 02:24, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
The Yugoslavia Barnstar of National Merit | |
for consistency and vigilance against chauvinism on articles related to Yugoslavia. Peacemaker67 ( talk) 02:57, 24 October 2012 (UTC) | ||
this WikiAward was given to DIREKTOR by Peacemaker67 ( talk) on 02:57, 24 October 2012 (UTC) |
Hello!
Congratulations for
this
!
Litlok (
talk) 23:23, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
There is new thread about you on arbitration enforcement forum - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement Nemambrata ( talk) 13:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
Good Morning Direktor
I am an Italian-Swiss (non-Fascist, non-irredentist :-)) Wikipedian asking your opinion about the recent edits on the
Julian March article. I noticed that you wisely commented on the Talk page, so your opinion would be welcomed. I opened a corresponding Thread with my opinion. Thanks,
Alex2006 (
talk) 13:35, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
You may wish to contribute to
Talk:Byzantine Empire#intro.
JTBX (
talk ·
contribs) wanted to restore the changes he made to the lead, the ones you removed. That thread is a response to my request to bring it to the talk page first.
—
Sowlos (
talk) 20:25, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Hey there :) I noticed in File:Europe under Nazi domination.png, Syria was labeled as "British-occupied." However, according to the Sykes–Picot Agreement, Syria and Lebanon were actually a French mandate at the time, and were occupied by France. I was wondering if you could correct that on the map. Thanks! :) -- AutoGyro ( talk) 20:33, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
First let me mention how I loved your style of talking down to me as if I'm some critter who showed-up out of nowhere just to undo your edits. You should know I've been editing for a while now.
Second, this has nothing to do with the fact that I'm a Syrian-American. You are adding information that pushes the POV of one side while ignoring the other. For example, what you write about the flag can be just as easily be rewritten as: "The opposition uses the Green-white-black flag that saw Syria's independence from France until the union with Egypt". See how that could be also telling half the story like with what you've been doing? That's why the version that I've been putting is the most in-between NPOV for both sides of the story.
Third, you keep telling me that I should take it to the talk page, but the fact of the matter is that this same issue that you're trying to do another editor tried to also do called
user:Latristelagrima and on the talk page everyone agreed that his edits (which are exactly the same as your edit) are biased and it the current wording was agreed to. Therefore, stop telling me to go to the talkpage, it's obvious you're the one that should be reading what we agreed upon already.
Fourth, I never undid your edits b/c their "bad press for the opposition", I'm trying to keep this site as neutral as possible. You're edits aren't even cited/sourced! Bye.
Moester101 (
talk) 22:31, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
On the EU talkpage over a month ago you mentioned that Macedonia is the centre of a five-sided Balkans dispute. If you don't mind me asking, what is this dispute? I'm aware of quite a few bilateral disputes it's in, but haven't heard of any described as five-way. CMD ( talk) 22:32, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dalmatia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Zagora ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:02, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk) 02:03, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
This is the chronology of the national dilemma of the Bosniaks: Serb/Croats->Confused medieval Christians->Muslims betraying Christianity->Losing touch with their Slavic roots and calling themselves Turks->Muslims with capital M->Viscous nationalist trying to steal the Bosniak name (4th of December, 2012). 90.230.54.125 ( talk) 04:35, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
If an editor express a opinion, that should be respected. Blind reverts will be regarded as nationalistic vandalism. But you are welcomed to use talk page, like normal editors do. You do not have any reason or argument for removing those, and you didnt stated any of those also. Now, inform now someone off wiki to revert me back, as you and your friend always do. -- WhiteWriter speaks 18:52, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
Dear Direktor, I'm all with you in moving this page to "Trentino-South Tyrol". There's pleanty of reasons to do so, but as you see, the actual name was the outcome of an arbitration, and we need stronger grounds for the move. A killer argument would be some high-profile documents using the name "Trentino-South Tyrol". Unfortunately they are difficult to find, as hardly anyone talks/writes about this (outdated) region. Usally whoever writes about our area either refers to the province of Trentino or to South Tyrol only.-- Sajoch ( talk) 19:21, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
Greetings DIREKTOR. I late with response because I'm currently in Pristina, Kosovo so I do not have Internet access. It may possibly be considered a sensitive topics by some, but you know that I almost exclusively work on sensitive topics on English Wikipedia (It partially satisfies my need for freedom of speech). Although I at all do not understand your last objection on my contributions, in fact it seems to me that both of you overemphasize and falsely represents my contribution-so you are the ones who are doing this a political issue not me. Also, I do not see any rule that I broke so I dont see ground for such I would even say hysterical reactions, and your already boring (often based but not in this case) accusations of bloodthirsty nationalism, chauvinism, extremism and I do not know, maybe vegetarianism (sorry for too much freedom of speech I hope I will not offend you)? I think that my edits were 100% justified, positive and well explained, but since it is not about the content of articles it did not even cross my mind to receive punishment because of that. I plan to talk about it with other editors (about part that WP don't owe article...) and maybe to talk about special WP Republika Srpska so that we can avoid your fake argument about Serbia-Serbs, or to add part that WP Serbia deals also with topics connected with Serbs, but all that are long therm ideas. Because I still want to work on issues related to members of minority groups in Croatia I will not continue edit war in this case because it is not worth to be blocked for that (I will now maybe only raise this issue among other editors). So much of me (I may not be able to respond until next week).-- MirkoS18 ( talk) 21:56, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
Please weigh in if you wish. - Biruitorul Talk 19:25, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
WhiteWriter speaks 12:01, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Re:dashes? Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 03:58, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Greetings, DIREKTOR. Hope you are well.
The article in question was a complete mess, and contained (and still contains, for that matter) material that is unsourced, original research, or just wrong.
i.Several of the entries are listed belonging to Royal Houses and they have been given the wrong name. For example; the Royal House of Belgium has been the 'House of Belgium' since 1921; not 'House of Wettin' (which was the former House designation), the Royal House of the Netherlands is simply the 'House of Orange-Nassau' (and it has been ever since 1908; via decree of Queen Wilhelmina, despite the fathers of the current and last-but-one Queens not coming from this house.) The grand ducal house of the Netherlands is listed as 'Bourbon, Parma line, Nassau-Weilburg sub line'; yet Grand Duke Jean changed the name of the House from 'Bourbon-Parma' to 'Nassau' (although the House does indeed descend agnatically from the House of Bourbon Parma) in 1986 in retaliation for the Head of the House of Bourbon-Parma; Carlos Hugo, Duke of Parma, ruling the marriage of Jean's son, the present Grand Duke Henri, as unequal and non-dynastic. The name now borne by the grand-ducal House is 'Luxembourg-Nassau', by grand-ducal decree. See here: http://www.monarchie.lu/fr/monarchie/droits-de-succession/annexe-au-communique-du-20062011.pdf Likewise, the House name given for the defunct throne of the Empire of Brazil is also wrong.
ii.There are several entries where claimants are given, but the family in question is extinct and no current pretender exists. For example, 'Albania' is listed under the Zogu and Wied claims. Whilst there certainly is a Zogu claimant (the male-line grandson of King Zog I of Albania is alive and well); the son of the Wied claimant died without issue and thus there is no claimant to the Wied Principality of Albania that existed in 1913. There are also several entries where the House given is listed as 'extinct'-well; if the House is extinct, then there is no claimant; therefore why is it being listed? Likewise; there is no current pretender to the throne of Poland, nor is there for any of the various empires and kingdom that ruled over Haiti.
iii.There are several entries where the 'pretender' given is not a pretender at all. For example, Amadeo, Duke of Savoy (the Head of the Aosta branch of the House of Savoy and rival to the headship of the entire house.), is listed as the pretender to the throne of Croatia. But not only did Amadeo's father Aimone relinquish any claims to the Kingship of Croatia in 1943 (which at any rate was an Axis puppet state and was ephemeral at best); neither Amadeo nor his father (nor anyone else for that matter) have ever considered him to be the 'pretender' to the defunct throne of Croatia. Similarly, Queen Margarethe II of Denmark is listed as the 'pretender' for Iceland; yet Queen Margarethe's grandfather King Christian X acknowledged the loss of his Icelandic throne (which at any rate was decided by plebiscite anyway) and no claims to the throne of Iceland have been made by any of his successors. Like with Elizabeth II and the loss of some of her thrones in the commonwealth, King Christian X made no claim to or even lamented the loss of his icelandic throne: he sent a congratulatory telegram to the Icelandic people, and the arms of Iceland were removed from the Royal arms of Denmark by his son Frederik IX in 1947. It could be argued that 'yes; but someone could view them as pretenders; it can be a claim made on their behalf' -but the monarchist movement in both countries is non-existent, and in both cases the loss of the throne was legally acknowledged, both by the state and by the Royal House.
iv. Several entries are given for entities that had no throne in the first place. For example, the various colonial possessions of Spain (the Viceroyalties) are listed; but these were only ever colonies of Spain rather than independent states in their own right that shared a monarch with Spain. Same as regards the thirteen colonies that later founded the U.S.A.: these were colonies rather than independent monarchies with their own throne. A colony is just an overseas territory of another country, not a sovereign state in its own right.
v.Several entries give the pretender to an extinct throne titles that they do not pretend to. Yes; there have been several deposed monarchs (who have thus become pretenders) who have continued to use the title they used as monarch (ex-Kings Simeon II, Constantine II and Michael I are good examples); but this is common diplomatic practice: a deposed monarch is allowed to use the title they used during their reign as a courtesy title; but this courtesy is not extended to their heirs (for example, when the former King Peter II of Yugoslavia died, his son did not proclaim himself 'King Alexander II of Yugoslavia' but simply used the title of Crown Prince that he had been entitled legally for a week after his birth.) There are examples of Heads of former royal houses using Monarchical titles, for example Crown Prince Leka, son of Zog I of Albania; declared himself 'King of the Albanians', but this practice is rare.
Second to this; after it becomes impossible for a pretender to use a courtesy title (because they have been born after the abolition of the monarchy); the Pretender will use a title that shows they are Head of the Royal House; without using a title they are not qualified to use. Thus; for example, Georg Friedrich; Head of the Prussian Royal House is styled simply 'Prince of Prussia', and not 'Emperor Georg Friedrich I', as listed here.
vi. There are some entries that are just...well; wrong. For example, Prince Phillip (husband of Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth Realms) is listed as being the 'pretender' to the throne of Hesse; with the House designation of 'Mountbatten'. Not only if the Hessian throne still existed would Prince Phillip be nowhere near the throne (his maternal grandmother was a daughter of the Grand Duke of Hesse. The Hessian throne was inherited in a salic, males-only basis and the direct line of the House of Hesse-Darmstadt at any rate is extinct in the male line and its claims have passed to the branch of Hesse-Cassel); not only that, but he has never been a member of the House of Mountbatten (he was born a Prince of Greece from the Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glucksburg branch of the House of Oldenburg and has not renounced membership of that House, neither has he been removed from the House by the Head of the House); not only that; but that arms shown for him are the ones born by his maternal grandfather, Prince Louis of Battenburg; which not only would he not be entitled to (and at any rate he has); those aren't even the arms that are borne today by the House of Mountbatten. The only throne Prince Phillip has been anywhere near in his lifetime as far as potential succession is concerned is the Greek one, and he renounced that on marrying the then-Princess Elizabeth in 1947.
