The Civility Barnstar | |
I appreciate your nice and friendly tone in discussions. Eisfbnore (会話) 18:26, 1 May 2020 (UTC) |
Regarding your edit summary about a possible sock. Do you suspect some editor in particular? EdJohnston ( talk) 17:51, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
The article Bosnian genocide denial you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Bosnian genocide denial for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Mhare -- Mhare ( talk) 21:01, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
Did you notice the recent Twitter spat between Jasmin Mujanović and Glenn Greenwald? [1] Interesting to watch how certain stuff never seems to settle completely… Eisfbnore (会話) 02:19, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
http://srebrenica hyphen genocide.blogspot.com/2011/10/byen-som-kunne-ofres-serbisk-propaganda.html
(spam filter prohibits linkage) through Google Translate, for a point-by-point refusal of the ludicrous statements given.
Eisfbnore
(会話)
20:39, 20 May 2020 (UTC)Category:Islamophobia in scholarship has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. gnu 57 17:58, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
Done.-- 3E1I5S8B9RF7 ( talk) 11:14, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Islamophobia in non-fiction requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 17:41, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
Hello/Salam,
Thanks for your edits :-) VR talk 21:49, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
Frankly, I just wanted to say I disagree. I share your concerns about possible non-encyclopedic interests at play, but it is a mistake to have faith that our topic area will be rescued by some well-meaning Westerners or Koreans or whoever. Whenever non-Balkanians get involved, they either don't make enough effort to actually learn the matters at stake, or they do but then get sucked in -- myself, Taivo, Fut Perf... -- and end up accused of voting in one of the Balkan "blocs" anyways -- which imo should raise questions about whether these "blocs" are actually based on ethnicity or instead based on personalities, who simply assert they are "ethnic blocs" in order to obscure the interpersonal dynamics at play, which are the real reason for much of the allegedly "ethnic" bloc behavior. Hence I (and even Cinadon -- a Greek!) get mistaken for an Albanians (except for that episode my old userpage was defaced by someone who thought I was a Greek...), and Taivo and FP for Macedonians. There is no reason to think it is somehow going to change the game if Sandstein invents this rule. Really, the best thing I have seen happen to Balkan topics is native Balkan editors who are actually conscientious and working to build an encyclopedia, including working with "the other side". Sandstein's non-policy threw out the baby with the bathwater. -- Calthinus ( talk) 17:05, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Petrovo field, Bosnia and Herzegovina, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Field ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:24, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
An article you recently created,
List of karst plateaus in Bosnia and Herzegovina, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from
reliable,
independent sources. (
?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (
verifiability is of
central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to
draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's
general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.
b
uidh
e
19:22, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
An article you recently created,
Potočari, Srebrenica, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from
reliable,
independent sources. (
?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (
verifiability is of
central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to
draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's
general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.
Celestina007 (
talk)
17:55, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
Hello. 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. 109.245.37.148 ( talk) 15:09, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in Eastern Europe or the Balkans. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
EdJohnston ( talk) 15:36, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Santasa99. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Ethnic cleansing in the Bosnian War at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Cheers, Baffle☿gab 03:07, 7 July 2020 (UTC) |
I have nominated mergers of two categories created by you:
If you wish to comment, please do so at WP:CFDS. – Fayenatic London 09:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I'm running through the categories in WP:LAKES and came across two that you created that seem to describe the same thing. Could you explain the difference or let me know if it makes sense to merge these. Thanks. Category:Subterranean lakes in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Category:Underground lakes of Bosnia and Herzegovina Wolfgang8741 says: If not you, then who? ( talk) 15:33, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Drina, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Međeđa.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:14, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to List of Serbian painters, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 23:20, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi! I've rated nearly 8,000 pages for WP:IR and note you changed my importance rating of Neo-Ottomanism for the project. Given that this page clearly needs to be improved, may I ask why? Johncdraper ( talk) 09:41, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
The article Esad Kurtović has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Very accomplished, lots of published material, but very anemic citation count (highest is 35). Can't see where he meets any of the other criteria of WP:NACADEMIC, and definitely doesn't meet WP:GNG.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Onel5969
TT me
15:33, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Esad Kurtović 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/Esad Kurtović until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article. Onel5969 TT me 19:26, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kotor Castle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ključ.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:47, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
Category:Glavatičevo has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Elliot321 ( talk | contribs) 23:09, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:19, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
I recall you wanting to add a tag to the Boris Malagurski but were told you need consensus. Yet [Here] a tag is added by those that told you this but don’t seem to follow their own advice?
Seems hypocritical if I am reading this correctly. OyMosby ( talk) 21:02, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Herzegovina, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Archaic.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:22, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
Category:Bosnian Genocide deniers has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ( t · c) buidhe 01:32, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Santasa99, could you enable your email function so I can send you a pdf source for you to go through as you speak the language and all? Thank you. OyMosby ( talk) 17:21, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Look who's talking. [4] [5] Amanuensis Balkanicus ( talk) 22:38, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
When you manually made that photo go away on History of Bosnia and Herzegovina, it did not create the "reverted" tag on the article's history, making it that much harder for other editors to understand the situation with those inappropriate photos and seek a solution. Just a heads up.-- Quisqualis ( talk) 04:36, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at
List of Serb countries and regions and
Serbs of Bosnia and Herzegovina shows that you are currently engaged in an
Wikipedia:Hounding; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, while following other editors with whom you disagree and not engaging in Talk Page existing discussions. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others, especially not via WP:Hounding. Instead, please use the
talk page to work toward making a version that represents
consensus. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant
noticeboard or seek
dispute resolution. Being involved in hounding and edit war as a consequence can result in
blocking from editing.---
Theonewithreason (
talk)
18:52, 16 January 2021 (UTC) 18:50, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Serbs of Bosnia and Herzegovina, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 20:46, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello Santasa99, I hope you are doing well. Can the POV template from the NATO and Western media section be removed? The section has been considerably rearranged, references by esteemed and relevant authors have been added (even more than 30 references!), as well as criticism of their opinions. What is disputable and not neutral in this case? What would you like to change and in what way? No one made specific objections to the sources and content on the talk page. I would like to resolve this together and improve the article. I have already initiated a discussion several times. I'm always available for cooperation. Thanks. -- WEBDuB ( talk) 22:09, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Aeengath. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Battle of Zenta, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Aeengath ( talk) 17:41, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ston, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dukedom.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:17, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors. Thank you. CommanderWaterford ( talk) 21:26, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
I re-instated the GA Nomination after your complain at GA Review Talk. Good luck for it. CommanderWaterford ( talk) 21:34, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Stjepan Vukčić Kosača you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of CommanderWaterford -- CommanderWaterford ( talk) 21:40, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
The article
Stjepan Vuk?i? Kosa?a you nominated as a
good article has failed
; see
Talk:Stjepan Vuk?i? Kosa?a for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
CommanderWaterford --
CommanderWaterford (
talk)
21:41, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Please actually read Ethan Van Sciver. The redundant information you re-added is already in the article.
Hello:
The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Stjepan Vukčić Kosača has been completed.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
I have tagged two sentences in the Struggle for family inheritance with "clarification needed" tags as I was unable to understand what the text was tring to convey. Please be sure to read through the article carefully to make certain that none of the edits I have made have added errors to the text. Best of luck with the GAN.
