Archive 1

I've removed the Prekmurian language - what is published in popular magazines is not a reliable source. You have to provide references that have been published in peer reviewed sources. -- Eleassar ^{my talk} 12:42, 27 December 2010 (UTC) reply

I'm using English because it is about the content of an article in English and I want the conversation to be available to other editors too. (Pišem v angleščini, ker gre za članek v angleščini, zato želim, da lahko prebere vsakdo.) -- Eleassar ^{my talk} 12:47, 27 December 2010 (UTC) reply

I understand your point about Večer and Feri Lainšček getting the Prešeren Award. However, what counts as a reliable source in linguistics and any other science is only an article published in a peer-reviewed journal. "Where available, academic and peer-reviewed publications are usually the most reliable sources, such as in history, medicine, and science." [1] I have no doubt it's easy to find peer-reviewed articles treating Prekmurian in language, but it's up to you to provide peer-reviewed articles discussing Prekmurian as a language. Per Wikipedia:Verifiability, anything that requires but lacks a source may be removed. -- Eleassar ^{my talk} 13:01, 27 December 2010 (UTC) reply

Oprosti, ampak to ni tako. Čeprav zdaj ne najdem tiste strani, kjer je Toporišič menil o prekmurščini, ampak Vilko Novak tudi veš da je znan znanstvenik je bil, in zelo zadeven Prekmurec. On javno ni napisal, ampak sem slišal o njem, da je privezan bil tudi prekmurščini. Zinka Zorko in drugi tudi so napisali, da je prekmurščina ni vsakdanašnjo narečje. Doncsecz ^talk 13:05, 27 December 2010 (UTC) reply

Ampak ne razveljavi vse, kaj sem napisal! Ne morem tak hitro virov najdti. Doncsecz ^talk 13:42, 27 December 2010 (UTC) reply

Kot sem rekel, ne zanima nas, kaj je res, ampak samo poročamo o tem, kar je bilo objavljeno. Tvoje mnenje je zelo zanimivo, vendar ga najprej objavi v ugledni reviji, da ga bomo lahko uporabili in citirali kot zanesljiv vir. -- Eleassar ^{my talk} 16:22, 27 December 2010 (UTC) reply

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular the three-revert rule states that making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording and content that gains consensus among editors. If unsuccessful, then do not edit war even if you believe you are right. 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 edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. -- Eleassar ^{my talk} 14:24, 28 December 2010 (UTC) reply

Ok, Doncsecz, it seems there is no consensus about the inclusion of 'Prekmurian' in the article Languages of Slovenia (see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Slovenia#Languages of Slovenia) and at least four(!) editors (Doremo, Mhus, 89.212.243.255 and me) find it does not belong there. I suggest you show some good faith, remove the section from the article, and try to build consensus for its inclusion first by using dispute resolution processes, or I'll have to report you for disregarding the 3 reverts rule and for tendentious editing. -- Eleassar ^{my talk} 15:11, 28 December 2010 (UTC) reply

Enough is enough. I've reported you at WP:ANEW. [2] -- Eleassar ^{my talk} 21:32, 11 January 2011 (UTC) reply

In a 2007 arbitration case, administrators were given the power to impose discretionary sanctions on any user working on articles concerning the Balkans. Before any such sanctions are imposed, editors are to be put on notice of the decision. This notice is not to be taken as implying any inappropriate behaviour on your part, merely to warn you of the Arbitration Committee's decision. Thank you. Magog the Ogre ( talk) 09:57, 12 January 2011 (UTC) reply

Thanks the warning. Doncsecz ^talk 10:16, 12 January 2011 (UTC) reply

Your comments in both English and Slovenian are unsupported ad hominem attacks: “Doremo ... be a stranger this informations”, [ [3]] “you beforehand disbelieve” [ [4]], “Doremo pa veliko stvari ne pozna” [ [5]], and perhaps even racist: “Doremo moreover is not Slovene” [ [6]]. Please engage in civil discourse on WP. Doremo ( talk) 17:08, 13 January 2011 (UTC) reply