Elizabeth II is listed as being the 'pretender' to the throne of Cyprus here as well. Not only was Cyprus a republic from the date of independence in 1960 (it was a British colony from 1914 to 1960, and thus had no throne of its own during this time-it was 'merely' a British territory)-it was not a commonwealth realm so she was never 'Queen of Cyprus' like she was of various other countries such as Ceylon and South Africa that she was formerly Queen of (but no longer is), not only that, but neither she nor anyone for that matter has ever viewed her as 'Queen of Cyprus'. Of course; there are pretenders to the Cypriot Kingdom that was abolished in 1490 by the Venetians, but that is not the issue here. Both those entries are erroneous in the extreme. Whilst I'm at it as well; she doesn't claim the throne of Ireland either and nor has anyone ever claimed the throne for her either. She is listed as claiming the throne of Malta; yet whilst she was indeed Queen of Malta from 1964 to 1974; she doesn't claim that title now (indeed, she fully acknowledged its loss via giving royal consent to the Republic of Malta Act 1974.), nor has anyone claimed it on her behalf.
vii.Yes; I'm aware that I deleted a whole lot of content (most of which was erroneous anyway), but my intention was anyway to add bits back as I went along after checking the sources-I did want to add the pretenders back for places like Austria, Hungary and Hawaii, for example.
viii.The present article makes no distinction between ruling houses and formerly ruling houses that have a pretender. My intention was to make this article much easier to understand to both those familiar with the topic; and those who aren't. As it stands now; it's just confusing. JWULTRABLIZZARD ( talk) 14:17, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Did you know that 92 editors watch your talk page?-- Antidiskriminator ( talk) 19:52, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk) 09:45, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
I've already gotten too mad about this typical Balkan ultranationalist tirade by this Croatian ultranationalist, and told him that his reasoning is bullshit. You rated the Dalmatianism article for mid-importance, I would prefer if you addressed this user's complaints because you considered the article to be pertinent, I'm tired of that user's attitude already and don't want to converse with them.-- R-41 ( talk) 19:26, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
... here.--v/r - T P 20:44, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Ignore all the bickering, these articles always end up like this. I appreciate your trying to help out,I suggest you just have at it and the involved editors can complain or not on the talk page. Darkness Shines ( talk) 15:30, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
As above, please adhere to Wikipedia:Assume good faith and Wikipedia:Civility, instead of accusing me of "stonewalling" because I disagreed with your proposal for the sidebars of Fascism and Nazism. I disagreed with your proposal but I also said that you could post your proposal on the talk page and see if other users would support it. There is no reason to assume bad faith of what I said.-- R-41 ( talk) 14:03, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:TIME Josip Broz Tito Oct 9 1944.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 15:26, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:TIME Josip Broz Tito Sep 16 1946.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 15:26, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:TIME Josip Broz Tito Jun 6 1955.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 15:26, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
File:TIME Josip Broz Tito Jun 13 1969.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot ( talk) 04:00, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Is there any site with (original) documents from interwar era elections (lists of deputies, candidates etc.) of Yugoslavia (including the "Kingdom of Slov/Cr/Sr")?-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 19:23, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your recent edits here, but I do have a question. The overall perception of Stalin in today's society is negative. I don't see it as a biased statement to say that he "remains a controversial figure" to this day, and I think referring to popular opinion of Stalin throughout the world as "mixed" is an overgeneralization. I've decided to re-add my own text in that particular sentence; if you still disagree, feel free to ping me on my talk page explaining your side of the issue.
Take care. Kurtis (talk) 14:14, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
You removed the Parteiabzeichen ("party emblem") on the grounds that it was just a "badge". A "party emblem" is the same as a party logo, and it was in a section specifically designed for the inclusion of a party logo. The Parteiadler means "Party eagle" - it was not a logo of the party, but a very prominent symbol of it. Yes there were badges based on the Parteiabzeichen, but the Parteiabzeichen is recorded in Nazi Party documents. Here is the Organization Book of the National Socialist German Workers' Party from 1940 that says that the symbol is the Parteiabzeichen, and it also shows the emblem in black-and-white being used on a Nazi Party document: [30]
-I agree here with
Director. The Nazis made a clear distinction between the Parteiadler (Party Eagle-emblem of the party) and the Reichsadler (Reich Eagle-emblem of the Reich) -The Reichsadler;
whilst not technically a coat of arms (because it was not borne on a shield) faced heraldic left (dexter) in an effort to respect heraldic rules, along the lines of other national coats of arms and emblems worldwide (or, at least; europe-wide)-it being considered somewhat bad heraldic form (and bad luck, for that matter) for charges (images in a heraldic coat of arms or emblem) to face to the heraldic right (sinister). The Parteiadler;
the original party emblem, was left as it was and was not abolished, and was used after their coming to power to represent the party alone, there being considered here no obligation to follow the rules of heraldry. This is discussed in the chapter 'Nazi Heraldry' in Stephen Slater's 'Complete Guide to Heraldry.'
Hope that helps. :-)
JWULTRABLIZZARD ( talk) 19:04, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The thread is " Template talk:Nazism_sidebar#Parteiadler.3F".
Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you! EarwigBot operator / talk 13:48, 14 January 2013 (UTC) helpCan you help at hr:Naglasak? I am trying to fix confused iw's across 60 projects, but have now been blocked at WP-hr; that one problem with disrupt all the rest. (The confusion is accent = stress vs. accent = regional speech.) Thanks, — kwami ( talk) 00:31, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXII, January 2013
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here. IvanOSIvanOS has been pushing his "Serbo-Croatian does not exist" nonsense on more articles, see his list of contributions. -- JorisvS ( talk) 18:55, 29 January 2013 (UTC) Continuation on Serbo-Croatian controversyI noticed that editor IvanOS continuously delete term Serbo-Croatian from all my edits and replace it. I'm interested would it be considered edit war if I return expression Serbo-Croatian? Specifically, I used so far versions ( Serbo-Croatian: Sunce) and ( Serbo-Croatian: Sunce; Serbian Cyrillic: Сунце). I was thinking about how to solve problem of Cyrillic in cases where I need it. Option ( Serbian: Сунце) would clearly be POV pushing, but since there still is no ( Serbo-croatian cyrilic:Сунце) I decided to use version ( Serbian Cyrillic: Сунце) because just this option allows me to use Cyrillic alphabet without to say that Serbian, Croatian, Montenegrin, Bosnian, Martian... are different languages. Again, I spread story to much, I'm interested in your advice regarding IvanOS and just maybe you can save in the edge of mind this ?problem? with ( Serbo-croatian cyrilic:). BR.-- MirkoS18 ( talk) 17:01, 30 January 2013 (UTC) Possibly unfree File:Milos Trifunovic left.jpgA file that you uploaded or altered, File:Milos Trifunovic left.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 21:54, 31 January 2013 (UTC) Re February 2013I accepted your request. Since you are offended. You remove this [33]-- Sokac121 ( talk) 20:59, 1 February 2013 (UTC) Possibly unfree File:Bozidar Puric right.jpgA file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bozidar Puric right.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 16:36, 3 February 2013 (UTC) Possibly unfree File:Branko Mikulic left.jpgA file that you uploaded or altered, File:Branko Mikulic left.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 16:37, 3 February 2013 (UTC) Possibly unfree File:Veselin Duranovic left.jpgA file that you uploaded or altered, File:Veselin Duranovic left.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 09:10, 4 February 2013 (UTC) You should take Frietjes to ANI......because he keeps reverting everything and everyone without giving a reason for his actions. -- 92.13.59.67 ( talk) 19:22, 7 February 2013 (UTC) Why should a ten-day alliance that made no military contribution to the Axis be included?Yugoslavia was a part of the Axis for ten days. The state made no military contribution to the Axis war effort. Why should it be included?-- R-41 ( talk) 17:32, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.-- Vituzzu ( talk) 07:50, 15 February 2013 (UTC) DRN: editing 'overview' sectionAre you done? If you're going to keep altering what you said, it's going to be confusing. We don't mind people taking a few goes to get it right, or fixing layout or typos in their own comments, but coming back hours later and adding to or changing the substance of a comment is discouraged. WP:REDACT explains why and gives some tips on how to show that a comment has been altered, if you really feel that it's necessary to change it. It might also be easiest and clearest (especially for adding to the comment) to just make a second comment (with a separate signature). CarrieVS ( talk) 17:29, 16 February 2013 (UTC) PANONIANSorry Director, but I'm not buying into that one. I get the impression such things are not taken very seriously over there. I'm happy to continue playing Whac-a-mole with these goons on en WP that keep changing the flag, and report it if it continues. Thanks for the tip though, I'll keep a closer eye on the suspect. Interestingly, I note that PANONIAN keeps a list on sr WP of your "socks", which includes me (lol) and a name for you. I take that is not "outing"? Anyway, thanks for the pointer, I'll keep an eye out. Regards, Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 00:33, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
Feb 2013Hello, I would love to hear your opinion on this RfC request [ [34]] cheers! Eng.Bandara ( talk) 12:13, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 22Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Star and crescent, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page South Slavic ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:52, 22 February 2013 (UTC) SyriaI saw your message and looked into the problem, however, I doubt I can help. I'm inactive on Wikipedia for a longer period now. I was constantly watched by some IPs, my pages and edits were vandalised for days and so on... I lost any will to participate on Wikipedia since... Wish you luck with Syria topic though. -- Wüstenfuchs 06:13, 17 February 2013 (UTC) YOU ARE BROKEN. WE ARE LEGION. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.197.127.134 ( talk) 17:01, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXIII, February 2013
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here. RE:CyrillicBoth scripts are in use in Serbo-Croatian, and in given local communities are prescribed by official documents. When we have writen in articles (Serbo-Croatian:Bla bla...) than your arguments will have more sense. BR.-- MirkoS18 ( talk) 02:23, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussionHello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.-- FutureTrillionaire ( talk) 18:28, 24 March 2013 (UTC) Please see my comments here. As a result of your edit warning, I am warning you that you may be subject to discretionary sanctions under the terms of ARBPIA if you continue to edit in a manner inconsistent with expected standards of behavior. Do not interpret the fact that I have expressed some sympathy towards your position as evidence that I will extend more leniency towards you than the other participants in this edit war. You need to focus on advertising the RFC and gathering consensus, now and after the protection expires. ⇌ Jake Wartenberg 22:57, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXIV, March 2013
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here. An interesting Infobox solution
Suggested by EkoGraf. This entirely makes the need for a lengthy debate of which country supports who or which is of greater importance than the other obsolete. (Refs to be added appropriately) Sopher99 ( talk) 02:28, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your noticeUser:direktor thank you for your notice on my page. Please do go ahead and utilise Wikipedia's arbitration process or noticeboards if you feel that that will help the process of building consensus on the military infobox on the Syrian civil war page. The actions of all editors on that page are open and transparent for all other editors to read and gauge. I look forward to working with you further on the Syrian civil war article. Guest2625 ( talk) 01:35, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXV, April 2013
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here. April 2013Please be advised that WP:GOODFAITH and assuming normal actions (allowed on wiki policy) conctructive edits is against project policy and did you REALLY read WP:CANVASS? the first paragraph in the lead clearly states that "In general, it is perfectly acceptable to notify other editors of ongoing discussions, provided that it is done with the intent to improve the quality of the discussion by broadening participation to more fully achieve consensus." Peterzor ( talk) 16:01, 25 April 2013 (UTC) ANIHello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Peterzor ( talk) 16:31, 1 May 2013 (UTC) The Bugle: Issue LXXXVI, May 2013
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here. Complaint about your edits at WP:AN3Please see WP:AN3#User:DIREKTOR reported by User:FutureTrillionaire (Result: ). You may respond there if you wish. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 20:34, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Nazi Party articleHi: It appears that you tried to rv to the "Emblem of the National Socialist German Workers' Party" for the info. box but it did not go through. Could you check it and fix it as to the "emblem" you wanted to place there. I assume it was the NSDAP eagle but would rather you fix it as you know what you wanted there. Thanks, Kierzek ( talk) 02:42, 2 June 2013 (UTC) Byzantine Empire discussionI know it's a bit late for when I should be mentioning this, but I just thought I'd come here and say that I agree with your proposed changes to the opening paragraph of Byzantine Empire. Not much to be done about it now, but I just thought I would put that out there, Anyway, keep up the good work. I Feel Tired ( talk) 05:44, 2 June 2013 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for June 8Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jakov Cindro, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Podesta ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 12:00, 8 June 2013 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for June 16Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Istrian exodus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fascist Italy ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:45, 16 June 2013 (UTC) The Bugle: Issue LXXXVII, June 2013
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here. Talkback![]() Message added 04:55, 3 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. — Preceding signed comment added by Cymru.lass ( talk • contribs) 04:55, 3 July 2013 (UTC) Call for research participantsHi DIREKTOR, we are a Croatian team of researchers who are looking at the editing dynamics on different language Wikipedias and are focusing specifically on the topic of Kosovo. We are looking for users who have edited, discussed, or acted in accordance with administrative rights on articles about this topic, and who would be willing to be interviewed for the purpose of this research project. This is a project approved by the Wikimedia Foundations´ Research Committee and you can find more information on this meta-wiki page. Research results will be published under an open access license and your participation would be much appreciated. If you would like to participate you can reach us at interwikiresearch@gmail.com and we will set up an interview in a way that best suits your needs. Pbilic ( talk) 09:53, 3 July 2013 (UTC) National Animal of CroatiaHello. I've replied to you on Talk:List of national animals. I am not sure Peregrine Falcon should be listed as a national animal of Croatia. This also means it does not belong in the Symbols of Croatia. I am quite sure the Marten ( Pine marten to be more specific) is the only one which can be claimed as a "national animal" ( Nightingale excluded). Shokatz ( talk) 14:17, 4 July 2013 (UTC) Anon7mous
Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.![]() This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is " Talk:Istrian exodus". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot operator / talk 19:07, 6 July 2013 (UTC) Possibly unfree File:Slobodan Jovanovic left.jpgA file that you uploaded or altered, File:Slobodan Jovanovic left.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 17:34, 9 July 2013 (UTC) Possibly unfree File:Slobodan Jovanovic right.jpgA file that you uploaded or altered, File:Slobodan Jovanovic right.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 17:36, 9 July 2013 (UTC) Possibly unfree File:Milos Trifunovic right.jpgA file that you uploaded or altered, File:Milos Trifunovic right.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 23:16, 10 July 2013 (UTC) A minor change to DRNHi there, you're getting this message as you are involved in a case at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard which is currently open. Today DRN has undergone a big move resulting in individual cases on subpages as opposed to all the content on one page. This is to inform you that your case is now back on the DRN board and you will be able to 'watch' the subpage it's located on. Thanks, Cabe 6403 ( Talk• Sign) 13:16, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Coat of arms of Dubrovnik RepublicHello. I have noticed that it was you who changed the CoA of the republic. I hope you do realize the colors on the CoA are wrong. I have elaborated on this in Talk:Republic of Ragusa and I have also contacted the author on Wikimedia Commons. The blue lines were a wrong interpretation from 1950s-1960s when they thought the CoA was barry azure and gules (blue and red lines) when instead it was barry argent and gules (white and red lines) - the old CoA of Arpad dynasty. This issue is also very well elaborated and sourced on Croatian Wikipedia [35]. Can we please discuss this issue? Shokatz ( talk) 00:09, 23 July 2013 (UTC) July 2013
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 01:08, 25 July 2013 (UTC) The Bugle: Issue LXXXVIII, July 2013
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
Your recent edits to Double-headed eaglePlease be aware that the inclusion of specific images in the gallery in this article was the subject of recent detailed discussion at Talk:Double-headed eagle#Examples image gallery, where at least a tentative consensus was established. Please see other editors' comments there regarding the rationale behind each decision to include or exclude certain images, and offer your own commentary on these and any other images you recently introduced to the article. I will refrain from reverting your changes, because I feel that consensus is still tentative and not yet settled, and I sincerely hope you will include yourself in the discussion there. One of the issues prompting the discussion is the endless stream of drive-by additions, which are often driven by an inflated sense of nationalism (not in your case, but in many others) and erode the gallery's essential purpose: to display a geographically, temporally, stylistically and functionally diverse set of examples of double-headed eagles. Thank you for your contributions! Wilhelm Meis ( ☎ Diskuss | ✍ Beiträge) 01:49, 30 July 2013 (UTC) edit requestcan you include a motto in the nazi germany infobox? if not "Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer" can you please help me find another one?, i saw a comment on the article's talkpage that you will find one 83.180.188.119 ( talk) 20:04, 4 August 2013 (UTC) Re: Kosovo and MetohijaThis might constitute a technical move but at this point I'm honestly not sure if Antidiskriminator wouldn't complain about that because it offends some peculiar sensibility. They've already reverted my 1990-related change there. Besides, I didn't discuss it previously, and there's some history to those names, both at the English and the Serbian variant:
I see myself in the history of both of those, so I think it's actually fair to say that this would be excessively bold - please post to Talk:Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija first. -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 06:40, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 9Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Socialist Autonomous Province of Kosovo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Albanian ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:47, 9 August 2013 (UTC) Possibly unfree File:Dusan Simovic left.jpgA file that you uploaded or altered, File:Dusan Simovic left.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Vanjagenije ( talk) 23:24, 10 August 2013 (UTC) Macedonian help neededHello DIREKTOR, I'm contacting you because we need some Macedonian translators to help with the deployment of the new VisualEditor on mk.wikipedia. There are help pages, user guides, and description pages that need translating, as well as the interface itself. The translating work is going on over on MediaWiki: Translation Central. I also need help with a personal message for the Macedonian Wikipedians. If you are able to help in any way, either reply here, or head over to TranslationCentral. Thanks for your time, PEarley (WMF) ( talk) 18:14, 13 August 2013 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for August 16Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ante Marković, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aleksandar Mitrović ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:56, 16 August 2013 (UTC) Huge Tanks !You really should have a big star for your contributions with the "nazism" article. To me, the preavious "Fascism-varity"-describing in the early lead strongly suggests some kind of hidden agenda. Thanks once more ! Boeing720 ( talk) 20:35, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXIX, August 2013
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here. Hey, just letting you know that the coin switch came about during a series of edits, including a change of the caption to say it was the divinized father of Trajan, that I found a bit precipitous. I think the coin caption was one of the discussions I opened on the talk page regarding these edits, so we could confirm consensus on various points the other editor wanted to change. Do you have a secondary source that discusses this coin, so we can put this to rest once and for all? That is, which ID of the coin portrait is right? I can support Trajan, but not his "father", as the lead image. The legend reads divus pater Traianus, not Traiani, so I'm assuming it's Trajan himself, but the other editor said its date of issue meant Trajan was still alive and hence not divinized. I was preoccupied by other matters regarding the accursed infobox, and restored the other image till the correct caption could be verified. Cynwolfe ( talk) 21:10, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Marshal Josip Broz Tito.jpg)
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth ( talk) 21:01, 5 September 2013 (UTC) September 2013
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 17:01, 8 September 2013 (UTC) WikiProject Military history coordinator electionGreetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill [talk] 18:06, 16 September 2013 (UTC) Orphaned non-free image File:Jakov Blazevic.jpg![]() Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 10:55, 18 September 2013 (UTC) The Bugle: Issue LXXXXX, September 2013
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here. September 2013
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 08:04, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
October 2013
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 12:12, 4 October 2013 (UTC) The Bugle: Issue XCI, October 2013
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here. Edit warring on Istrian ExodusJust to inform that I have reported you for edit warring. You can find details on the notification on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. You cannot revert sourced edits without a reason. Please note a discussion has been proposed on the talk page but you diserted it.-- Silvio1973 ( talk) 19:13, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Request for CommentPlease see here Regards IJA ( talk) 00:30, 31 October 2013 (UTC) Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.![]() This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is " Republic of Kosovo". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! -- Guy Macon ( talk) 02:24, 31 October 2013 (UTC) IstriansHi Direktor. Concerning this edit [36], I can't help but fear that preferential criteria is being introduced on what to many is unfavourable. Ethnicity by its very description is the label by which an individual identifies himself. Conservative Serbs feel the same way about Montenegrins; conservative Serbs and Croats both have reservations over Bosniaks and to whom they belong; Bulgarians and Serbs question Macedonian ethnicity, everybody likes to denounce Yugoslavs, the list goes on for ever but there is no "Day 1" policy. If a person wishes to call himself Istrian, it makes precious little difference whether his dad is Serb and his mother Croat because the only thing that makes them Serb and Croat in the first place is their decision to dclare themselves as such, it doesn't mean they have bloodlines going back to some imaginary progenitor. That's why I believe ethnicities should be given equal treatment. Zavtek ( talk) 22:09, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Republic of KosovoHi,
Report to ANIHello, I am informing you that following the dispute we had on Istrian Exodus I have filed a report on ANI.[ [38]] Silvio1973 ( talk) 11:36, 7 November 2013 (UTC) height of Stalin is disputedHello Director, there seems to be some inaccuracy in the Stalin article, and from the edit-history you looked like you might know more about the subject than me. Can you comment here, if you have a moment? Talk:Joseph_Stalin#Biased_about_Stalin.27s_height Thanks. p.s. There is also a piece of photo-evidence, that User:Objectus claims gives evidence of Stalin's height, but I cannot read the script; perhaps you can verify what the text in the photo says? 74.192.84.101 ( talk) 00:23, 10 November 2013 (UTC) The Bugle: Issue XCII, November 2013
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here. |
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Happy Holidays. :) ( LAz17 ( talk) 20:12, 28 December 2011 (UTC)).
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Dabnube Swabian. Since you had some involvement with the Dabnube Swabian redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). – Miranche T C 23:28, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Just 70 years ago you would have likely been imprisoned and killed in 8 of the 10 countries you've lived in/been to. I find that interesting. -- ChristianHistory ( talk) 13:13, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
-- ChristianHistory ( talk) 15:05, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
DIREKTOR, you have the document that states that AVNOJ adopted a new flag in 1945, that is the flag with the rounded star. I don't have a source right now, but I have seen sources that state that a different version of the flag existed prior,, but after the Serbian-Croatian friendship flag, in 1942 the Partisans adopted a series of flags with the tricolour and the straight-armed star. Though I will not use it as a source - the photograph who just recently shown me at the Democratic Federal Yugoslavia article is this 1942-1945 flag of the Partisans, but again I will search for a source. As I said, it is known that the Yugoslav Partisans adopted set of flags in 1942, including the Partisans' naval ensign that has a straight-armed star. The Partisans prior to 1942 used a Serbian-Croatian twin tricolour flag as part of their Serbian-Croatian friendship initiative.-- R-41 ( talk) 18:35, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
below this notice, but you should read the
guide to appealing blocks first. v/r -
T
P 14:04, 5 January 2012 (UTC)It's not listed as an exemption.--v/r - T P 19:30, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
TParis, not that I'm complaining I'm not actually blocked, but if I am going to be blocked I wouldn't want to have to wait another week after all this. As I said above, I realize at this point I'm only able to annoy everyone further :), so I'm done with ANI. I haven't been editing anywhere since you posted the block template above, and I wonder if the past couple days will count towards the one week? As far as I'm concerned, I'm certainly not going to edit while I'm supposed to be blocked, whether the block is actually in place or not for the duration.
Another question I'd like to ask you regards how exactly the interaction ban works? For example, if Timbouctou should post an RfM, would I be allowed to respond to that? -- Director ( talk) 10:57, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello DIREKTOR, with this edit, in enacting a consensus of the community reached at the Administrator's Noticeboard, I hereby inform you that you are banned for 6 months from
The discussion leading to the ban may be viewed here. Salvio Let's talk about it! 14:52, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
FkpCascais, I should probably report you for trolling on my talkpage ("nice to see you were blocked"). Please be sure not to use my talkpage to evade your t-ban. -- Director ( talk) 11:53, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Emblem of Yugoslavia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sheaves ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:43, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Nominations for the " Military Historian of the Year" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so here. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the coordinators, Nick-D ( talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:54, 15 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject.
G'day Director, please see my RfM re Fourth anti-Partisan Offensive for my policy arguments against this. I am flagging this because I do not want an edit war over this, but am disappointed that you did not respond to the RfM and have not engaged in any discussion before moving all of these articles. There is no consensus between our key texts on this. Peacemaker67 ( talk) 00:25, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Pozdrav,
Could you please elaborate on why you decided to add a distinct classification? Despite that few primary sources do speak in favor of that, the issue was brought into question numerous times without pushing forward credible literature to back up that side of the dispute (or both for that matter). Er-vet-en ( say) 15:45, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Ustaše, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Croatian Home Guard ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:06, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Ed
[talk]
[majestic titan] 23:52, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Uniform 03.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hammersoft ( talk) 21:24, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi Director, it's a Walther PPK, not a Walter. Peacemaker67 ( talk) 21:51, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Goldstein is nonetheless a locally published source and we do not pick and choose which locally published sources we prefer. It was agreed for them not to be used on both the Chetniks and Yugoslav Partisans talkpages. -- ◅PRODUCER ( TALK) 00:03, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:45, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
If I can't put copyrighted picture of NATO flag.svg can I pin the flag as a {{flag| / {{flagicon| style?? Please answer on my talk page 68.202.26.86 ( talk) 02:35, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Split, Croatia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Snow day ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:42, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
Without any surprise even on this - fairly minor - writer there was the usual and sad discussions about the name. As you were directly involved in the discussion can I understand why the article is named with the Croatian version of the name when in this case it is IMHO quite evident that the Italian (or the Latin name) should be used? For you personal reference consider in Italy on the names of the street it is written "Elio Lampridio Cerva, umanista dalmata XV secolo". Wouldn't be more correct to name the article to the name used for this person when in life and report him as Dalmatian? Also it is surprising to name with a Croatian version a writer that wrote exclusively in Latin and Italian and rejected Slavik? -- Silvio1973 ( talk) 10:54, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Of course it would not be of any relevance that in Italy he was considered Italian, but indeed this is not the case. In Italy he is considered Dalmatian. For the same reason it is not of any relevance that in Croatia is considered Croatian.