Regards,
Twofingered Typist ( talk) 13:48, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Here they want to put Bosnia and Herzegovina and other things that have never been Serbian countries, please pay attention to this page and further possible edits [ [6]]. Thank you. 89.172.66.209 ( talk) 05:55, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Bombaj Štampa songs indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 15:49, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Stjepan Vukčić Kosača you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Some Dude From North Carolina -- Some Dude From North Carolina ( talk) 20:40, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
The article Stjepan Vuk?i? Kosa?a you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Stjepan Vuk?i? Kosa?a for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Some Dude From North Carolina -- Some Dude From North Carolina ( talk) 20:42, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi, Santasa99. You have done excellent work at Stjepan Vukčić Kosača. I intended to perform the GA review but found that a lot more needs be done. Do you want me to proceed with the review and post suggestions there or would you rather that I take a more active role and edit the article ahead of a review by another editor? Issues include punctuation, spelling, linking, capitalization, clarity, grammar, and internal consistency. Surtsicna ( talk) 16:53, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Producer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thomas Meehan.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 05:56, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
Category:Anti-Muslim sentiment has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:03, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Župas of the medieval Bosnia state indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 15:40, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
Category:Fly fishing in Bosnia and Herzegovina has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. User:力 (powera, π, ν) 05:03, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Category:Recreation in Bosnia and Herzegovina has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. User:力 (powera, π, ν) 05:05, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Hello Santasa99,
Is Category:Hucho habitats in Bosnia and Herzegovina really a good idea? There are regions of the world that have tens of thousands of native fauna. This seems like overcategorization ( WP:OC) unless hucho are somehow staggeringly rare AND influential. Any thoughts on possibly emptying & deleting the category? If a river is really notable as a place hucho fishers go, it can be added as normal referenced content in prose, rather than as a category. SnowFire ( talk) 21:58, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for
your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from
Schutzkorps into
Stjepan Vukčić Kosača. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere,
Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an
edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and
linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution
. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{
copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at
Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. —
Diannaa (
talk)
15:29, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bila (river), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kozica.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:01, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Please note that Graham87 was reverting a bunch of unsourced, unexplained changes--the kind of change one sees all the time in articles in this area. Drmies ( talk) 18:27, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Stjepan Vukčić Kosača you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vacant0 -- Vacant0 ( talk) 18:00, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
The article Stjepan Vuk?i? Kosa?a you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Stjepan Vuk?i? Kosa?a for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vacant0 -- Vacant0 ( talk) 18:02, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
The article Stjepan Vukčić Kosača you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Stjepan Vukčić Kosača for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vacant0 -- Vacant0 ( talk) 23:00, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Hasan Kikić small.png. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 18:29, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
Helo Santasa99. You've been warned per a complaint at the edit warring noticeboard. Either of you may be blocked if you revert the article again without getting a prior consensus for your change on the article talk page. EdJohnston ( talk) 18:43, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi Santa, early parts of the discussion on talk page of the article went a little bit off-topic. Would you mind if I collapsed it with template. Thank you.-- John the Janitor (public) ( talk) 20:04, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
OK :) Then, we subcategorize? Category:Ottoman military personnel of Croatian descent? -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 19:06, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Nuklear bunkers in Bosnia and Herzegovina indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself.
I created a new category with the correct spelling of "Nuclear" and moved the pages formerly in Category:Nuklear bunkers in Bosnia and Herzegovina to the new category, Category:Nuclear bunkers in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The old category is empty and I have therefore asked for it to be deleted. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 22:09, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
An article you recently created,
Dinjčić noble family, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from
reliable,
independent sources. (
?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (
verifiability is of
central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to
draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's
general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.
Onel5969
TT me
17:40, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I'm GenoV84. I noticed that you removed topically-relevant content from LGBT in Islam. However, Wikipedia is not censored. Please do not remove or censor information that directly relates to the subject of the article. If the content in question involves images, you have the option to configure Wikipedia to hide images that you may find offensive. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. GenoV84 ( talk) 22:54, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at LGBT in Islam. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. And to answer your latest disruptive edit, YES: there is also a Jewish death penalty. GenoV84 ( talk) 23:05, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at LGBT in Islam, you may be blocked from editing. GenoV84 ( talk) 23:17, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on LGBT in Islam. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. — Manti core 01:50, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello. 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. — Manti core 06:52, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
An article you recently created,
Katun (commune), is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from
reliable,
independent sources. (
?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (
verifiability is of
central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to
draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's
general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.
Onel5969
TT me
14:44, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, @
Onel5969:, but given that in a very short time you have chosen to review several articles I have created, I would expect that by now you could have assumed that I would object draftification, because I prefer when you handle [it] through other processes, such as deletion, stubbing, tagging, etc. - so, at least three other ways exist (and some more?). This is because the last time you draftified one of my articles (I believe Dinjčić article few days ago, right?), I explained why I prefer other options in these words: If we take into account the fact that the community of editors who are interested in this topic is extremely small, removing the article from the mainspace only further narrows the number of editors who would be willing to improve the article with proper references, thus shifting the weight to the creator alone. Since the subject of this article is notable, and since it's hardly blatant example of an article unsuitable for the mainspace or misguided creation, I am asking you to move the page back to mainspace so that it can be further developed from there.
; further, when the time is short for me to ref an article properly, I at least always leave Bibliography with some high profile scholarship for any interested party to use as a starting point.
Now, since deletion (AfD) would be highly prejudicial move, taking that this article is/was linked from dozens of other articles, written on the subject of Balkan history, and whenever those touch the history of Vlach ethnic group and Katun as their socio-political organisation, and probably many more that were left out because different link format, then, probably most collaborative and least controversial way of handling it would be proper tagging. Thanks (and I really hope you won't take this personally, after I contested every single decision you tried to implement wherever I was active as an editor - it's just a fluke, probably).--
౪ Santa ౪
99°
17:52, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
These are few article linking to Katun (commune), while probably many more could potentially link to it if their (red) links were properly formatted :
So, if not through behavioural boards ( WP:ANI, etc.) and not through content resolution ( WP:DRR, etc.), what "channels" do you envision remain? El_C 13:01, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in gender-related disputes or controversies or in people associated with them. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
El_C 17:29, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
abandoned that page when [you] started to write ANI earlier today, except maybe now. I don't understand why you are committing these really obvious factual errors. Same with the 17 diffs that became 3. I don't know if it's to do with how you read/write it, but there is an objective threshold, which you are failing to meet. Please try to be more cognizant of that. It would be in everybody's best interest, not least your own. El_C 17:53, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
The following article ban now applies to you:
indefinitely article banned from LGBT in Islam and Talk:LGBT in Islam
You have been sanctioned per this ANI report. I would recommend waiting at least 6 months before appealing.
This article ban is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gender_and_sexuality#Final_decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. Please read WP:ABAN to understand what an article ban is. If you do not comply with the article ban, you may be blocked for an extended period to enforce the ban.
If you wish to appeal the ban, please read the appeals process. You are free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. El_C 07:58, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
An article you recently created,
PEN Bosnia and Herzegovina, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from
reliable,
independent sources. (
?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (
verifiability is of
central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to
draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's
general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.
Onel5969
TT me
15:55, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
When he was alive Bosnia and Herzegovina did not exist. He is described as Yugoslav. Rathfelder ( talk) 08:37, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Hi! According to my research, this range of IPs [ [7]] is vandalized every day on sites related to Croatia, Bosnia, Montenegro, Serbia and Macedonia. Please pay attention to the editing of that IP range and if the vandalism continues please report it to someone in charge to block it. Thanks 78.3.85.128 ( talk) 08:03, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Rade Uhlik, Bosnian romologist.png. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:41, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Santasa99!
Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the
Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the
Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!
asilvering (
talk)
04:25, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
|
Thanks for uploading File:Rade Uhlik, Bosnian romologist.png. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:23, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Rade Uhlik, Bosnian romologist.png. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 13:55, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Hello Santasa99. You've been mentioned at User_talk:EdJohnston#Breaking of a ban on Zachlumia_article. Thank you, EdJohnston ( talk) 02:29, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
Seems that not only Theonewithreason is again editing against NPOV on controversial articles or sections dealing with early medieval history, see Višeslav of Serbia: Revision history and Principality of Serbia (early medieval): Revision history where crucial sentence is removed without any valid reasoning and editing policy is exactly against such removal. Miki Filigranski ( talk) 16:10, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Rade Uhlik, Bosnian romologist.png. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:35, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Songs about the Siege of Sarajevo indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:43, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Santasa99. It is impossible that Ragusa granted Sandalj and Vukac the status of Ragusan nobility because they were dead by 30 October 1435. According to Miklǒsich, Ragusa granted them Ragusan citizenship by charter dated 29 June 1419. Greets Kardam ( talk) 20:55, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on International Day Against Fascism and Antisemitism requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://dayagainstfascism.eu/09-november/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Onel5969 TT me 11:59, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
Vandalism was committed on this page, they put Croatian literature to be Serbian, they just changed Croatian to Serbian, and the sources say Croatian can you fix that, i would but it's semi protected so i can't. Siverije repaired, but vandalism was committed again.Thanks [ [8]], history page [ [9]— Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.138.140.121 ( talk) 08:44, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
Hello Santasa99. Could you please explain to me what do you mean by "it is completely invented by editor who created it"? Are you accusing me of creating hoaxes in Wikipedia? Your behavior and attitude shows a disregard of respect for the work of other editors. I will give you an advice: do not accuse established editors of making up articles and having some kind of POV or bias. It will eventually end up with your name at the administrators' noticeboard. Super Ψ Dro 08:32, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jusuf Barčić, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. You are not allowed to comment on an AfD after it is closed - something I'm sure you know, and is in any case written quite explicitly at the bottom of the closed discussion. If you think the discussion was closed improperly you should discuss it with the closer on their talk page or open a Wikipedia:Deletion review. Iskandar323 ( talk) 19:10, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello. 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. Governor Sheng ( talk) 17:38, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
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. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is " West Herzegovina Canton".
Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!
-- Aaron Liu ( talk) 16:26, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
Category:Islamophobia in North America has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Iskandar323 ( talk) 13:24, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is West Herzegovina Canton Symbols. Thank you. Aaron Liu ( talk) 12:36, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Please be aware that " irredentism" from its own article refers to the doctrine of redeeming lost territories while the speech itself did not allude to irredetmsim, and nor did it advocate redrawing Serbia's borders (which were only internal anyway). The term features only on the "Reception" sector of the article by one or two writers to loosely connect the event with later events that would occur in Bosnia and in Croatia and in particular with the narrative of how events were being portrayed in mainstream media and less so on the ground. That in itself does not insinuate a link between the content of the speech and the ideological doctrine you have sought to include. -- Coldtrack ( talk) 06:21, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
00:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Where was the consensus in 2019? [10]? -- Coldtrack ( talk) 17:43, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
Continuing from the above, I would urge you strongly to read the posts of Talk:Srebrenica massacre#Denial (and scepticism?) and provide your proposals and reasoning ther after reading what Pincrete has stated and what I too have adduced. Thank you. -- Coldtrack ( talk) 21:47, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Hello again Santasa. Your latest edit to Srebrenica massacre demonstrates a fourth revert inside of 24 hours thus breaching WP:3RR. Yes I reverted it (again), but J.O seems very cocksure here. He may be giving you rope, I am not sure, but I would say you have between now and the time he plans to report you "tomorrow" (whatever that means to him) to self-revert and back off. Because frankly, I don't even know what he meant and whether he has seen a violation on your part even graver that edit-warring. The choice is yours. -- Coldtrack ( talk) 22:41, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Hello. 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. Juicy Oranges ( talk) 08:22, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Daniel Case (
talk)
19:23, 4 December 2022 (UTC)Santasa99 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I am sorry that this case was concluded without a chance to offer some reply. I am experienced editor and I rarely fall into a trap like this or bring myself to the brink of being warned let alone blocked for disputes like one we have on genocide denial. I do manage fairly successfully to navigate all our guidelines and policies, I have been editing in Balkan scope under WP:ARBEE, where discussions often get heated, without a log warning let alone blocks (1 logged page ban is due to something of a different nature altogether), and never missed to seek consensus and always looked to avoid being disruptive. And although I have made a mistake and miscalculated timeframe in those reverts, there is more to this case than it was reported by Juicy Oranges. This means that although guideline suggest talking about oneself, I will point to all three of us and the situation which led to this report and block. If it means anything, I actually did try to resolve this whole issue by asking administrator to mediate - I posted at Peacemaker67 user TP (it was badly framed, because hot head needs to cool down before making proper decisions).
The reason for that is that filing editor obviously missed to inform community about not that innocuous way they and Coldtrack participated. We had dispute on the article Gazimestan speech. The moment I left that article and its TP discussion, Juicy Oranges and Coldtrack followed me to article Srebrenica massacre with this edit by Coldtrack, and Juicy Oranges chipped in with this edit,, and started reverting me there, and immediately followed me to another article Bosnian genocide denial with first Coldtrack's edit, and Proposed Croat federal unit in Bosnia and Herzegovina first Coldtrack and first Juicy (they confirm it's them in the next edit here), and again started reverting me there too.
Blocking admin probably checked those reverts simply as presented by Juicy in their report, but I would like to direct attention to Juicy and Coldtrack first edits in these three articles, as they never edited there before until they decided to follow me from Gazimestan speech, and for all intents and purposes tag-teamed and used their same POV to take turns on my edits across these three articles, and edit-warred while evading risk of being themself reported for 3RR. Whole this time they were very well aware what they were doing, taking turns, and here's some evidence of their communications:
see edit-summary with a message by Juicy Oranges to Coldtrack; soon enough Juicy Oranges informed Coldtrack and leaving him
directions what to do or not to do.
Sometime in September they were already exchanging these kinds of messages and communication
here, which is interesting because now Joicy informed Coldtrack that they
owed them for something they missed back then, to which Coldtrack replied
like this.
After Juciy Oranges filed the report Coldtrack noticed that report was idle for few hours, so in the message to Juciy Oranges they thanked them and they won't take on themself to
"exacerbate things" by making more reverts, and to doubling down on if this is not "exacerbate things": Coldtrack left two edit-summaries referred to me with
"no consensus is required for reverting a blatant troll", and
"Troll, vandalism"; or that I should have my
eye checked because I refused to accept his accusation that what I am doing is
"egregious and stiff-necked behaviour to sell a point". Later, they were
thanking to Juicy.
I actually intended to go straight to ARBCOM, while fully acknowledging my miscalculated 3RR by fully accepting responsibility for that misstep, and file a report on both editors who are showing some clear signs that they are now taking things into their hands to start fixing great wrongs within Balkan scope, skipping consensus and labeling RS as "so-called reliable sources" and referring to sources with "simplistic narrative sold by mainstream media", only to come across of my 36 hours block. At Gazimestan speech TP, just hour(s) earlier I received blunt ad-hominem from Juicy Oranges.