And you, on end query this informations with disused sources. No got it, that here formerly just in rascist- and communistic-wise abuse the Prekmurian? Now other things exist. In my country and in the Prekmurje in 1950s the Communists prohibit the Prekmurian. Vilko Novak in 1956 in Felsőszölnök deliver a speech in Prekmurian and in Yugosalvia the Communists suspect Novak. Doncsecz ^talk 17:16, 13 January 2011 (UTC) reply

Your comments referring to other editors as "dunce person" ([ [7]]) and that they "scores cock" (whatever that means, it certainly sounds vulgar) are not civil. Please review Wikipedia:Etiquette and help contribute to consensus-based changes in a positive and constructive atmosphere. Doremo ( talk) 16:26, 28 January 2011 (UTC) reply

I'm not really involved with the Prekmurje dialect article, but an Afd template is requesting total deletion of the article which does not appear to be appropriate since it is well developed, extensively cited, long standing, and exists in other versions on quite a few other language wikipedias (36 others by my count). My recommendation is to continue to engage other interested editors on the Prekmurje dialect talk page with your concerns. -- Quartermaster ( talk) 17:14, 10 February 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi. 1) The English is terrible, 2) It doesn't make sense and 3) it's completly unsourced. Lugnuts ( talk) 18:24, 23 May 2011 (UTC) reply

You latest comment ("do not write stupid!") is insulting. Please find another way to interact with editors on Wikipedia. Doremo ( talk) 08:13, 10 June 2011 (UTC) reply

I deleted the text because 1) it is inaccurate (claiming that the Prekmurje dialect is the only dialect in which dialect texts are produced), 2) it gives undue weight to one item in an otherwise simple list, and 3) it is written in very poor English. I suggest that you delete your addition and instead seek consensus from other editors on whether it should be included in the article. Doremo ( talk) 09:00, 10 June 2011 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Ferenc Marics requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Rabbit fang 07:47, 16 August 2011 (UTC) reply

If you object to the deletion of this page, make your argument on the article's talk page so it can be seen by an admin before it gets deleted. Thank you. Rabbit fang 07:54, 16 August 2011 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Ferenc Marics requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Rabbit fang 07:58, 16 August 2011 (UTC) reply

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from Ferenc Marics, a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, then you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Click here to contest this speedy deletion and appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. Rabbit fang 07:58, 16 August 2011 (UTC) reply

don't worry about it too much, it was a totally inappropriate nomination nomination for deletion.

As reviewing administrator, I removed the tag, and commented on User talk:Rabbitfang. We cover the entire world equally, and I encourage you as strongly as I can to continue to translate articles from other Wikipedias that are missing here. We need more people to do this. DGG ( talk ) 12:52, 16 August 2011 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Branko Pintarič requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. ConcernedVancouverite ( talk) 15:52, 27 August 2011 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Branko Pintarič requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. ConcernedVancouverite ( talk) 13:22, 28 August 2011 (UTC) reply

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from Branko Pintarič, a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, then you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Click here to contest this speedy deletion and appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. ConcernedVancouverite ( talk) 14:43, 28 August 2011 (UTC) reply

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with Branko Pintarič. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, then you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Click here to contest this speedy deletion and appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. ConcernedVancouverite ( talk) 14:47, 28 August 2011 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Branko Pintarič 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/Branko Pintarič until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. ConcernedVancouverite ( talk) 15:32, 28 August 2011 (UTC) reply

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Slovene dialects. 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.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; 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. VQuakr ( talk) 06:28, 15 September 2011 (UTC) reply

There are several problems with this edit that I hope you will be able to avoid repeating. Please re-read WP:CIVIL, and note that communications on talk pages should be in English. Also please note that this request was posted at the suggestion of an uninvolved editor responding to a WP:3O request: [8]. Thanks! VQuakr ( talk) 07:27, 15 September 2011 (UTC) reply

A request for arbitration clarification involving you has been filed at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification#Request_for_clarification:_WP:DIGWUREN_or_WP:ARBMAC. Regards, TransporterMan ( TALK) 21:02, 15 September 2011 (UTC) reply