At the end of the day it is always the same discussion. Most of the Croatian historiography insists that Italian/Dalmatian ethnicity at the end of Middle Age was marginal. The reality is that it was quite marginal in terms of population, but not in terms of contribution to culture and arts. And not because those people were a better race, just because the most of the nobility preferred to consider themselves as Roman descendent, Dalmatian or Venetian. This issue is very frequent elsewhere. In the XIX century the nobility of Gent (Flamish part of Belgium) considered themselves as French, because the Flamish were the poors. This is perhaps irratating for modern Flamish historiography but does not change the fact that that the area of culture and art of the Gent nobility belongs to Francophony.
Medutin Vrsta Direktor, I am not discussing the Ragusa in the XV century was fairly out of the sphere of influence of Venice (and BTW nothing close in any sense to modern Italy existed at that time). And I do not discuss that the most of the population did not speak Italian/Dalmatian/Latin (albeit your quoted number of 99% it's an exaggeration). I discuss merely that EL Cerva is described here as Croatian (to the point that the main name used for the article is the Croatian one), when even he described himself as out of the sphere of the Slavik culture. Even if we do not give a damn to what Cerva thought he was (and perhaps this is quite legitimate), there is still the issue about the sourcing of your claim.
PS Don't worry, I am not going to start with you the same dispute I had with Zenanarh. If you think that you are right because this guy born in what today is Croatia or because he was a representative of the non-Slavik nobility that was oppressing the poor Slavik people there is nothing that could drive the discussion forward because we would move the issue from History to Politics.
--
Silvio1973 (
talk) 11:50, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Director, I am well aware of this argument. I do not need to be any more convinced that the claim of "Croat" and "Italian" are absolutely inappropriate when speaking of people living at that time. I think I have shared enough this argument in all the different talks (please check my last change in Luciano Laurana talk page). But honestly, under which condition can you consider someone Slavik when he even refused to write in that language?
Concerning the use of the name you know more than me that the use of Slavik to name all people from Dalmatia did not start before the beginning of the 18th century. Elio Lampridio Cerva was not known as "Ilija Crijevic" at the time. To support your claim you should quote sources reporting him as "Ilija Crijevic" at that time.
P.S. On my dictionary (M. Deanovic), Vrsta is the translation of "Kind" or "Dear".
--
Silvio1973 (
talk) 20:22, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Direktor, you play with (my) words here. The language used by the majority of the people in Dubrovnik at the time is almost irrilevant, what counts is the ethnicity of the person. However, I am not convinced that at the time Slavik was spoken in the terms you describe. This is just another feature of Croatian historiography. On the old customs building of Dubrovnik it is still written "DOGANA" and the main street of the city in named "STRADUN". To complete the job of Romance eradication perhaps Croatia should once for all remove all this residual evidence. Let's do this job, this avoid to people like me to born in the future.
In the XV century Dubrovnik was out of the sphere of influence of Venice (fact) but many literate people were still influenced by Romance languages (fact).
It looks that the fact that EL Cerva considered himself as strongly external to the Slavik world is totally irrelevant to you. Perhaps we could give right to someone dead to be what he wanted to be when he was in life.
And let's be very clear, I do not believe in "evil Slavic propagandists". I believe that at some point Croatia took fully knowledge of themselves and arrange the history in the most suitable way.
Yes, the burden is on me and I am not sure that I am going to take it. This is a fairly minor writer, if I can find something easily I might submi some evidence. In this Dalmatia project even when you submit strong evidence such the result of a census or the opinion of the Britannica there is no way to change things, so I do not see how this article could change because I submit the evidence from a minor scholar (I could not find anything of major for such little known writer).
PS I speak Russian, Serbo-Croatian really cannot scare me.
--
Silvio1973 (
talk) 06:19, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Fair point, let's focus on the facts but please avoid any allegation of racism and nationalism with me. Please believe that genuinely it is not the case.
Direktor, I did not write that the most of the people in Dalmatia were not Slaviks (infact I said the opposite, please check the discussion we are having at the very beginning). Also I did not write that those people had no culture before the the 18th century (or whenever), I clealy meant in the 18th century Croats started to have the full knowledge of the modern concept of nationality. And there is nothing racist in this affirmation, indeed the very same thing applies for the Italians or the Germans.
Let's come to the reason, the real reason. This writer used to write in Latin and clearly stated that he belonged to the Romance area of culture (I can quote what he wrote, but I guess you know it already).
Ivan, the fair thing would be to move the title of this article to the Latin version of the name (indeed the original one) and direct both the Italian and the Croatian version of the name to the Latin one. As things are right now, it is even not possible to make a search from his Italian version of the name. Do you consider this fair?
If this proposal does not seem sound to you, yes we stop the discussion here. Our positions would be then too fare to get to any compromise.
P.S. Concerning the conception I have of Dalmatian culture, yes it is different from the one of Croatian historiography. But please consider that it is legitimate to have some doubts about the fairness of Croatian historiography. An example? It might even be that Marco Polo did not born in Venice. But from there to consider his life belonging to Croatian history there is quite a distance. On facts like that is built-up what I could call "legitimate doubts".
-- Silvio1973 ( talk) 08:57, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Direktor, I am not pointing you because I consider you responsible of anything. It is just a side note to make you understand why I have perhaps some doubts when Croatian references are used to justify facts. Another example? It is not my fault if in some academic circles in Croatia there are historians supporting their thesis using chromosomic comparative analysis. Unfortunately, such facts happen and it is unavoidable that they contribute to creates a general climate of doubt about the fairness of modern Croatian historiography.
OK let's remain on the matter.
Of course the real reason it's not because he wrote in Latin. Please pay me some respect even if I am only a person of average culture. The most of the people used to write in Latin untill the the 16th century. Newton wrote in Latin but this did not make him Romance. Latin was used as a language of convenience because the language of literates.
But here the facts are different. EL Cerva clearly stated that he belonged to the Romance culture and refused in quite straight terms Slavik language and culture. And was educated in Rome. These are facts, but one could still claim that he was Slavik because his family was Slavik. Are you really sure of this? Again here we do not speak of claimed nationality, but of the name to use. And again it is not fair that it is not possible to make the search on en:wiki typing "Elio Lampridio Cerva".
You write in English but you are Croat. But if tomorrow you will start exclusively to write in English (and of course if your books sell a lot) and affirm that you refuse Croatian culture, in two centuries you will be considered an English writer. Ok, you might be considered also Croatian because you have perhaps a Croatian passport, but at the time of EL Cerva that stuff did not exist.
PS I have made a modification on the main article. Give a look and if you want to keep the previous version please justify with a valid source (or if you really feel the actual source is valid just undo my edit, don't be worry I will not insist).
Hi. When you recently edited Ivo Tijardović, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fascist Italy ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:56, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello I think we had a misunderstanding. I explained it better this time. Sry for the misunderstanding. regards Seader ( talk) 01:49, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Why is that important to push Serbo-croatian in all those articles. You must have talk page agreement for all of those, you see that your edits are reverted. Give us the reasons for that, i dont see those. And i am speaking for article Serbia, primarily. :) -- WhiteWriter speaks 21:57, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
No problem, but do you realise that YOU started with this? Why do you call me Silvio? Don't do to the others what you do not want they do to you. Kind regards. -- Silvio1973 ( talk) 17:23, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
My user name is Silvio1973, not Silvio. I called you with your name (alleged) because you started. However, I will refer to you as Direktor. No problem. -- Silvio1973 ( talk) 18:07, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
It will not happen again, but please do not call me with my first name. I dislike you to take such proximity. --Silvio1973 (talk) 18:17, 18 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Silvio1973 ( talk • contribs)
Hi. When you recently edited Yugoslav Partisans, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fascist Italy ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 18:45, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
Per the continuing debate, is it true that all laws of BiH were repealed by the Dayton accords? — kwami ( talk) 10:15, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Ed
[talk]
[majestic titan] 09:41, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Stop editing without consensus. BoDu ( talk) 11:57, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Just like that "I think this is actually the correct CoA" [1]? You think? Without any source? [2]-- Bracodbk ( talk) 20:18, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Zdenka Janeković Römer: Okvir slobode, page 364.: After the Treaty of Zadar 1358 political reasons prompted the nobility that in the crucial moment of independence take the Coat of Arms of the new sovereign. Hungary, Árpáds (Apradovići) Coat of Arms with red and silver beams was adopted in the Republic of Ragusa as their own, so it stayed after the termination of state ties with Hungary. Luccari Giacomo (Jakov Lukarić) mentions that in the 17th century voting urns in councils of the Republic were labeled with the original red and white beams. Although recognized as a declarative character of subordination sovereignty of the Hungarian king, Coat of Arms with silver and red beams was conceived and used as a sign of the sovereignty of the Republic of Dubrovnik.
Well, Zdenka Janeković Römer, Ivan Mustać, Jakov Lukarić (Giacomo Luccari), Vito Galzinski, Milan Rešetar, Frane Čizmić, they all agree that Coat of Arm is red and silver, sometimes red and white, and during the 18th century rarely blue and red (made by mistake according to those who have studied history of this Coat of arms). I have plenty of different pics with red and silver, or red and white (white symbolizes silver) from catalog of the exibition of history of Coat of arms of the Republic of Ragusa:
and only two with red and blue Coat of Arm. What else do I have to do to prove you that present Coat of Arm of the City of Dubrovnik is based on historical one with red and silver stripes? If anyone wants this pics please send me a mail.-- Bracodbk ( talk) 15:43, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Dalmatia and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
Thanks, Whenaxis talk · contribs | DR goes to Wikimania! 01:01, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
The plain Yugoslav tricolour flag-map is appropriate for the Yugoslavia-stub template because it is about Yugoslavia as a whole, not just the SFRY. The plain Yugoslav tricolour is not a royalist symbol, it is the same as the pan-Slavic flag and was used by Yugoslavists, it served as the flag of the rump Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the plain Yugoslav tricolours are seen used today by supporters of a state of Yugoslavia. Besides, the SFRY flag was based on this flag, it simply put the Communist Red Star on top of it. A plain Yugoslav tricolour can represent Yugoslavia from its beginning to its end.-- R-41 ( talk) 17:46, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. -- ◅PRODUCER ( TALK) 12:26, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
Please apologize. I am very offended that you disrespected and insulted my efforts to create the Yugoslavian coat of arms symbol that took me hours to make. After I listened to you and you spat upon me over a minor disagreement - I am outraged. You don't have to apologize, but I am offering you a way out of being reported for violation of WP:CIVIL - if you ignore or delete this like the last comment - I will report you, I don't care even if I get reprimanded because I won't put up with this kind of work abuse - if you are a good person you shouldn't spit upon people who are are working with you on something when they have listened to almost everything you requested. Now please apologize and let's restart positive conversation on the flag issue.-- R-41 ( talk) 01:39, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Unitary National Liberation Front is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unitary National Liberation Front until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Nobody Ent 11:10, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is " Template:Yugoslav Axis collaborationism". Thank you. -- BoDu ( talk) 10:02, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
Don't be too long out there in the real world... Peacemaker67 ( talk) 10:04, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Dalmatia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dalmatian ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:38, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
Sssshhh! *rubs jam on your nose like the dormouse in alice in wonderland*
Your recent comments had uninvolved people in a tizz thinking a textual fight was about to break out commenting on dispute resolution volunteers talk pages. Your contributions are very valid, and appreciated, but stop scaring the newbies! :D In disputes, people tend to be emotional, and may take tongue in cheek witty comments out of context and have a bit of a wobbly over it, and as some parties involved are clearly pushing an agenda rather than understanding the policy implications, it could very easily get ugly. I apologise for contacting you personally about it, but you seem like a wonderful contributor so I thought you ought to know first hand that someone is :( and may have taken your comment out of context. <3 BaSH PR0MPT ( talk) 03:16, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Template:Yugoslav Axis collaborationism has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
BoDu (
talk) 16:30, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
From your edit moving the "State Security Service" to the "Department of State Services" I believe you have not read the act establishing the agency. The National Security Agencies Act of 1986 (Decree 19) and the the SSS Instrument I of 1999 (General Abubakar invoked his powers under section 6 of the NSA act to define the objectives of the SSS before transition to civil rule)only recognizes the "State Security Service" and not the Department of State Services. The DSS is a cover name used by the organization because it is in reality only a department within the presidency.