Maybe it's not directly related to this block and my appeal, but all these edits by two editors were done without even seeking a consensus let alone achieving it, they never accepted that they need consensus to include or change something so controversial in such sensitive articles, where nationalistic editing is not only unheard of but in fact is almost natural occurrence.
OK, whether blocking admin remove or leave my block, I am, regardless, fully aware of and accepting my share of responsibility for what happened. Thank you for the attention.-- ౪ Santa ౪ 99° 00:46, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Accept reason:
See below. NinjaRobotPirate ( talk) 13:48, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
Block message:
Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Santasa99". The reason given for Santasa99's block is: "Violation of the three-revert rule: one additional revert beyond the fourth".
Accept reason: You should be able to edit now. If not, make another unblock request, I guess. NinjaRobotPirate ( talk) 13:48, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
౪ Santa ౪ 99° 12:14, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
Hey there. It's been a while. I've drafted an RfC to be posted at RSN in my sandbox. It'd be helpful if you gave me some suggestions about it. Aaron Liu ( talk) 12:52, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
Santasa99,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (
talk)
17:59, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Abishe ( talk) 17:59, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for creating Amir Bukvić. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it needs more sources to establish notability. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.
Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Reading Beans ( talk) 03:22, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
There is a prominent banner at the top of the archived page that you edited: {{ talk archive navigation}} I have deleted your additional posts to the closed discussion. If you wish to continue the discussion, start a new thread on the RSN page. Banks Irk ( talk) 13:19, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
I saw this edit summary, and I think there might be some confusion. Anyone can Wikipedia:Request closure. "Closure" in wiki-jargon means "write a summary of what the discussion already decided". The discussion is supposed to have finished before you request closure.
If your goal was "make them stop talking about this", then we don't really have a process for that, but if it's about an RFC, you can always explain your concern at Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 20:31, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Santasa99. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Stjepan Vukčić Kosača at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Cheers, Baffle☿gab 03:13, 24 February 2023 (UTC) |
Hi Santasa99, this article is quite poorly written in places; please review my edits and make corrections if I misinterpret anything. The text may have been machine-translated at some stage.
On another note; could you please enable section-level editing of your talk page? It's awkward for editors to scroll past every other section. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 06:32, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
( ←) I've now finished my c/e; I've marked a few passages with {{ citation needed}} where citations appear to be missing; and {{ which}} and {{ what}} on some confusing passages where I couldn't decide what or who the pronouns used refer to. I think I've managed to interpret the text correctly, feel free to inform me if I didn't. Anyway, good luck with the article your planned FA nomination. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 03:13, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Juicy Oranges ( talk) 19:25, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Santasa99. Thank you for your work on Bilino Polje abjuration. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Thanks for creating the article! I encourage you to create more article. Have a good day!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}
. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. (Message delivered via the
Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 03:21, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
The article Luka Božičković has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Fails WP:GNG, no significant coverage can be found
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 10:00, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Category:Katuns has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Estopedist1 ( talk) 07:51, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Santasa99. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Bosnian genocide denial at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Cheers, Baffle☿gab 05:30, 25 March 2023 (UTC)) |
( ←) I've now finished my copy-edit; I'll leave a few suggestions for improvements on the article's talk page. Good luck with the article and cheers, Baffle☿gab 05:30, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
I've restored this to the List of micronations page, because (1) there are many more than two people involved, and (2) while its page deletion is under discussion, that has not yet reached any consensus. – •Raven .talk 21:47, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
I've moved Žitomislić around to allow for the village article to be linked. In the future, don't do a copy&paste move, just ask for help at WP:RM instead. If the village article needs to be renamed, likewise. -- Joy ( talk) 07:51, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in Bosnia and Herzegovina topic area. Due to past disruption in this topic area is placed under WP:ARBEE and WP:ARBMAC, which means more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
Johnbod ( talk) 12:20, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello. 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. Johnbod ( talk) 14:08, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Daniel Case (
talk)
02:31, 28 May 2023 (UTC)@ Daniel Case would you mind giving me few inputs on my 60 hours block, before I consider appeal? I was kind of thinking, maybe, to appeal unless this inquiry dissuade me from it. ౪ Santa ౪ 99° 04:21, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
Santasa99 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
G'day to all. I would like to ask for a review of my 60 hours block by Daniel Case. I am not here to persuade you that I don't bear clear and full responsibility for breaking 3RR, but I feel, with all due respect to blocking admin Daniel, that block is too severely imposed and one-sided, without, at least, some consideration for the circumstances. It is priority to assess the risk and 1) the risk that I could continue to engage in edit-warring and/or disrupt the page and the project are literally nonexistent, not only because I usually successfully restrain myself and avoid the trap of edit-warring despite being participant (for more than a 15 long yr. without single sanction) in highly sensitive and controversial topic area, which is Balkans, but also the edits I contributed to the article which ultimately led to reverts between me and the reporting editor and this block, are actually accepted by reporting editor himself now that I am blocked. By reporting editor's own
admission my edits were actually never that contentious in his view -as he said, "I don't mind your "layout changes too much", which is strangely interesting because reporting editor too broke the 3RR over these very edits even before me. So, why than all the reverts and edit-warring, meanwhile I get blocked for edits that didn't matter to opposing editor who invested time and effort to remove them while I was on the page, but now, they sit there in article undisturbed and uncontested !? In a way I got into 3RR and received a block over nothing, over edits which actually never bothered editor in the first place; why was I compelled to defend my edits from reverts by reverting myself; why it did not boomeranged under all these circumstances (he had no more reason to make fourth revert than I did). Or in other words reporting editor was practically edit-warred over nothing, while not actually mind my changes too much, all the while pressuring me on TP with unrelated justification for his, at this point, unnecessary reverts; why on earth was he doing all that, and why he used something inconsequential and already dropped on first two of 2x2 reverts as a pretext (here, it must be clarified that reporting editor was reverting my contribution while justifying it with something else, with explaining how he does not accept links in section "See also", which I stopped including after second revert maybe day before, but he continued to remove my contribution on structuring article which was in layout mess - in other words, he was taking me for a ride at that article and its TP, constantly focusing on non-existant and irrelevant - like this
me,
him,
me,
him) !? This felt like deliberate avoidance to pinpoint what was actually in dispute or it's maybe how he comprehends the world around him, either way dispute resolution never got a chance. And 2) 3RR was honest mistake, with those two sets of 2x2 reverts coming on two different afternoons Thak you. --
౪ Santa ౪
99°
(Inserted) Adendum: Only today, after this block was imposed, did the reporting editor properly approach collaboration by using
WP:REVONLY to fix only those parts of my contribution he thought needed fixing, instead unnecessarily and provocatively going full reverts while using our interaction to offer bogus explanations as noted above (see article history for attribution).--
౪ Santa ౪
99°
20:32, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I might have removed the block if this had been your first one, and if it didn't involve a controversial topic area. But by your own admission you failed to restrain yourself (you say "I usually successfully restrain myself and avoid the trap of edit-warring") so I'm not really clear on what will be different with the next editing dispute you get in. 331dot ( talk) 13:53, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Category:Bosnia and Herzegovina art history has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Estopedist1 ( talk) 05:28, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Rade Uhlik, Bosnian romologist.png. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:32, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Rade Uhlik, Bosnian romologist.png. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:30, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Vidoški, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Podgrađe.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:05, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Santasa99. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bosnia in the Middle Ages, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 23:02, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
The Civility Barnstar | |
I appreciate your nice and friendly tone in discussions. Eisfbnore (会話) 18:26, 1 May 2020 (UTC) |
Regarding your edit summary about a possible sock. Do you suspect some editor in particular? EdJohnston ( talk) 17:51, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
The article Bosnian genocide denial you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Bosnian genocide denial for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Mhare -- Mhare ( talk) 21:01, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
Did you notice the recent Twitter spat between Jasmin Mujanović and Glenn Greenwald? [1] Interesting to watch how certain stuff never seems to settle completely… Eisfbnore (会話) 02:19, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
http://srebrenica hyphen genocide.blogspot.com/2011/10/byen-som-kunne-ofres-serbisk-propaganda.html
(spam filter prohibits linkage) through Google Translate, for a point-by-point refusal of the ludicrous statements given.