Prekmurian is a possible formation (as are Burgenlandian, Vorarlbergian, Tuscanian, Kordunian, etc.). Nonetheless, it is less typical in the literature on the topic. Wikipedia must rely on typical usage. This may help you: "The term most typically used in reliable sources is preferred to technically correct but rarer forms". Doremo ( talk) 12:00, 5 October 2011 (UTC) reply

Typical usage should be followed, regardless of individual instances of variant names. Please review Common names. Doremo ( talk) 12:25, 5 October 2011 (UTC) reply

Then Slovenian Wikipedia should use the word prekmurščina. That's OK with me; I don't contribute to Slovenian WP. Doremo ( talk) 12:36, 5 October 2011 (UTC) reply

I do not understand your last comment. Doremo ( talk) 13:21, 5 October 2011 (UTC) reply

Wikipedia must rely on typical usage. This may help you: "The term most typically used in reliable sources is preferred to technically correct but rarer forms". Typical usage should be followed, regardless of individual instances of variant names. Please review Common names. Doremo ( talk) 16:01, 4 November 2011 (UTC) reply

You falsely claimed that the form Medmürska žüpanija is attested in Slovar stare knjižne prekmurščine, page 241. It is not. That is why it was removed. Doremo ( talk) 10:18, 17 November 2011 (UTC) reply

As I've already said, the form Medmürska žüpanija is not attested in Slovar stare knjižne prekmurščine. If you can cite an authentic source for the term, that's OK. WP requires reliable sources. Doremo ( talk) 10:31, 17 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Please refrain from making talk page edits like this. WP Talk page guidelines state that "The basic rule ... is that you should not edit or delete the comments of other editors without their permission." Doremo ( talk) 06:16, 19 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Many things are nonsense. Nonetheless, WP policy is not to delete the comments of other editors on talk pages. Doremo ( talk) 08:13, 19 November 2011 (UTC) reply

As a native speaker of Moravian, I'm glad to see it having its own article also at this Wikipedia. The article is, nonetheless, written in a very poor English. I would like to improve it, but sometimes it's really hard to understand what it should actually mean – that's why I prefer rewriting it from scratch.

As for the article by Zbyšek Šustek, I suggest not to rely on the information stated therein. It has received a very negative review and, honestly, I don't find it very serious either. In order to preserve the quality of ‘our’ article, let's be pickier about the sources we base on. Kind regards, Määriläinen ( talk) 18:01, 29 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Hello, I replied at my talk page. -- Vejvančický ( talk | contribs) 14:48, 7 December 2011 (UTC) reply

I replied at Talk:Moravia#Moravia_and_the_Moravian_language. -- Vejvančický ( talk | contribs) 15:20, 7 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Your recent at Slovene dialects has damaged the markup for the note format, as I noted in my earlier revision. The page cannot remain like this. In any case, the note was a compromise solution helpfully provided by User:Yerpo on 15 September 2011 to resolve a dispute. Because the point was previously an object of dispute, it would be appropriate for you to revert your change (including your deletion of the English-language source and replacement with a Hungarian-language source) and to discuss it first on the talk page. This will help achieve consensus on whether your change is a constructive addition to the article. Doremo ( talk) 15:39, 28 December 2011 (UTC) reply

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Slovene dialects. 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.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; 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. Doremo ( talk) 16:28, 28 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi. When you recently edited Bible translations into Prekmurian, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Carinthia ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:34, 29 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Your recent editing history shows that you are in danger of breaking the three-revert rule, or that you may have already broken it. An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a block.