Please cross check and make necessary amendments. If you have been mislead by the agency's overt use of the DSS name in recent times, please don't. They have only resorted to the DSS name in a bid to shake off the negativity associated with the SSS name due to the long years under the military. The agency still writes ALL official correspondence, presents their budget and prosecutes cases with the only name recognized by the law, the State Security Service. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lamodele ( talk • contribs) 17:57, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
DIREKTOR, can you please just tell your reason why you find this first image better then the new one at the talk page, since you initiated the discussion. -- Wusten fuchs 13:08, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Ed
[talk]
[majestic titan] 02:06, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Sorry that I had to partially revert your changes, but I felt/feel that saying a section of shoreline is small is something that should only be done with a reliable source saying as much, especially since it tends to imply unimportant (which is actually contradicted by Slovenia having the 4th largest port by cargo in the Adriatic!). I think that the reader can read the table of shoreline lengths (and other info) and decide for themselves. Allens ( talk | contribs) 22:19, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Landesfarben Croatia-Slavonia.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Cloudbound ( talk) 17:14, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Please, participate in the discussion. Removing sourced informations is not good. -- Wusten fuchs 17:22, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
A smile for you
You’ve just received a random act of kindness! 66.87.0.137 ( talk) 13:31, 31 March 2012 (UTC) |
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is " Talk:Serbia under German occupation, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/DIREKTOR/Archive#25_March_2012". Thank you. -- Peacemaker67 ( talk) 13:01, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
![]() Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite Hello Director. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click
HERE to participate. You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 11:20, 5 April 2012 (UTC) |
Your recent editing history at Serbia (Territory of the German Military Commander) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Tiptoety talk 17:47, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
You have insulted me and my integrity with this post. I am asking for apology. -- WhiteWriter speaks 17:56, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
Per the discretionary sanctions authorized in the Digwuren case, this article is subject to 1RR. Reverting more than one time in a 24-hour period may result in a block or a ban from this article and its talk page. All reverts should be discussed on the talk page. This is a bright line, not an entitlement, and reverting exactly once per day is considered disruption, and users doing so are subject to being blocked. Please see this notice about recent edit warring. Editors wishing to make controversial edits are strongly advised to discuss them first. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 01:25, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
I opened thread about you here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Constant_personal_harassment_of_User:DIREKTOR PANONIAN 18:50, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Ed
[talk]
[majestic titan] 23:57, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Stop with these threats, insults and harassment. Leave me alone already. PANONIAN 21:00, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Look PANONIAN, I'm prepared to grant that this territory was called "Serbia" for short. I'm prepared to discuss what this thing was called, but I'm not prepared to talk about what it was. It was not a country, it was a German Gebiet des Militärbefehlshabers. One of many in occupied Europe. As such, it requires the appropriate infobox, with the appropriate flag and insignia, and the appropriate official name in the infobox and lede. It is absurd to continue talking with you about puppet states. And I'm done beating my head against the wall there. I propose once more that you collaborate with Peacemaker and myself on applying the sources to the article, and do not WP:DISRUPT such efforts. I'm sure you can provide valuable input in the further development in the article, but your idea of a fantasy puppet state is a delusion. It just was not so. -- Director ( talk) 23:29, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Now, now Director, I may in fact be insane, but how could you know that? Don't start an argument with me to prove I'm not your meat or sock puppet... In terms of 'infobox former subdivision', I believe I am correct, that is the recommendation of the coordinator of the Wikiproject, and it is persuasive and is why we should use that infobox. As far as the rest is concerned, I'm with you. Peacemaker67 ( talk) 12:05, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
PANONIAN, as you can see, I'm tired and annoyed, and I want to get to bed. You came here asking what my problem is, and telling me to cut the crap. My problem is you are disrupting efforts to bring this article in-line with the sources and other articles of the same type [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23]. Do you, or do you not, intend ever to concede to have the article use the appropriate infobox? Please answer. -- Director ( talk) 13:27, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
Director, please stop moving articles without discussion. Peacemaker67 ( talk) 02:42, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi. I just want to say that you forgot to revert my edit here: [26] PANONIAN 08:16, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
This a notification to inform you that an WP:AE discussion related to you is taking place. -- ◅PRODUCER ( TALK) 09:18, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
WhiteWriter speaks 13:51, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
WhiteWriter speaks 13:55, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi DIREKTOR, I agree map colours are important in clarity, but unless you can give a valid reason for changing them then making changes is purely personal preference. You cannot make a statement like "it objectively looks better" without some kind of reasoning as statements on how something looks are by definition subjective unless properly qualified. The reason that the neutral grey was chosen for the other countries on the map is because the map is not of them and to have another brighter colour distracts from the map of the country/territory being shown. This is valid reasoning and has been used successfully on all other maps I have made on Wikipedia. None of the other maps has ever been criticised or changed by other editors for the reason of the background being the wrong colour. But if you have a specific reason for the background colour of these maps to be different, then please let me know so we can discuss it and reach a compromise. I am still trying to make changes to the maps while I am co-ordinating with other users which is impossible if you just keep removing my version. Also the source map used to generate these maps is at a higher resolution and uses some vector graphics. So your edited version loses quality by definition as you are working from the rendered version. BUT! Just to say, I am quite happy to change the background colour if you have a specific valid reason for it. It will be better if we can keep the map editing on the same original source version otherwise we will end up in the mess before with the infobox maps we used to have. XrysD ( talk) 15:37, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
WhiteWriter speaks 17:49, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
WhiteWriter speaks 19:22, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Bloody hell, Director. Do you mind? Here I am making inquiries about the details of the merge and you are just doing it over the top of me. Not even an 'if you please'? Peacemaker67 ( talk) 12:33, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
WhiteWriter speaks 15:16, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
You might want to consider using the {{ Edit protected}} template with regards to your comments on the Template talk:Country data Nazi Germany page. -- Thefrood (talk) 18:58, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Olympic template fixed but have you looked at Template:Country data Germany? -- Thefrood (talk) 16:31, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
I've pointed Justice and Arbitration toward WP:DRN and I'm requesting you participate or initiate there. Leaving a notice on the talk page of the article would be appropriate once initiated. After I left a note on his talk page, he left one on my talk page, so I think he gets the point that the language needs to be dialed back a notch. I have no opinion as to the content or merits of the discussion, that is to be decided at DRN. I would only ask that you go there and be objective and let the clerks do their job, and try to overlook minor incivility when possible and just focus on the merits of the discussion. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 16:56, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
Iskažite molim vas svoje mišljenje na temu. Hvala lepo/lijepo. -- Модернист ( talk) 17:30, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Ah Split... rasadnik genijalaca :) Još jedanput, hvala vam puno na komentaru i podršci. Bok -- Модернист ( talk) 00:04, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
C'mon, i dont think we should be in any kind of conflict. Direktore, talk to me, listen to me, and we will solve anything possible! And our disputes are not that big, mostly about minor, or medium content edits. I will give my best, but please, try to follow. I dont want to report anymore, and i would love that (only) two of us can find some good way to coedit. I am mostly not involved in any serious conflict on wiki, except with few of you. Therefor, i want to sort this out. Follow me, and talk to me in a AGF way please! -- WhiteWriter speaks 12:31, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
this is a warning to you, too. Uncle G ( talk) 14:41, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Can you please have a look at this discussion? Are you aware of reliable sources that discuss mass killings under Tito, and strongly link them to Communism? Thank you in advance. -- Paul Siebert ( talk) 05:28, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Ed
[talk]
[majestic titan] 14:33, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
Template:User Split Riva has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Kumioko (
talk) 18:13, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
Why you delete? I represent all the versions. Соколрус ( talk) 21:36, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
OK with me... DeCausa ( talk) 18:55, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Start writing edit summaries on glaringly controversial edits for a change. Mass removal of text isn't warranted by default except on WP:BLP violations, and even there it's annoying without a modicum of an explanation. -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 15:23, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi there, my name's Peter Coombe and I'm a Wikimedia Community Fellow working on a project to improve Wikipedia's help system. At the moment I'm trying to learn more about how people use and find the current help pages. If you could help by filling out this brief survey about your experiences, I'd be very grateful. It should take less than 10 minutes, and your responses will not be tied to your username in any way.
Thank you for your time,
the wub (
talk) 18:09, 14 June 2012 (UTC) (Delivered using
Global message delivery)
Please don't switch unnecessarily between different varieties of English. There was nothing wrong with this article as it was, and there's a clear notice on the talk page stating that the article is written in British English. Ta. — JonC ॐ 10:32, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
On the ByzantineEmpire infobox map.png, the middle map is wrong. You can see the correct territorial extent in these maps: Map Byzantine Empire 1025-en.svg and Map of the Byzantine Empire. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 18:51, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
File:Hsu.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot ( talk) 04:24, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Ed
[talk]
[majestic titan] 18:47, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
pricas o cetnicima a nigde ne spominjes Pranjane i spasavanje preko 500 americkih pilota. Sve se desava od 1943 pa do 1944. po istoriji cetnici su tada vec presli na stranu nemaca, a eto gle cuda oni spasavaju Amerikance od Nemaca ... http://www.ong.ohio.gov/stories/2009/08_August/story_20090825b.html STRASNO da se to nigde ne spominje. Prvi gradovi oslobodjeni u ex YU su bili oslobodjeni od strane cetnika itd itd Koliko ima logike da Srbi posle 2. sv rata saradjuju sa nemcima... ? Istorija nije sve sto procitas 89.172.76.1 ( talk) 00:38, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello, DIREKTOR!
Template Lang-sh (Serbo-Croatian) I have replaced with Lang-hr (Croatian) or Lang-sr (Serbian) with right because:
-- Ivan OS 10:44, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
očito nisi shvatio poruku. nama ovo nije zabava nego posao. stoga prestani da laješ o srbima i srbiji i ostavit ćemo te na miru. i ovo tvoje pseto neka također prestane lajati (jer obaviješteni smo da je to tvoje pseto). u suprotnom, viđaćeš svoju sliku i ime na zanimljivim mjestima na internetu. onaj sajt za upoznavanje je bio samo demonstracija. ono što slijedi je to da ćemo te na internetu predstaviti kao srbina koji piše protiv hrvatske države, tvoje ime i slika će se pojaviti na političkim blogovima i forumima a imaćeš i svoj osobni politički sajt gdje podržavaš mladića i karadžića, zalažeš se za obnovu republike srpske krajine i pišeš protiv hrvatske države i to na hrvatskom jeziku. ljudi iz tvog okruženja će prije ili kasnije to pročitati i teško ćeš ih poslije uvjeriti da to nisi pisao ti. a neko od tih tvojih hrvata može i da te prepozna na ulici i namlati. razmisli da li ti to treba u životu? je li djetinjasto podjebavanje srba po vikipediji vrijedno tolikog blata na tvom imenu? izbor je tvoj, dečko. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Warhammer76 ( talk • contribs) 11:40, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi Direktor,
I'm not sure if you're back from your Wikibreak yet but I'll send you this message anyway. My specialty is editing sports articles which I like and usually stick to. I started however this article on Nikola Kalabić as I've just recently heard of him and noticed he doesn't have an article. Knowing your expertise is (Yugoslav) history, I wanted to ask if you know more about this guy? I'm trying to get info from the Serbian Wikipedia translated. He seems to be a controversial fellow and I'm not quite sure which side he was on?
All the best,
Tempo21 ( talk) 22:22, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
Well, I didn't have bad intention, just consider this, a guy born in Austria-Hungary, lived in USA, witnessed the colapse of Yugoslavia, a state which he never saw. What does he has to do with Yugoslavia? -- Wustenfuchs 20:54, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
Hope you made good use of your off-wiki break. Peacemaker67 ( talk) 06:37, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Ed
[talk]
[majestic titan] 09:12, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
File:Josip Broz Tito 50s.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot ( talk) 04:08, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
G'day DIREKTOR, An observation about the various 'Military Administration in...' articles. If you do a Google Books search for "Gebiet des Militärbefehlshabers", you get hits for:
I am starting to think all these 'Military Administration in...' articles are misnamed. They should all be 'Territory of the Military Commander in...' articles as they relate to a territory, not just a military administration. The military commander in these occupied territories was the supreme authority (as much as that was possible with the Byzantine chains of command and control that existed thanks to Hitler's NSDAP divide and rule strategy. It was he (ie Bader, for example in the Serbien one) that issued the overall 'Verordnungs' for the occupied territory, not the chief of the military administration (ie Harald Turner). Peacemaker67 ( talk) 09:19, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
Please stop to revertmy changes or I will report you. Discuss it on talk page. Nemambrata ( talk) 21:20, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
How could that possibly be the case? Since when does ARBMAC dictate content decisions? Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:13, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Direktore,pretpostavljam da znaš i hrvatski jezik.Zašto ona slika ne valja- "Druze Tito.jpg" ? Jel nešto nije dobro postavljeno ili? Cromen ( talk) 17:48, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi Director,
Having followed the evolution of Yugoslav-related topics on Wikipedia for many years now I would like to express my gratitude for your efforts.