Eisfbnore
(会話)
20:39, 20 May 2020 (UTC)Category:Islamophobia in scholarship has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. gnu 57 17:58, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
Done.-- 3E1I5S8B9RF7 ( talk) 11:14, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Islamophobia in non-fiction requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 17:41, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
Hello/Salam,
Thanks for your edits :-) VR talk 21:49, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
Frankly, I just wanted to say I disagree. I share your concerns about possible non-encyclopedic interests at play, but it is a mistake to have faith that our topic area will be rescued by some well-meaning Westerners or Koreans or whoever. Whenever non-Balkanians get involved, they either don't make enough effort to actually learn the matters at stake, or they do but then get sucked in -- myself, Taivo, Fut Perf... -- and end up accused of voting in one of the Balkan "blocs" anyways -- which imo should raise questions about whether these "blocs" are actually based on ethnicity or instead based on personalities, who simply assert they are "ethnic blocs" in order to obscure the interpersonal dynamics at play, which are the real reason for much of the allegedly "ethnic" bloc behavior. Hence I (and even Cinadon -- a Greek!) get mistaken for an Albanians (except for that episode my old userpage was defaced by someone who thought I was a Greek...), and Taivo and FP for Macedonians. There is no reason to think it is somehow going to change the game if Sandstein invents this rule. Really, the best thing I have seen happen to Balkan topics is native Balkan editors who are actually conscientious and working to build an encyclopedia, including working with "the other side". Sandstein's non-policy threw out the baby with the bathwater. -- Calthinus ( talk) 17:05, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Petrovo field, Bosnia and Herzegovina, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Field ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:24, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
An article you recently created,
List of karst plateaus in Bosnia and Herzegovina, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from
reliable,
independent sources. (
?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (
verifiability is of
central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to
draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's
general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.
b
uidh
e
19:22, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
An article you recently created,
Potočari, Srebrenica, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from
reliable,
independent sources. (
?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (
verifiability is of
central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to
draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's
general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.
Celestina007 (
talk)
17:55, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
Hello. 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. 109.245.37.148 ( talk) 15:09, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in Eastern Europe or the Balkans. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
EdJohnston ( talk) 15:36, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Santasa99. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Ethnic cleansing in the Bosnian War at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Cheers, Baffle☿gab 03:07, 7 July 2020 (UTC) |
I have nominated mergers of two categories created by you:
If you wish to comment, please do so at WP:CFDS. – Fayenatic London 09:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I'm running through the categories in WP:LAKES and came across two that you created that seem to describe the same thing. Could you explain the difference or let me know if it makes sense to merge these. Thanks. Category:Subterranean lakes in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Category:Underground lakes of Bosnia and Herzegovina Wolfgang8741 says: If not you, then who? ( talk) 15:33, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Drina, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Međeđa.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:14, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to List of Serbian painters, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 23:20, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi! I've rated nearly 8,000 pages for WP:IR and note you changed my importance rating of Neo-Ottomanism for the project. Given that this page clearly needs to be improved, may I ask why? Johncdraper ( talk) 09:41, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
The article Esad Kurtović has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Very accomplished, lots of published material, but very anemic citation count (highest is 35). Can't see where he meets any of the other criteria of WP:NACADEMIC, and definitely doesn't meet WP:GNG.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Onel5969
TT me
15:33, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Esad Kurtović 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/Esad Kurtović until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article. Onel5969 TT me 19:26, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kotor Castle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ključ.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:47, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
Category:Glavatičevo has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Elliot321 ( talk | contribs) 23:09, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:19, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
I recall you wanting to add a tag to the Boris Malagurski but were told you need consensus. Yet [Here] a tag is added by those that told you this but don’t seem to follow their own advice?
Seems hypocritical if I am reading this correctly. OyMosby ( talk) 21:02, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Herzegovina, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Archaic.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:22, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
Category:Bosnian Genocide deniers has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ( t · c) buidhe 01:32, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Santasa99, could you enable your email function so I can send you a pdf source for you to go through as you speak the language and all? Thank you. OyMosby ( talk) 17:21, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Look who's talking. [4] [5] Amanuensis Balkanicus ( talk) 22:38, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
When you manually made that photo go away on History of Bosnia and Herzegovina, it did not create the "reverted" tag on the article's history, making it that much harder for other editors to understand the situation with those inappropriate photos and seek a solution. Just a heads up.-- Quisqualis ( talk) 04:36, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at
List of Serb countries and regions and
Serbs of Bosnia and Herzegovina shows that you are currently engaged in an
Wikipedia:Hounding; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, while following other editors with whom you disagree and not engaging in Talk Page existing discussions. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others, especially not via WP:Hounding. Instead, please use the
talk page to work toward making a version that represents
consensus. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant
noticeboard or seek
dispute resolution. Being involved in hounding and edit war as a consequence can result in
blocking from editing.---
Theonewithreason (
talk)
18:52, 16 January 2021 (UTC) 18:50, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Serbs of Bosnia and Herzegovina, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 20:46, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello Santasa99, I hope you are doing well. Can the POV template from the NATO and Western media section be removed? The section has been considerably rearranged, references by esteemed and relevant authors have been added (even more than 30 references!), as well as criticism of their opinions. What is disputable and not neutral in this case? What would you like to change and in what way? No one made specific objections to the sources and content on the talk page. I would like to resolve this together and improve the article. I have already initiated a discussion several times. I'm always available for cooperation. Thanks. -- WEBDuB ( talk) 22:09, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Aeengath. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Battle of Zenta, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Aeengath ( talk) 17:41, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ston, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dukedom.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:17, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors. Thank you. CommanderWaterford ( talk) 21:26, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
I re-instated the GA Nomination after your complain at GA Review Talk. Good luck for it. CommanderWaterford ( talk) 21:34, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Stjepan Vukčić Kosača you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of CommanderWaterford -- CommanderWaterford ( talk) 21:40, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
The article
Stjepan Vuk?i? Kosa?a you nominated as a
good article has failed
; see
Talk:Stjepan Vuk?i? Kosa?a for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
CommanderWaterford --
CommanderWaterford (
talk)
21:41, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Please actually read Ethan Van Sciver. The redundant information you re-added is already in the article.
Hello:
The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Stjepan Vukčić Kosača has been completed.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
I have tagged two sentences in the Struggle for family inheritance with "clarification needed" tags as I was unable to understand what the text was tring to convey. Please be sure to read through the article carefully to make certain that none of the edits I have made have added errors to the text. Best of luck with the GAN.