If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You may still be blocked for edit warring even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly. -- Eleassar ^{my talk} 12:24, 31 January 2012 (UTC) reply

You have been reported at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Doncsecz_reported_by_Eleassar_my_talk_.28Result:_.29 -- Eleassar ^{my talk} 12:25, 31 January 2012 (UTC) reply

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for failure to adhere to WP:NPOV by editorialising in articles and edit-warring to reinstate it. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{ unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:11, 31 January 2012 (UTC) reply

I not accept to this blocked. This was not edit war, this graffitys was provocations in 2009 in Murska Sobota. Doncsecz ^talk 13:15, 31 January 2012 (UTC) reply

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Doncsecz~enwiki ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))

---

Request reason:

Admin HJ Mitchell me blocked with an expiry time 2 weeks, but not examine my case in the article Republic of Prekmurje, about a graffity, which was a provocation in 2009. Moreover a new user vandalised my personal user page and placed the template: You have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia as a result of your disruptive edits. Please my unblocked! Copied from unblock-en-l due to a backlog. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 12:32 pm, Today (UTC−5)

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. TN X Man 18:26, 5 February 2012 (UTC) reply

---

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.

A tag has been placed on Irén Pavlics requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Shriram ( talk) 07:15, 18 March 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi Doncsecz, you recently removed a deletion tag from Irén Pavlics. Because Wikipedia policy does not allow the creator of the page to remove speedy deletion tags, an automated program has replaced the tag. Although the deletion proposal may be incorrect, removing the tag is not the correct way for you to contest the deletion, even if you are more experienced than the nominator. Instead, please use the talk page to explain why the page should not be deleted. Remember to be patient, there is no harm in waiting for another experienced user to review the deletion and judge what the right course of action is. As you are involved, and therefore potentially biased, you should refrain from doing this yourself. Thank you, - SDPatrolBot ( talk) 07:24, 18 March 2012 (UTC) reply

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with Irén Pavlics. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Click here to contest this speedy deletion, which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. - SDPatrolBot ( talk) 07:29, 18 March 2012 (UTC) reply

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is " List of Slovene writers and poets in Hungary". Thank you. -- Dialectric ( talk) 09:16, 18 March 2012 (UTC) reply

When you create new articles, feel free to add the names into List of Slovene writers and poets in Hungary. As long as the names are uncited redlinks, they do not belong in the list. Your recent revert restored a number of redlinks, which should be removed. Please discuss this further on the article talk page, where I have explained my reasoning. Dialectric ( talk) 06:05, 19 March 2012 (UTC) reply

Please revert your re-addition of redlinked names in List of Slovene writers and poets in Hungary, as discussed on that article's talk page. I have attempted to pursue this as a disupute resolution, and my next step will be to raise the issue on the Administrators' noticeboard. Dialectric ( talk) 16:22, 21 March 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi. When you recently edited László Kovács (writer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 2000s ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:20, 18 March 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi. When making edits to the date pages like September 22, please don't link generic terms like Hungarian-Slovene or years of death in the births section or years of birth in the deaths section. You will see that none of these are linked. If you have questions, please ask. Swayback Maru ^{Mufka's alternate account ( talk)} 18:48, 21 March 2012 (UTC) reply

The article Irén Pavlics has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{ prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Swayback Maru ^{Mufka's alternate account ( talk)} 18:55, 21 March 2012 (UTC) reply

Hello. I'm very sorry to revert you again, but what you've inserted into the article is not English and cannot be understood. It cannot remain. Can you possibly find a colleague with better English to make any necessary alterations? Regards, -- Stfg ( talk) 13:55, 9 April 2012 (UTC) reply

But this is not real: After the victory, in order to increase his power, Emperor Jovan Nenad incorporated South-Transylvania into his empire Haţeg and the Saxonland. Doncsecz ^talk 15:18, 9 April 2012 (UTC) reply

What you have put in its place is no good because it is unintelligible. Please don't keep on inserting the same nonsense. If you prefer, I can simply tag the article as {{ Rough translation}} and request a translation of the article in the Hungarian Wikipedia. Would you be happy with this? -- Stfg ( talk) 16:07, 9 April 2012 (UTC) reply

Well, I've done that for the Aftermath section. There's no alternative that I can see. -- Stfg ( talk) 17:37, 9 April 2012 (UTC) reply

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Yopie ( talk) 09:28, 12 April 2012 (UTC) reply

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Moravians (ethnic group). 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.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; 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. Yopie ( talk) 17:14, 13 April 2012 (UTC) reply

This was not edit war, i have sources. Doncsecz ^talk 17:16, 13 April 2012 (UTC) reply

Please look at the article talk page and history as well as related pages:

1. Spain was not a WW2 belligerent. The 250th infantry division of the wehrmacht was under German command and control. Please stop adding the Spanish Flag for the participant entry.