As you'd be aware, the political climate in the area is such that an unbiased and relatively accurate account of historical events is hard to maintain. I would go so far to say, that considering the amount of exile funded propaganda, you are more than holding your own.
This is not merely a task of sourcing sound and academically accepted literature, but a monumental undertaking that would have taken much of your time over the years. You've repelled an endless barrage of our unfortunate and misled youth, and for that I sincerely commend you.
Many of us take the time to read trial proceedings or foreign military and intelligence documents, but very few donate their time to uphold the facts in the face of Balkan nationalism. For what its worth, I'm sure that your contributions have gone a long way in educating the new generation. Heck, unlike their predecessors with libraries, at least they have access to the internet.
Again, thank you.
Chechachi ( talk) 14:33, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, and your participation in this discussion may be critical to finding a resolution. The thread is " Talk:Slavonia". Thank you! EarwigBot operator / talk 18:29, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
The first line in the Dalmatia section of the Rough Guide to Croatia says: Stretching from Zadar in the north to the Bay of Kotor (now part of Montenegro) in the south, Dalmatia possesses one of Europe's most dramatic shorelines, as the stark, grey wall of the coastal mountains sweeps down towards a lush seaboard ribbon dotted with palm trees and olive plantations. The full citation is Bousfield, Jonathan (2010). The Rough Guide to Croatia. Penguin. p. 263. ISBN 978-1-84836-936-8. The Rough Guides are a travel book series that are generally considered reliable. You will find them pretty widely cited in the Wikipedia. If you click on 263 above you can view the scan of the page from which the quote comes. -- Bejnar ( talk) 03:07, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Peacemaker67 ( talk) 06:20, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Pavle Gregoric.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 ( talk) 15:52, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Dragutin Haramija.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 ( talk) 15:52, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Antun Milovic.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 ( talk) 15:53, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Zvonko Brkic.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 ( talk) 15:53, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Jakov Sirotkovic.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 ( talk) 15:53, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Savka Dabcevic-Kucar 70s.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 ( talk) 15:53, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Ed
[talk]
[majestic titan] 00:45, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.
In this issue:
--The Olive Branch 18:57, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello! I appreciate your involvement with Central Croatia and other articles on Croatian regions - some of them are on my watchlist, but the subject is really out of my depth, and I'm at a loss regarding what to do with IP edits. Could you keep an eye on them? Central Croatia has just been reverted. GregorB ( talk) 12:09, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators ( about the project • what coordinators do) 08:51, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
Not unlike the whole "can be described as Dalmatia" argument, you're pushing the boundaries of the concept of a personal attack. I'm questioning your flawed argument, and when you keep repeating it even after saying I'll fix the Zadar County bit when I return and after it's been debunked at length, I have no alternative theory as to its origins than it being a plain old grudge. -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 13:57, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
I'm sorry if it offends you that I accuse you of such a thing; it offends me that you would accuse me of an ad hominem. -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 13:59, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
I agree, but I like to do things my way. Peacemaker67 ( talk) 13:23, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
There is a discussion at WP:3O relating to an issue you have been involved with. Peacemaker67 ( talk) 04:32, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Peacemaker67 ( talk) 07:21, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello. There is a report at WP:AE with which you have been involved. Thanks. Peacemaker67 ( talk) 02:43, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project and/or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Nick-D (
talk) and
Ed
[talk]
[majestic titan] 20:31, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
File:Jovan Marinovic2.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot ( talk) 04:13, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
File:Milan Pirocanac crop.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot ( talk) 04:13, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I would appreciate if you could strike your comment please.-- Antidiskriminator ( talk) 08:31, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Nick-D (
talk) and
Ian Rose (
talk) 02:24, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
The Yugoslavia Barnstar of National Merit | |
for consistency and vigilance against chauvinism on articles related to Yugoslavia. Peacemaker67 ( talk) 02:57, 24 October 2012 (UTC) | ||
this WikiAward was given to DIREKTOR by Peacemaker67 ( talk) on 02:57, 24 October 2012 (UTC) |
Hello!
Congratulations for
this
!
Litlok (
talk) 23:23, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
There is new thread about you on arbitration enforcement forum - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement Nemambrata ( talk) 13:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
Good Morning Direktor
I am an Italian-Swiss (non-Fascist, non-irredentist :-)) Wikipedian asking your opinion about the recent edits on the
Julian March article. I noticed that you wisely commented on the Talk page, so your opinion would be welcomed. I opened a corresponding Thread with my opinion. Thanks,
Alex2006 (
talk) 13:35, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
You may wish to contribute to
Talk:Byzantine Empire#intro.
JTBX (
talk ·
contribs) wanted to restore the changes he made to the lead, the ones you removed. That thread is a response to my request to bring it to the talk page first.
—
Sowlos (
talk) 20:25, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Hey there :) I noticed in File:Europe under Nazi domination.png, Syria was labeled as "British-occupied." However, according to the Sykes–Picot Agreement, Syria and Lebanon were actually a French mandate at the time, and were occupied by France. I was wondering if you could correct that on the map. Thanks! :) -- AutoGyro ( talk) 20:33, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
First let me mention how I loved your style of talking down to me as if I'm some critter who showed-up out of nowhere just to undo your edits. You should know I've been editing for a while now.
Second, this has nothing to do with the fact that I'm a Syrian-American. You are adding information that pushes the POV of one side while ignoring the other. For example, what you write about the flag can be just as easily be rewritten as: "The opposition uses the Green-white-black flag that saw Syria's independence from France until the union with Egypt". See how that could be also telling half the story like with what you've been doing? That's why the version that I've been putting is the most in-between NPOV for both sides of the story.
Third, you keep telling me that I should take it to the talk page, but the fact of the matter is that this same issue that you're trying to do another editor tried to also do called
user:Latristelagrima and on the talk page everyone agreed that his edits (which are exactly the same as your edit) are biased and it the current wording was agreed to. Therefore, stop telling me to go to the talkpage, it's obvious you're the one that should be reading what we agreed upon already.
Fourth, I never undid your edits b/c their "bad press for the opposition", I'm trying to keep this site as neutral as possible. You're edits aren't even cited/sourced! Bye.
Moester101 (
talk) 22:31, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
On the EU talkpage over a month ago you mentioned that Macedonia is the centre of a five-sided Balkans dispute. If you don't mind me asking, what is this dispute? I'm aware of quite a few bilateral disputes it's in, but haven't heard of any described as five-way. CMD ( talk) 22:32, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dalmatia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Zagora ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:02, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk) 02:03, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
This is the chronology of the national dilemma of the Bosniaks: Serb/Croats->Confused medieval Christians->Muslims betraying Christianity->Losing touch with their Slavic roots and calling themselves Turks->Muslims with capital M->Viscous nationalist trying to steal the Bosniak name (4th of December, 2012). 90.230.54.125 ( talk) 04:35, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
If an editor express a opinion, that should be respected. Blind reverts will be regarded as nationalistic vandalism. But you are welcomed to use talk page, like normal editors do. You do not have any reason or argument for removing those, and you didnt stated any of those also. Now, inform now someone off wiki to revert me back, as you and your friend always do. -- WhiteWriter speaks 18:52, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
Dear Direktor, I'm all with you in moving this page to "Trentino-South Tyrol". There's pleanty of reasons to do so, but as you see, the actual name was the outcome of an arbitration, and we need stronger grounds for the move. A killer argument would be some high-profile documents using the name "Trentino-South Tyrol". Unfortunately they are difficult to find, as hardly anyone talks/writes about this (outdated) region. Usally whoever writes about our area either refers to the province of Trentino or to South Tyrol only.-- Sajoch ( talk) 19:21, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
Greetings DIREKTOR. I late with response because I'm currently in Pristina, Kosovo so I do not have Internet access. It may possibly be considered a sensitive topics by some, but you know that I almost exclusively work on sensitive topics on English Wikipedia (It partially satisfies my need for freedom of speech). Although I at all do not understand your last objection on my contributions, in fact it seems to me that both of you overemphasize and falsely represents my contribution-so you are the ones who are doing this a political issue not me. Also, I do not see any rule that I broke so I dont see ground for such I would even say hysterical reactions, and your already boring (often based but not in this case) accusations of bloodthirsty nationalism, chauvinism, extremism and I do not know, maybe vegetarianism (sorry for too much freedom of speech I hope I will not offend you)? I think that my edits were 100% justified, positive and well explained, but since it is not about the content of articles it did not even cross my mind to receive punishment because of that. I plan to talk about it with other editors (about part that WP don't owe article...) and maybe to talk about special WP Republika Srpska so that we can avoid your fake argument about Serbia-Serbs, or to add part that WP Serbia deals also with topics connected with Serbs, but all that are long therm ideas. Because I still want to work on issues related to members of minority groups in Croatia I will not continue edit war in this case because it is not worth to be blocked for that (I will now maybe only raise this issue among other editors). So much of me (I may not be able to respond until next week).-- MirkoS18 ( talk) 21:56, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
Please weigh in if you wish. - Biruitorul Talk 19:25, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
WhiteWriter speaks 12:01, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Re:dashes? Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 03:58, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Greetings, DIREKTOR. Hope you are well.
The article in question was a complete mess, and contained (and still contains, for that matter) material that is unsourced, original research, or just wrong.
i.Several of the entries are listed belonging to Royal Houses and they have been given the wrong name. For example; the Royal House of Belgium has been the 'House of Belgium' since 1921; not 'House of Wettin' (which was the former House designation), the Royal House of the Netherlands is simply the 'House of Orange-Nassau' (and it has been ever since 1908; via decree of Queen Wilhelmina, despite the fathers of the current and last-but-one Queens not coming from this house.) The grand ducal house of the Netherlands is listed as 'Bourbon, Parma line, Nassau-Weilburg sub line'; yet Grand Duke Jean changed the name of the House from 'Bourbon-Parma' to 'Nassau' (although the House does indeed descend agnatically from the House of Bourbon Parma) in 1986 in retaliation for the Head of the House of Bourbon-Parma; Carlos Hugo, Duke of Parma, ruling the marriage of Jean's son, the present Grand Duke Henri, as unequal and non-dynastic. The name now borne by the grand-ducal House is 'Luxembourg-Nassau', by grand-ducal decree. See here: http://www.monarchie.lu/fr/monarchie/droits-de-succession/annexe-au-communique-du-20062011.pdf Likewise, the House name given for the defunct throne of the Empire of Brazil is also wrong.
ii.There are several entries where claimants are given, but the family in question is extinct and no current pretender exists. For example, 'Albania' is listed under the Zogu and Wied claims. Whilst there certainly is a Zogu claimant (the male-line grandson of King Zog I of Albania is alive and well); the son of the Wied claimant died without issue and thus there is no claimant to the Wied Principality of Albania that existed in 1913. There are also several entries where the House given is listed as 'extinct'-well; if the House is extinct, then there is no claimant; therefore why is it being listed? Likewise; there is no current pretender to the throne of Poland, nor is there for any of the various empires and kingdom that ruled over Haiti.
iii.There are several entries where the 'pretender' given is not a pretender at all. For example, Amadeo, Duke of Savoy (the Head of the Aosta branch of the House of Savoy and rival to the headship of the entire house.), is listed as the pretender to the throne of Croatia. But not only did Amadeo's father Aimone relinquish any claims to the Kingship of Croatia in 1943 (which at any rate was an Axis puppet state and was ephemeral at best); neither Amadeo nor his father (nor anyone else for that matter) have ever considered him to be the 'pretender' to the defunct throne of Croatia. Similarly, Queen Margarethe II of Denmark is listed as the 'pretender' for Iceland; yet Queen Margarethe's grandfather King Christian X acknowledged the loss of his Icelandic throne (which at any rate was decided by plebiscite anyway) and no claims to the throne of Iceland have been made by any of his successors. Like with Elizabeth II and the loss of some of her thrones in the commonwealth, King Christian X made no claim to or even lamented the loss of his icelandic throne: he sent a congratulatory telegram to the Icelandic people, and the arms of Iceland were removed from the Royal arms of Denmark by his son Frederik IX in 1947. It could be argued that 'yes; but someone could view them as pretenders; it can be a claim made on their behalf' -but the monarchist movement in both countries is non-existent, and in both cases the loss of the throne was legally acknowledged, both by the state and by the Royal House.
iv. Several entries are given for entities that had no throne in the first place. For example, the various colonial possessions of Spain (the Viceroyalties) are listed; but these were only ever colonies of Spain rather than independent states in their own right that shared a monarch with Spain. Same as regards the thirteen colonies that later founded the U.S.A.: these were colonies rather than independent monarchies with their own throne. A colony is just an overseas territory of another country, not a sovereign state in its own right.
v.Several entries give the pretender to an extinct throne titles that they do not pretend to. Yes; there have been several deposed monarchs (who have thus become pretenders) who have continued to use the title they used as monarch (ex-Kings Simeon II, Constantine II and Michael I are good examples); but this is common diplomatic practice: a deposed monarch is allowed to use the title they used during their reign as a courtesy title; but this courtesy is not extended to their heirs (for example, when the former King Peter II of Yugoslavia died, his son did not proclaim himself 'King Alexander II of Yugoslavia' but simply used the title of Crown Prince that he had been entitled legally for a week after his birth.) There are examples of Heads of former royal houses using Monarchical titles, for example Crown Prince Leka, son of Zog I of Albania; declared himself 'King of the Albanians', but this practice is rare.