Regards,
Twofingered Typist ( talk) 13:48, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Here they want to put Bosnia and Herzegovina and other things that have never been Serbian countries, please pay attention to this page and further possible edits [ [6]]. Thank you. 89.172.66.209 ( talk) 05:55, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Bombaj Štampa songs indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 15:49, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Stjepan Vukčić Kosača you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Some Dude From North Carolina -- Some Dude From North Carolina ( talk) 20:40, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
The article Stjepan Vuk?i? Kosa?a you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Stjepan Vuk?i? Kosa?a for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Some Dude From North Carolina -- Some Dude From North Carolina ( talk) 20:42, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi, Santasa99. You have done excellent work at Stjepan Vukčić Kosača. I intended to perform the GA review but found that a lot more needs be done. Do you want me to proceed with the review and post suggestions there or would you rather that I take a more active role and edit the article ahead of a review by another editor? Issues include punctuation, spelling, linking, capitalization, clarity, grammar, and internal consistency. Surtsicna ( talk) 16:53, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Producer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thomas Meehan.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 05:56, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
Category:Anti-Muslim sentiment has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:03, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Župas of the medieval Bosnia state indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 15:40, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
Category:Fly fishing in Bosnia and Herzegovina has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. User:力 (powera, π, ν) 05:03, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Category:Recreation in Bosnia and Herzegovina has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. User:力 (powera, π, ν) 05:05, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Hello Santasa99,
Is Category:Hucho habitats in Bosnia and Herzegovina really a good idea? There are regions of the world that have tens of thousands of native fauna. This seems like overcategorization ( WP:OC) unless hucho are somehow staggeringly rare AND influential. Any thoughts on possibly emptying & deleting the category? If a river is really notable as a place hucho fishers go, it can be added as normal referenced content in prose, rather than as a category. SnowFire ( talk) 21:58, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for
your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from
Schutzkorps into
Stjepan Vukčić Kosača. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere,
Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an
edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and
linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution
. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{
copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at
Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. —
Diannaa (
talk)
15:29, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bila (river), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kozica.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:01, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Please note that Graham87 was reverting a bunch of unsourced, unexplained changes--the kind of change one sees all the time in articles in this area. Drmies ( talk) 18:27, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Stjepan Vukčić Kosača you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vacant0 -- Vacant0 ( talk) 18:00, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
The article Stjepan Vuk?i? Kosa?a you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Stjepan Vuk?i? Kosa?a for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vacant0 -- Vacant0 ( talk) 18:02, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
The article Stjepan Vukčić Kosača you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Stjepan Vukčić Kosača for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vacant0 -- Vacant0 ( talk) 23:00, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Hasan Kikić small.png. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 18:29, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
Helo Santasa99. You've been warned per a complaint at the edit warring noticeboard. Either of you may be blocked if you revert the article again without getting a prior consensus for your change on the article talk page. EdJohnston ( talk) 18:43, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi Santa, early parts of the discussion on talk page of the article went a little bit off-topic. Would you mind if I collapsed it with template. Thank you.-- John the Janitor (public) ( talk) 20:04, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
OK :) Then, we subcategorize? Category:Ottoman military personnel of Croatian descent? -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 19:06, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Nuklear bunkers in Bosnia and Herzegovina indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself.
I created a new category with the correct spelling of "Nuclear" and moved the pages formerly in Category:Nuklear bunkers in Bosnia and Herzegovina to the new category, Category:Nuclear bunkers in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The old category is empty and I have therefore asked for it to be deleted. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 22:09, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
An article you recently created,
Dinjčić noble family, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from
reliable,
independent sources. (
?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (
verifiability is of
central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to
draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's
general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.
Onel5969
TT me
17:40, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I'm GenoV84. I noticed that you removed topically-relevant content from LGBT in Islam. However, Wikipedia is not censored. Please do not remove or censor information that directly relates to the subject of the article. If the content in question involves images, you have the option to configure Wikipedia to hide images that you may find offensive. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. GenoV84 ( talk) 22:54, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at LGBT in Islam. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. And to answer your latest disruptive edit, YES: there is also a Jewish death penalty. GenoV84 ( talk) 23:05, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at LGBT in Islam, you may be blocked from editing. GenoV84 ( talk) 23:17, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on LGBT in Islam. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. — Manti core 01:50, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello. 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. — Manti core 06:52, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
An article you recently created,
Katun (commune), is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from
reliable,
independent sources. (
?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (
verifiability is of
central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to
draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's
general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.
Onel5969
TT me
14:44, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, @
Onel5969:, but given that in a very short time you have chosen to review several articles I have created, I would expect that by now you could have assumed that I would object draftification, because I prefer when you handle [it] through other processes, such as deletion, stubbing, tagging, etc. - so, at least three other ways exist (and some more?). This is because the last time you draftified one of my articles (I believe Dinjčić article few days ago, right?), I explained why I prefer other options in these words: If we take into account the fact that the community of editors who are interested in this topic is extremely small, removing the article from the mainspace only further narrows the number of editors who would be willing to improve the article with proper references, thus shifting the weight to the creator alone. Since the subject of this article is notable, and since it's hardly blatant example of an article unsuitable for the mainspace or misguided creation, I am asking you to move the page back to mainspace so that it can be further developed from there.
; further, when the time is short for me to ref an article properly, I at least always leave Bibliography with some high profile scholarship for any interested party to use as a starting point.
Now, since deletion (AfD) would be highly prejudicial move, taking that this article is/was linked from dozens of other articles, written on the subject of Balkan history, and whenever those touch the history of Vlach ethnic group and Katun as their socio-political organisation, and probably many more that were left out because different link format, then, probably most collaborative and least controversial way of handling it would be proper tagging. Thanks (and I really hope you won't take this personally, after I contested every single decision you tried to implement wherever I was active as an editor - it's just a fluke, probably).--
౪ Santa ౪
99°
17:52, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
These are few article linking to Katun (commune), while probably many more could potentially link to it if their (red) links were properly formatted :
So, if not through behavioural boards ( WP:ANI, etc.) and not through content resolution ( WP:DRR, etc.), what "channels" do you envision remain? El_C 13:01, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in gender-related disputes or controversies or in people associated with them. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
El_C 17:29, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
abandoned that page when [you] started to write ANI earlier today, except maybe now. I don't understand why you are committing these really obvious factual errors. Same with the 17 diffs that became 3. I don't know if it's to do with how you read/write it, but there is an objective threshold, which you are failing to meet. Please try to be more cognizant of that. It would be in everybody's best interest, not least your own. El_C 17:53, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
The following article ban now applies to you:
indefinitely article banned from LGBT in Islam and Talk:LGBT in Islam
You have been sanctioned per this ANI report. I would recommend waiting at least 6 months before appealing.
This article ban is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gender_and_sexuality#Final_decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. Please read WP:ABAN to understand what an article ban is. If you do not comply with the article ban, you may be blocked for an extended period to enforce the ban.
If you wish to appeal the ban, please read the appeals process. You are free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. El_C 07:58, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
An article you recently created,
PEN Bosnia and Herzegovina, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from
reliable,
independent sources. (
?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (
verifiability is of
central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to
draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's
general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.
Onel5969
TT me
15:55, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
When he was alive Bosnia and Herzegovina did not exist. He is described as Yugoslav. Rathfelder ( talk) 08:37, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Hi! According to my research, this range of IPs [ [7]] is vandalized every day on sites related to Croatia, Bosnia, Montenegro, Serbia and Macedonia. Please pay attention to the editing of that IP range and if the vandalism continues please report it to someone in charge to block it. Thanks 78.3.85.128 ( talk) 08:03, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Rade Uhlik, Bosnian romologist.png. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:41, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Santasa99!
Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the
Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the
Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!
asilvering (
talk)
04:25, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
|
Thanks for uploading File:Rade Uhlik, Bosnian romologist.png. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:23, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Rade Uhlik, Bosnian romologist.png. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 13:55, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Hello Santasa99. You've been mentioned at User_talk:EdJohnston#Breaking of a ban on Zachlumia_article. Thank you, EdJohnston ( talk) 02:29, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
Seems that not only Theonewithreason is again editing against NPOV on controversial articles or sections dealing with early medieval history, see Višeslav of Serbia: Revision history and Principality of Serbia (early medieval): Revision history where crucial sentence is removed without any valid reasoning and editing policy is exactly against such removal. Miki Filigranski ( talk) 16:10, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Rade Uhlik, Bosnian romologist.png. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:35, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Songs about the Siege of Sarajevo indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:43, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Santasa99. It is impossible that Ragusa granted Sandalj and Vukac the status of Ragusan nobility because they were dead by 30 October 1435. According to Miklǒsich, Ragusa granted them Ragusan citizenship by charter dated 29 June 1419. Greets Kardam ( talk) 20:55, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on International Day Against Fascism and Antisemitism requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://dayagainstfascism.eu/09-november/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Onel5969 TT me 11:59, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
Vandalism was committed on this page, they put Croatian literature to be Serbian, they just changed Croatian to Serbian, and the sources say Croatian can you fix that, i would but it's semi protected so i can't. Siverije repaired, but vandalism was committed again.Thanks [ [8]], history page [ [9]— Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.138.140.121 ( talk) 08:44, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
Hello Santasa99. Could you please explain to me what do you mean by "it is completely invented by editor who created it"? Are you accusing me of creating hoaxes in Wikipedia? Your behavior and attitude shows a disregard of respect for the work of other editors. I will give you an advice: do not accuse established editors of making up articles and having some kind of POV or bias. It will eventually end up with your name at the administrators' noticeboard. Super Ψ Dro 08:32, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jusuf Barčić, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. You are not allowed to comment on an AfD after it is closed - something I'm sure you know, and is in any case written quite explicitly at the bottom of the closed discussion. If you think the discussion was closed improperly you should discuss it with the closer on their talk page or open a Wikipedia:Deletion review. Iskandar323 ( talk) 19:10, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello. 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. Governor Sheng ( talk) 17:38, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
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. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is " West Herzegovina Canton".
Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!
-- Aaron Liu ( talk) 16:26, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
Category:Islamophobia in North America has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Iskandar323 ( talk) 13:24, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is West Herzegovina Canton Symbols. Thank you. Aaron Liu ( talk) 12:36, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Please be aware that " irredentism" from its own article refers to the doctrine of redeeming lost territories while the speech itself did not allude to irredetmsim, and nor did it advocate redrawing Serbia's borders (which were only internal anyway). The term features only on the "Reception" sector of the article by one or two writers to loosely connect the event with later events that would occur in Bosnia and in Croatia and in particular with the narrative of how events were being portrayed in mainstream media and less so on the ground. That in itself does not insinuate a link between the content of the speech and the ideological doctrine you have sought to include. -- Coldtrack ( talk) 06:21, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
00:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Where was the consensus in 2019? [10]? -- Coldtrack ( talk) 17:43, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
Continuing from the above, I would urge you strongly to read the posts of Talk:Srebrenica massacre#Denial (and scepticism?) and provide your proposals and reasoning ther after reading what Pincrete has stated and what I too have adduced. Thank you. -- Coldtrack ( talk) 21:47, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Hello again Santasa. Your latest edit to Srebrenica massacre demonstrates a fourth revert inside of 24 hours thus breaching WP:3RR. Yes I reverted it (again), but J.O seems very cocksure here. He may be giving you rope, I am not sure, but I would say you have between now and the time he plans to report you "tomorrow" (whatever that means to him) to self-revert and back off. Because frankly, I don't even know what he meant and whether he has seen a violation on your part even graver that edit-warring. The choice is yours. -- Coldtrack ( talk) 22:41, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Hello. 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. Juicy Oranges ( talk) 08:22, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Daniel Case (
talk)
19:23, 4 December 2022 (UTC)Santasa99 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I am sorry that this case was concluded without a chance to offer some reply. I am experienced editor and I rarely fall into a trap like this or bring myself to the brink of being warned let alone blocked for disputes like one we have on genocide denial. I do manage fairly successfully to navigate all our guidelines and policies, I have been editing in Balkan scope under WP:ARBEE, where discussions often get heated, without a log warning let alone blocks (1 logged page ban is due to something of a different nature altogether), and never missed to seek consensus and always looked to avoid being disruptive. And although I have made a mistake and miscalculated timeframe in those reverts, there is more to this case than it was reported by Juicy Oranges. This means that although guideline suggest talking about oneself, I will point to all three of us and the situation which led to this report and block. If it means anything, I actually did try to resolve this whole issue by asking administrator to mediate - I posted at Peacemaker67 user TP (it was badly framed, because hot head needs to cool down before making proper decisions).
The reason for that is that filing editor obviously missed to inform community about not that innocuous way they and Coldtrack participated. We had dispute on the article Gazimestan speech. The moment I left that article and its TP discussion, Juicy Oranges and Coldtrack followed me to article Srebrenica massacre with this edit by Coldtrack, and Juicy Oranges chipped in with this edit,, and started reverting me there, and immediately followed me to another article Bosnian genocide denial with first Coldtrack's edit, and Proposed Croat federal unit in Bosnia and Herzegovina first Coldtrack and first Juicy (they confirm it's them in the next edit here), and again started reverting me there too.
Blocking admin probably checked those reverts simply as presented by Juicy in their report, but I would like to direct attention to Juicy and Coldtrack first edits in these three articles, as they never edited there before until they decided to follow me from Gazimestan speech, and for all intents and purposes tag-teamed and used their same POV to take turns on my edits across these three articles, and edit-warred while evading risk of being themself reported for 3RR. Whole this time they were very well aware what they were doing, taking turns, and here's some evidence of their communications:
see edit-summary with a message by Juicy Oranges to Coldtrack; soon enough Juicy Oranges informed Coldtrack and leaving him
directions what to do or not to do.
Sometime in September they were already exchanging these kinds of messages and communication
here, which is interesting because now Joicy informed Coldtrack that they
owed them for something they missed back then, to which Coldtrack replied
like this.
After Juciy Oranges filed the report Coldtrack noticed that report was idle for few hours, so in the message to Juciy Oranges they thanked them and they won't take on themself to
"exacerbate things" by making more reverts, and to doubling down on if this is not "exacerbate things": Coldtrack left two edit-summaries referred to me with
"no consensus is required for reverting a blatant troll", and
"Troll, vandalism"; or that I should have my
eye checked because I refused to accept his accusation that what I am doing is
"egregious and stiff-necked behaviour to sell a point". Later, they were
thanking to Juicy.
I actually intended to go straight to ARBCOM, while fully acknowledging my miscalculated 3RR by fully accepting responsibility for that misstep, and file a report on both editors who are showing some clear signs that they are now taking things into their hands to start fixing great wrongs within Balkan scope, skipping consensus and labeling RS as "so-called reliable sources" and referring to sources with "simplistic narrative sold by mainstream media", only to come across of my 36 hours block. At Gazimestan speech TP, just hour(s) earlier I received blunt ad-hominem from Juicy Oranges.