2. The battle involved more than just the 250th and and the overall commander was Lindemann. D2306 ( talk) 17:30, 30 April 2012 (UTC) reply

This is not Spain, but Spanish Volunteers. Doncsecz ^talk 17:54, 30 April 2012 (UTC) reply

Then the spanish flag should especially not be there. The 250th infantry division of the wehrmacht was under German command and control. It was mainly composed of the spanish, but there were many other units with foreign volunteers. For example the Flanders legion also participated in the same battle, but that is no reason to add their flag and commander. D2306 ( talk) 18:05, 30 April 2012 (UTC) reply

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Battle of Valea Albă. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. ʝungle jill 17:25, 16 June 2012 (UTC) reply

I WANT YOU TO REVERT IT AND WAIT FOR AN ADMIN TO CLOSE THIS DISCUSSION. I WILL BE COMPLAINING TO AN ADMIN IF THIS IS NOT DONE. Tradedia ( talk) 00:56, 23 June 2012 (UTC) reply

on the contrary, it is acceptable. I7laseral ( talk) 01:31, 23 June 2012 (UTC) reply

You say in answer to my comments on my talk page and I quote your words for the benefit of other colleagues to see and reflect on: "Excuse me, i was moved the article, but only by opinion of the United Nations." End of your comment -- Really --- Now THAT'S enough ground to revert the move that you have done. werldwayd ( talk) 06:25, 23 June 2012 (UTC) reply

An opinion is an opinion, nothing more. And the opinion of a "certain individual" at the organization at that and not the entire organization itself and its member states. Tomorrow another individual from the UN may issue another declaration asserting some other so-called "opinion" and we change again based on this new opinionator? Please don't make this even worse on you. Revert to original title and wait for concensus which will be any time soon. No need to quote a so-called subjective opinion. werldwayd ( talk) 06:32, 23 June 2012 (UTC) reply

A further comment from you on my talk page. Quote: "Moreover, it is explicitly a civil war. The blind can see" --- Now now now. This is getting even worse. Now I do have serious doubt on the basis your premature "fait accompli" move was done. My request is: Let us wait for an administrator to see the long discussion on all this, formulate his opinion based on concensus formed and let him decide please. Meanwhile let us be, and concentrate on improving content rather than a disputed title move. werldwayd ( talk) 06:37, 23 June 2012 (UTC) reply

This move was a very bad idea due to the ongoing move discussion. It is generally considered a very bad idea to move a page while a move discussion is ongoing. Please don't do this again. As a neutral admin I have now closed the discussion as no consensus. My reasoning can be found on the talk page. Dpmuk ( talk) 23:17, 23 June 2012 (UTC) reply

Battle of Varna Stop changing the numbers, i am just adding a Turkish source at it, european historians tend to inflate te numbers of the Ottomans in battle.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Battle of Zsibó, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Komarno ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 14:21, 3 September 2012 (UTC) reply

The problem is that I do not know the exact relationship between place names. In Hungarian language is much clearer, as this place was the settlements of the historical Hungary. Doncsecz ^talk 15:04, 3 September 2012 (UTC) reply

Whether Hungary should be listed as an independent country, during the Napoleonic Wars, or not should be discussed on the Napoleonic Wars talk page, not on this particular article. So far, the presence of an independent Hungarian army in the battle of Raab is not proven. DITWIN GRIM ( talk) 12:05, 8 September 2012 (UTC); reply

The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material, you haven't brought any valuable evidence so far (see WP:BURDEN). 10:10, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

My talk page is not the place to discuss it. Your point of view is unsourced. DITWIN GRIM ( talk) 10:34, 9 September 2012 (UTC) reply

I don't care about the Austrian Empire's institutional structure. The point is that you have no source that lists Hungary as an independent belligerent for the battle of Raab. DITWIN GRIM ( talk) 10:48, 9 September 2012 (UTC) reply