Second to this; after it becomes impossible for a pretender to use a courtesy title (because they have been born after the abolition of the monarchy); the Pretender will use a title that shows they are Head of the Royal House; without using a title they are not qualified to use. Thus; for example, Georg Friedrich; Head of the Prussian Royal House is styled simply 'Prince of Prussia', and not 'Emperor Georg Friedrich I', as listed here.
vi. There are some entries that are just...well; wrong. For example, Prince Phillip (husband of Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth Realms) is listed as being the 'pretender' to the throne of Hesse; with the House designation of 'Mountbatten'. Not only if the Hessian throne still existed would Prince Phillip be nowhere near the throne (his maternal grandmother was a daughter of the Grand Duke of Hesse. The Hessian throne was inherited in a salic, males-only basis and the direct line of the House of Hesse-Darmstadt at any rate is extinct in the male line and its claims have passed to the branch of Hesse-Cassel); not only that, but he has never been a member of the House of Mountbatten (he was born a Prince of Greece from the Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glucksburg branch of the House of Oldenburg and has not renounced membership of that House, neither has he been removed from the House by the Head of the House); not only that; but that arms shown for him are the ones born by his maternal grandfather, Prince Louis of Battenburg; which not only would he not be entitled to (and at any rate he has); those aren't even the arms that are borne today by the House of Mountbatten. The only throne Prince Phillip has been anywhere near in his lifetime as far as potential succession is concerned is the Greek one, and he renounced that on marrying the then-Princess Elizabeth in 1947.
Elizabeth II is listed as being the 'pretender' to the throne of Cyprus here as well. Not only was Cyprus a republic from the date of independence in 1960 (it was a British colony from 1914 to 1960, and thus had no throne of its own during this time-it was 'merely' a British territory)-it was not a commonwealth realm so she was never 'Queen of Cyprus' like she was of various other countries such as Ceylon and South Africa that she was formerly Queen of (but no longer is), not only that, but neither she nor anyone for that matter has ever viewed her as 'Queen of Cyprus'. Of course; there are pretenders to the Cypriot Kingdom that was abolished in 1490 by the Venetians, but that is not the issue here. Both those entries are erroneous in the extreme. Whilst I'm at it as well; she doesn't claim the throne of Ireland either and nor has anyone ever claimed the throne for her either. She is listed as claiming the throne of Malta; yet whilst she was indeed Queen of Malta from 1964 to 1974; she doesn't claim that title now (indeed, she fully acknowledged its loss via giving royal consent to the Republic of Malta Act 1974.), nor has anyone claimed it on her behalf.
vii.Yes; I'm aware that I deleted a whole lot of content (most of which was erroneous anyway), but my intention was anyway to add bits back as I went along after checking the sources-I did want to add the pretenders back for places like Austria, Hungary and Hawaii, for example.
viii.The present article makes no distinction between ruling houses and formerly ruling houses that have a pretender. My intention was to make this article much easier to understand to both those familiar with the topic; and those who aren't. As it stands now; it's just confusing. JWULTRABLIZZARD ( talk) 14:17, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Did you know that 92 editors watch your talk page?-- Antidiskriminator ( talk) 19:52, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk) 09:45, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
I've already gotten too mad about this typical Balkan ultranationalist tirade by this Croatian ultranationalist, and told him that his reasoning is bullshit. You rated the Dalmatianism article for mid-importance, I would prefer if you addressed this user's complaints because you considered the article to be pertinent, I'm tired of that user's attitude already and don't want to converse with them.-- R-41 ( talk) 19:26, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
... here.--v/r - T P 20:44, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Ignore all the bickering, these articles always end up like this. I appreciate your trying to help out,I suggest you just have at it and the involved editors can complain or not on the talk page. Darkness Shines ( talk) 15:30, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
As above, please adhere to Wikipedia:Assume good faith and Wikipedia:Civility, instead of accusing me of "stonewalling" because I disagreed with your proposal for the sidebars of Fascism and Nazism. I disagreed with your proposal but I also said that you could post your proposal on the talk page and see if other users would support it. There is no reason to assume bad faith of what I said.-- R-41 ( talk) 14:03, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:TIME Josip Broz Tito Oct 9 1944.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 15:26, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:TIME Josip Broz Tito Sep 16 1946.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 15:26, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:TIME Josip Broz Tito Jun 6 1955.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 15:26, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
File:TIME Josip Broz Tito Jun 13 1969.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot ( talk) 04:00, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Is there any site with (original) documents from interwar era elections (lists of deputies, candidates etc.) of Yugoslavia (including the "Kingdom of Slov/Cr/Sr")?-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 19:23, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your recent edits here, but I do have a question. The overall perception of Stalin in today's society is negative. I don't see it as a biased statement to say that he "remains a controversial figure" to this day, and I think referring to popular opinion of Stalin throughout the world as "mixed" is an overgeneralization. I've decided to re-add my own text in that particular sentence; if you still disagree, feel free to ping me on my talk page explaining your side of the issue.
Take care. Kurtis (talk) 14:14, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
You removed the Parteiabzeichen ("party emblem") on the grounds that it was just a "badge". A "party emblem" is the same as a party logo, and it was in a section specifically designed for the inclusion of a party logo. The Parteiadler means "Party eagle" - it was not a logo of the party, but a very prominent symbol of it. Yes there were badges based on the Parteiabzeichen, but the Parteiabzeichen is recorded in Nazi Party documents. Here is the Organization Book of the National Socialist German Workers' Party from 1940 that says that the symbol is the Parteiabzeichen, and it also shows the emblem in black-and-white being used on a Nazi Party document: [30]
-I agree here with
Director. The Nazis made a clear distinction between the Parteiadler (Party Eagle-emblem of the party) and the Reichsadler (Reich Eagle-emblem of the Reich) -The Reichsadler;
whilst not technically a coat of arms (because it was not borne on a shield) faced heraldic left (dexter) in an effort to respect heraldic rules, along the lines of other national coats of arms and emblems worldwide (or, at least; europe-wide)-it being considered somewhat bad heraldic form (and bad luck, for that matter) for charges (images in a heraldic coat of arms or emblem) to face to the heraldic right (sinister). The Parteiadler;
the original party emblem, was left as it was and was not abolished, and was used after their coming to power to represent the party alone, there being considered here no obligation to follow the rules of heraldry. This is discussed in the chapter 'Nazi Heraldry' in Stephen Slater's 'Complete Guide to Heraldry.'
Hope that helps. :-)
JWULTRABLIZZARD ( talk) 19:04, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The thread is " Template talk:Nazism_sidebar#Parteiadler.3F".
Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you! EarwigBot operator / talk 13:48, 14 January 2013 (UTC) helpCan you help at hr:Naglasak? I am trying to fix confused iw's across 60 projects, but have now been blocked at WP-hr; that one problem with disrupt all the rest. (The confusion is accent = stress vs. accent = regional speech.) Thanks, — kwami ( talk) 00:31, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXII, January 2013
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here. IvanOSIvanOS has been pushing his "Serbo-Croatian does not exist" nonsense on more articles, see his list of contributions. -- JorisvS ( talk) 18:55, 29 January 2013 (UTC) Continuation on Serbo-Croatian controversyI noticed that editor IvanOS continuously delete term Serbo-Croatian from all my edits and replace it. I'm interested would it be considered edit war if I return expression Serbo-Croatian? Specifically, I used so far versions ( Serbo-Croatian: Sunce) and ( Serbo-Croatian: Sunce; Serbian Cyrillic: Сунце). I was thinking about how to solve problem of Cyrillic in cases where I need it. Option ( Serbian: Сунце) would clearly be POV pushing, but since there still is no ( Serbo-croatian cyrilic:Сунце) I decided to use version ( Serbian Cyrillic: Сунце) because just this option allows me to use Cyrillic alphabet without to say that Serbian, Croatian, Montenegrin, Bosnian, Martian... are different languages. Again, I spread story to much, I'm interested in your advice regarding IvanOS and just maybe you can save in the edge of mind this ?problem? with ( Serbo-croatian cyrilic:). BR.-- MirkoS18 ( talk) 17:01, 30 January 2013 (UTC) Possibly unfree File:Milos Trifunovic left.jpgA file that you uploaded or altered, File:Milos Trifunovic left.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 21:54, 31 January 2013 (UTC) Re February 2013I accepted your request. Since you are offended. You remove this [33]-- Sokac121 ( talk) 20:59, 1 February 2013 (UTC) Possibly unfree File:Bozidar Puric right.jpgA file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bozidar Puric right.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 16:36, 3 February 2013 (UTC) Possibly unfree File:Branko Mikulic left.jpgA file that you uploaded or altered, File:Branko Mikulic left.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 16:37, 3 February 2013 (UTC) Possibly unfree File:Veselin Duranovic left.jpgA file that you uploaded or altered, File:Veselin Duranovic left.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 09:10, 4 February 2013 (UTC) You should take Frietjes to ANI......because he keeps reverting everything and everyone without giving a reason for his actions. -- 92.13.59.67 ( talk) 19:22, 7 February 2013 (UTC) Why should a ten-day alliance that made no military contribution to the Axis be included?Yugoslavia was a part of the Axis for ten days. The state made no military contribution to the Axis war effort. Why should it be included?-- R-41 ( talk) 17:32, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.-- Vituzzu ( talk) 07:50, 15 February 2013 (UTC) DRN: editing 'overview' sectionAre you done? If you're going to keep altering what you said, it's going to be confusing. We don't mind people taking a few goes to get it right, or fixing layout or typos in their own comments, but coming back hours later and adding to or changing the substance of a comment is discouraged. WP:REDACT explains why and gives some tips on how to show that a comment has been altered, if you really feel that it's necessary to change it. It might also be easiest and clearest (especially for adding to the comment) to just make a second comment (with a separate signature). CarrieVS ( talk) 17:29, 16 February 2013 (UTC) PANONIANSorry Director, but I'm not buying into that one. I get the impression such things are not taken very seriously over there. I'm happy to continue playing Whac-a-mole with these goons on en WP that keep changing the flag, and report it if it continues. Thanks for the tip though, I'll keep a closer eye on the suspect. Interestingly, I note that PANONIAN keeps a list on sr WP of your "socks", which includes me (lol) and a name for you. I take that is not "outing"? Anyway, thanks for the pointer, I'll keep an eye out. Regards, Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 00:33, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
Feb 2013Hello, I would love to hear your opinion on this RfC request [ [34]] cheers! Eng.Bandara ( talk) 12:13, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 22Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Star and crescent, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page South Slavic ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:52, 22 February 2013 (UTC) SyriaI saw your message and looked into the problem, however, I doubt I can help. I'm inactive on Wikipedia for a longer period now. I was constantly watched by some IPs, my pages and edits were vandalised for days and so on... I lost any will to participate on Wikipedia since... Wish you luck with Syria topic though. -- Wüstenfuchs 06:13, 17 February 2013 (UTC) YOU ARE BROKEN. WE ARE LEGION. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.197.127.134 ( talk) 17:01, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXIII, February 2013
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here. RE:CyrillicBoth scripts are in use in Serbo-Croatian, and in given local communities are prescribed by official documents. When we have writen in articles (Serbo-Croatian:Bla bla...) than your arguments will have more sense. BR.-- MirkoS18 ( talk) 02:23, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussionHello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.-- FutureTrillionaire ( talk) 18:28, 24 March 2013 (UTC) Please see my comments here. As a result of your edit warning, I am warning you that you may be subject to discretionary sanctions under the terms of ARBPIA if you continue to edit in a manner inconsistent with expected standards of behavior. Do not interpret the fact that I have expressed some sympathy towards your position as evidence that I will extend more leniency towards you than the other participants in this edit war. You need to focus on advertising the RFC and gathering consensus, now and after the protection expires. ⇌ Jake Wartenberg 22:57, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXIV, March 2013
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here. An interesting Infobox solution