Maybe it's not directly related to this block and my appeal, but all these edits by two editors were done without even seeking a consensus let alone achieving it, they never accepted that they need consensus to include or change something so controversial in such sensitive articles, where nationalistic editing is not only unheard of but in fact is almost natural occurrence.
OK, whether blocking admin remove or leave my block, I am, regardless, fully aware of and accepting my share of responsibility for what happened. Thank you for the attention.-- ౪ Santa ౪ 99° 00:46, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Accept reason:
See below. NinjaRobotPirate ( talk) 13:48, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
Block message:
Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Santasa99". The reason given for Santasa99's block is: "Violation of the three-revert rule: one additional revert beyond the fourth".
Accept reason: You should be able to edit now. If not, make another unblock request, I guess. NinjaRobotPirate ( talk) 13:48, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
౪ Santa ౪ 99° 12:14, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
Hey there. It's been a while. I've drafted an RfC to be posted at RSN in my sandbox. It'd be helpful if you gave me some suggestions about it. Aaron Liu ( talk) 12:52, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
Santasa99,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (
talk)
17:59, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Abishe ( talk) 17:59, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for creating Amir Bukvić. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it needs more sources to establish notability. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.
Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Reading Beans ( talk) 03:22, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
There is a prominent banner at the top of the archived page that you edited: {{ talk archive navigation}} I have deleted your additional posts to the closed discussion. If you wish to continue the discussion, start a new thread on the RSN page. Banks Irk ( talk) 13:19, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
I saw this edit summary, and I think there might be some confusion. Anyone can Wikipedia:Request closure. "Closure" in wiki-jargon means "write a summary of what the discussion already decided". The discussion is supposed to have finished before you request closure.
If your goal was "make them stop talking about this", then we don't really have a process for that, but if it's about an RFC, you can always explain your concern at Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 20:31, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Santasa99. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Stjepan Vukčić Kosača at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Cheers, Baffle☿gab 03:13, 24 February 2023 (UTC) |
Hi Santasa99, this article is quite poorly written in places; please review my edits and make corrections if I misinterpret anything. The text may have been machine-translated at some stage.
On another note; could you please enable section-level editing of your talk page? It's awkward for editors to scroll past every other section. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 06:32, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
( ←) I've now finished my c/e; I've marked a few passages with {{ citation needed}} where citations appear to be missing; and {{ which}} and {{ what}} on some confusing passages where I couldn't decide what or who the pronouns used refer to. I think I've managed to interpret the text correctly, feel free to inform me if I didn't. Anyway, good luck with the article your planned FA nomination. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 03:13, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Juicy Oranges ( talk) 19:25, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Santasa99. Thank you for your work on Bilino Polje abjuration. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Thanks for creating the article! I encourage you to create more article. Have a good day!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}
. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. (Message delivered via the
Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 03:21, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
The article Luka Božičković has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Fails WP:GNG, no significant coverage can be found
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 10:00, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Category:Katuns has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Estopedist1 ( talk) 07:51, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Santasa99. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Bosnian genocide denial at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Cheers, Baffle☿gab 05:30, 25 March 2023 (UTC)) |
( ←) I've now finished my copy-edit; I'll leave a few suggestions for improvements on the article's talk page. Good luck with the article and cheers, Baffle☿gab 05:30, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
I've restored this to the List of micronations page, because (1) there are many more than two people involved, and (2) while its page deletion is under discussion, that has not yet reached any consensus. – •Raven .talk 21:47, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
I've moved Žitomislić around to allow for the village article to be linked. In the future, don't do a copy&paste move, just ask for help at WP:RM instead. If the village article needs to be renamed, likewise. -- Joy ( talk) 07:51, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in Bosnia and Herzegovina topic area. Due to past disruption in this topic area is placed under WP:ARBEE and WP:ARBMAC, which means more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
Johnbod ( talk) 12:20, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello. 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. Johnbod ( talk) 14:08, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Daniel Case (
talk)
02:31, 28 May 2023 (UTC)@ Daniel Case would you mind giving me few inputs on my 60 hours block, before I consider appeal? I was kind of thinking, maybe, to appeal unless this inquiry dissuade me from it. ౪ Santa ౪ 99° 04:21, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
Santasa99 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
G'day to all. I would like to ask for a review of my 60 hours block by Daniel Case. I am not here to persuade you that I don't bear clear and full responsibility for breaking 3RR, but I feel, with all due respect to blocking admin Daniel, that block is too severely imposed and one-sided, without, at least, some consideration for the circumstances. It is priority to assess the risk and 1) the risk that I could continue to engage in edit-warring and/or disrupt the page and the project are literally nonexistent, not only because I usually successfully restrain myself and avoid the trap of edit-warring despite being participant (for more than a 15 long yr. without single sanction) in highly sensitive and controversial topic area, which is Balkans, but also the edits I contributed to the article which ultimately led to reverts between me and the reporting editor and this block, are actually accepted by reporting editor himself now that I am blocked. By reporting editor's own
admission my edits were actually never that contentious in his view -as he said, "I don't mind your "layout changes too much", which is strangely interesting because reporting editor too broke the 3RR over these very edits even before me. So, why than all the reverts and edit-warring, meanwhile I get blocked for edits that didn't matter to opposing editor who invested time and effort to remove them while I was on the page, but now, they sit there in article undisturbed and uncontested !? In a way I got into 3RR and received a block over nothing, over edits which actually never bothered editor in the first place; why was I compelled to defend my edits from reverts by reverting myself; why it did not boomeranged under all these circumstances (he had no more reason to make fourth revert than I did). Or in other words reporting editor was practically edit-warred over nothing, while not actually mind my changes too much, all the while pressuring me on TP with unrelated justification for his, at this point, unnecessary reverts; why on earth was he doing all that, and why he used something inconsequential and already dropped on first two of 2x2 reverts as a pretext (here, it must be clarified that reporting editor was reverting my contribution while justifying it with something else, with explaining how he does not accept links in section "See also", which I stopped including after second revert maybe day before, but he continued to remove my contribution on structuring article which was in layout mess - in other words, he was taking me for a ride at that article and its TP, constantly focusing on non-existant and irrelevant - like this
me,
him,
me,
him) !? This felt like deliberate avoidance to pinpoint what was actually in dispute or it's maybe how he comprehends the world around him, either way dispute resolution never got a chance. And 2) 3RR was honest mistake, with those two sets of 2x2 reverts coming on two different afternoons Thak you. --
౪ Santa ౪
99°
(Inserted) Adendum: Only today, after this block was imposed, did the reporting editor properly approach collaboration by using
WP:REVONLY to fix only those parts of my contribution he thought needed fixing, instead unnecessarily and provocatively going full reverts while using our interaction to offer bogus explanations as noted above (see article history for attribution).--
౪ Santa ౪
99°
20:32, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I might have removed the block if this had been your first one, and if it didn't involve a controversial topic area. But by your own admission you failed to restrain yourself (you say "I usually successfully restrain myself and avoid the trap of edit-warring") so I'm not really clear on what will be different with the next editing dispute you get in. 331dot ( talk) 13:53, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Category:Bosnia and Herzegovina art history has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Estopedist1 ( talk) 05:28, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Rade Uhlik, Bosnian romologist.png. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:32, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Rade Uhlik, Bosnian romologist.png. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:30, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Vidoški, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Podgrađe.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:05, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Santasa99. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bosnia in the Middle Ages, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 23:02, 28 July 2023 (UTC)