Suggested by EkoGraf. This entirely makes the need for a lengthy debate of which country supports who or which is of greater importance than the other obsolete. (Refs to be added appropriately) Sopher99 ( talk) 02:28, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your noticeUser:direktor thank you for your notice on my page. Please do go ahead and utilise Wikipedia's arbitration process or noticeboards if you feel that that will help the process of building consensus on the military infobox on the Syrian civil war page. The actions of all editors on that page are open and transparent for all other editors to read and gauge. I look forward to working with you further on the Syrian civil war article. Guest2625 ( talk) 01:35, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXV, April 2013
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here. April 2013Please be advised that WP:GOODFAITH and assuming normal actions (allowed on wiki policy) conctructive edits is against project policy and did you REALLY read WP:CANVASS? the first paragraph in the lead clearly states that "In general, it is perfectly acceptable to notify other editors of ongoing discussions, provided that it is done with the intent to improve the quality of the discussion by broadening participation to more fully achieve consensus." Peterzor ( talk) 16:01, 25 April 2013 (UTC) ANIHello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Peterzor ( talk) 16:31, 1 May 2013 (UTC) The Bugle: Issue LXXXVI, May 2013
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here. Complaint about your edits at WP:AN3Please see WP:AN3#User:DIREKTOR reported by User:FutureTrillionaire (Result: ). You may respond there if you wish. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 20:34, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Nazi Party articleHi: It appears that you tried to rv to the "Emblem of the National Socialist German Workers' Party" for the info. box but it did not go through. Could you check it and fix it as to the "emblem" you wanted to place there. I assume it was the NSDAP eagle but would rather you fix it as you know what you wanted there. Thanks, Kierzek ( talk) 02:42, 2 June 2013 (UTC) Byzantine Empire discussionI know it's a bit late for when I should be mentioning this, but I just thought I'd come here and say that I agree with your proposed changes to the opening paragraph of Byzantine Empire. Not much to be done about it now, but I just thought I would put that out there, Anyway, keep up the good work. I Feel Tired ( talk) 05:44, 2 June 2013 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for June 8Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jakov Cindro, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Podesta ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 12:00, 8 June 2013 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for June 16Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Istrian exodus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fascist Italy ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:45, 16 June 2013 (UTC) The Bugle: Issue LXXXVII, June 2013
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here. Talkback![]() Message added 04:55, 3 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. — Preceding signed comment added by Cymru.lass ( talk • contribs) 04:55, 3 July 2013 (UTC) Call for research participantsHi DIREKTOR, we are a Croatian team of researchers who are looking at the editing dynamics on different language Wikipedias and are focusing specifically on the topic of Kosovo. We are looking for users who have edited, discussed, or acted in accordance with administrative rights on articles about this topic, and who would be willing to be interviewed for the purpose of this research project. This is a project approved by the Wikimedia Foundations´ Research Committee and you can find more information on this meta-wiki page. Research results will be published under an open access license and your participation would be much appreciated. If you would like to participate you can reach us at interwikiresearch@gmail.com and we will set up an interview in a way that best suits your needs. Pbilic ( talk) 09:53, 3 July 2013 (UTC) National Animal of CroatiaHello. I've replied to you on Talk:List of national animals. I am not sure Peregrine Falcon should be listed as a national animal of Croatia. This also means it does not belong in the Symbols of Croatia. I am quite sure the Marten ( Pine marten to be more specific) is the only one which can be claimed as a "national animal" ( Nightingale excluded). Shokatz ( talk) 14:17, 4 July 2013 (UTC) Anon7mous
Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.![]() This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is " Talk:Istrian exodus". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot operator / talk 19:07, 6 July 2013 (UTC) Possibly unfree File:Slobodan Jovanovic left.jpgA file that you uploaded or altered, File:Slobodan Jovanovic left.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 17:34, 9 July 2013 (UTC) Possibly unfree File:Slobodan Jovanovic right.jpgA file that you uploaded or altered, File:Slobodan Jovanovic right.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 17:36, 9 July 2013 (UTC) Possibly unfree File:Milos Trifunovic right.jpgA file that you uploaded or altered, File:Milos Trifunovic right.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 23:16, 10 July 2013 (UTC) A minor change to DRNHi there, you're getting this message as you are involved in a case at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard which is currently open. Today DRN has undergone a big move resulting in individual cases on subpages as opposed to all the content on one page. This is to inform you that your case is now back on the DRN board and you will be able to 'watch' the subpage it's located on. Thanks, Cabe 6403 ( Talk• Sign) 13:16, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Coat of arms of Dubrovnik RepublicHello. I have noticed that it was you who changed the CoA of the republic. I hope you do realize the colors on the CoA are wrong. I have elaborated on this in Talk:Republic of Ragusa and I have also contacted the author on Wikimedia Commons. The blue lines were a wrong interpretation from 1950s-1960s when they thought the CoA was barry azure and gules (blue and red lines) when instead it was barry argent and gules (white and red lines) - the old CoA of Arpad dynasty. This issue is also very well elaborated and sourced on Croatian Wikipedia [35]. Can we please discuss this issue? Shokatz ( talk) 00:09, 23 July 2013 (UTC) July 2013
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 01:08, 25 July 2013 (UTC) The Bugle: Issue LXXXVIII, July 2013
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
Your recent edits to Double-headed eaglePlease be aware that the inclusion of specific images in the gallery in this article was the subject of recent detailed discussion at Talk:Double-headed eagle#Examples image gallery, where at least a tentative consensus was established. Please see other editors' comments there regarding the rationale behind each decision to include or exclude certain images, and offer your own commentary on these and any other images you recently introduced to the article. I will refrain from reverting your changes, because I feel that consensus is still tentative and not yet settled, and I sincerely hope you will include yourself in the discussion there. One of the issues prompting the discussion is the endless stream of drive-by additions, which are often driven by an inflated sense of nationalism (not in your case, but in many others) and erode the gallery's essential purpose: to display a geographically, temporally, stylistically and functionally diverse set of examples of double-headed eagles. Thank you for your contributions! Wilhelm Meis ( ☎ Diskuss | ✍ Beiträge) 01:49, 30 July 2013 (UTC) edit requestcan you include a motto in the nazi germany infobox? if not "Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer" can you please help me find another one?, i saw a comment on the article's talkpage that you will find one 83.180.188.119 ( talk) 20:04, 4 August 2013 (UTC) Re: Kosovo and MetohijaThis might constitute a technical move but at this point I'm honestly not sure if Antidiskriminator wouldn't complain about that because it offends some peculiar sensibility. They've already reverted my 1990-related change there. Besides, I didn't discuss it previously, and there's some history to those names, both at the English and the Serbian variant:
I see myself in the history of both of those, so I think it's actually fair to say that this would be excessively bold - please post to Talk:Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija first. -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 06:40, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 9Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Socialist Autonomous Province of Kosovo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Albanian ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:47, 9 August 2013 (UTC) Possibly unfree File:Dusan Simovic left.jpgA file that you uploaded or altered, File:Dusan Simovic left.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Vanjagenije ( talk) 23:24, 10 August 2013 (UTC) Macedonian help neededHello DIREKTOR, I'm contacting you because we need some Macedonian translators to help with the deployment of the new VisualEditor on mk.wikipedia. There are help pages, user guides, and description pages that need translating, as well as the interface itself. The translating work is going on over on MediaWiki: Translation Central. I also need help with a personal message for the Macedonian Wikipedians. If you are able to help in any way, either reply here, or head over to TranslationCentral. Thanks for your time, PEarley (WMF) ( talk) 18:14, 13 August 2013 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for August 16Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ante Marković, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aleksandar Mitrović ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:56, 16 August 2013 (UTC) Huge Tanks !You really should have a big star for your contributions with the "nazism" article. To me, the preavious "Fascism-varity"-describing in the early lead strongly suggests some kind of hidden agenda. Thanks once more ! Boeing720 ( talk) 20:35, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXIX, August 2013
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here. Hey, just letting you know that the coin switch came about during a series of edits, including a change of the caption to say it was the divinized father of Trajan, that I found a bit precipitous. I think the coin caption was one of the discussions I opened on the talk page regarding these edits, so we could confirm consensus on various points the other editor wanted to change. Do you have a secondary source that discusses this coin, so we can put this to rest once and for all? That is, which ID of the coin portrait is right? I can support Trajan, but not his "father", as the lead image. The legend reads divus pater Traianus, not Traiani, so I'm assuming it's Trajan himself, but the other editor said its date of issue meant Trajan was still alive and hence not divinized. I was preoccupied by other matters regarding the accursed infobox, and restored the other image till the correct caption could be verified. Cynwolfe ( talk) 21:10, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Marshal Josip Broz Tito.jpg)
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth ( talk) 21:01, 5 September 2013 (UTC) September 2013
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 17:01, 8 September 2013 (UTC) WikiProject Military history coordinator electionGreetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill [talk] 18:06, 16 September 2013 (UTC) Orphaned non-free image File:Jakov Blazevic.jpg![]() Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 10:55, 18 September 2013 (UTC) The Bugle: Issue LXXXXX, September 2013
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here. September 2013
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 08:04, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
October 2013
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 12:12, 4 October 2013 (UTC) The Bugle: Issue XCI, October 2013
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here. Edit warring on Istrian ExodusJust to inform that I have reported you for edit warring. You can find details on the notification on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. You cannot revert sourced edits without a reason. Please note a discussion has been proposed on the talk page but you diserted it.-- Silvio1973 ( talk) 19:13, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Request for CommentPlease see here Regards IJA ( talk) 00:30, 31 October 2013 (UTC) Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.![]() This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is " Republic of Kosovo". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! -- Guy Macon ( talk) 02:24, 31 October 2013 (UTC) IstriansHi Direktor. Concerning this edit [36], I can't help but fear that preferential criteria is being introduced on what to many is unfavourable. Ethnicity by its very description is the label by which an individual identifies himself. Conservative Serbs feel the same way about Montenegrins; conservative Serbs and Croats both have reservations over Bosniaks and to whom they belong; Bulgarians and Serbs question Macedonian ethnicity, everybody likes to denounce Yugoslavs, the list goes on for ever but there is no "Day 1" policy. If a person wishes to call himself Istrian, it makes precious little difference whether his dad is Serb and his mother Croat because the only thing that makes them Serb and Croat in the first place is their decision to dclare themselves as such, it doesn't mean they have bloodlines going back to some imaginary progenitor. That's why I believe ethnicities should be given equal treatment. Zavtek ( talk) 22:09, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Republic of KosovoHi,
Report to ANIHello, I am informing you that following the dispute we had on Istrian Exodus I have filed a report on ANI.[ [38]] Silvio1973 ( talk) 11:36, 7 November 2013 (UTC) height of Stalin is disputedHello Director, there seems to be some inaccuracy in the Stalin article, and from the edit-history you looked like you might know more about the subject than me. Can you comment here, if you have a moment? Talk:Joseph_Stalin#Biased_about_Stalin.27s_height Thanks. p.s. There is also a piece of photo-evidence, that User:Objectus claims gives evidence of Stalin's height, but I cannot read the script; perhaps you can verify what the text in the photo says? 74.192.84.101 ( talk) 00:23, 10 November 2013 (UTC) The Bugle: Issue XCII, November 2013
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here. |