Your sources are unreliable as per WP:NOENG. DITWIN GRIM ( talk) 10:51, 9 September 2012 (UTC) reply

I brought this discussion on a less confidential talk page (see [9]). DITWIN GRIM ( talk) 11:11, 9 September 2012 (UTC) reply

Valóban, igazad van, Magyarország és Ausztria között (de jure) pusztán perszonálunió állt fenn, azaz a király személye volt közös. Hazánk el tudta kerülni az örökös tartományi sorsot, amely Csehországra várt a Fehér-hegyi vereség után (1620). Jelentettem a szerkesztési háborút az adminisztrátoroknál. -- Norden1990 ( talk) 11:20, 9 September 2012 (UTC) reply

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Doncsecz for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 13:11, 9 September 2012 (UTC) reply

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Doncsecz for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 13:31, 9 September 2012 (UTC) reply

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for Confirmed sockpuppet of User:GyorgyFerenc who is a possible sockpuppet of User:Stubes99. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{ unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Tiptoety ^talk 01:56, 10 September 2012 (UTC) reply

Note: You have now used 81.183.7.158 and 81.183.31.203 to evade your block. Please understand that the block applies to you as a person, whatever way you choose to connect to the Internet. If you wish to appeal your block please follow the instructions in the block notice. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 05:53, 12 September 2012 (UTC) reply

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Doncsecz~enwiki ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))

---

Request reason:

I'am not identical User:Stubes99. Stubes99 is a Hungarian troll and vandal, i have another IP and the administrators was not checked my and Stubes99's IP. Doncsecz ^talk 07:27, 12 September 2012 (UTC) reply

Decline reason:

You are blocked as a "Confirmed sockpuppet of User:GyorgyFerenc", and that is what you need to address if you wish to request unblock -- Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 07:35, 12 September 2012 (UTC) reply

---

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.

( edit conflict) exactly the same unblock decline that I was in the process of posting. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 07:39, 12 September 2012 (UTC) reply

Please don't blank your talk page while it still has active block notices and declined unblock requests. -- Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 08:24, 12 September 2012 (UTC) reply

I'am not identical Stubes99, remove the user:Stubes99 from the block, i'am not Stubes99! Doncsecz ^talk 08:36, 12 September 2012 (UTC) reply

OK, last chance...

• You are blocked as a sock of GyorgyFerenc - that's what you need to address.
• If you blank this page again while there are still active block/unblock messages, I will revoke your ability to edit here.

-- Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 08:48, 12 September 2012 (UTC) reply

...are blocked as a sock of GyorgyFerenc - okay, this is right. But who is a possible sockpuppet of User:Stubes99 – this is unrealy! Doncsecz ^talk 08:59, 12 September 2012 (UTC) reply

OK, if you're admitting that this account is a sock of GyorgyFerenc, then there's nothing more to do here - I suggest you go over to your GyorgyFerenc account and pursue the Stubes99 issue there. -- Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 09:11, 12 September 2012 (UTC) reply

← Your block has been reduced to two weeks. Tiptoety ^talk 05:42, 16 September 2012 (UTC) reply

Hello, Doncsecz. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Simon Knéfacz, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

1. edit the page
2. remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
3. save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks, Niado ( talk) 20:50, 16 November 2012 (UTC) reply

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:34, 27 December 2012 (UTC) reply

We only Wikilink the first occurrence of a term in an article section. Please don't add redundant links to articles. Yworo ( talk) 19:41, 27 December 2012 (UTC) reply

But this is two another articles: first about the Croatian minority, a second about their mother tongue. Doncsecz ^talk 19:42, 27 December 2012 (UTC) reply

And the link in the lead paragraph should be to the language that he wrote in, as material and links about ethnicity are discouraged in the lead paragraph. If you want to add cited material about his ethnicity, it goes in subsequent paragraphs, not the first. Yworo ( talk) 19:44, 27 December 2012 (UTC) reply

But in this case is necessary included the Burgenland Croatian language and the Burgenland Croats - the first rection is not always the clear. Doncsecz ^talk 19:46, 27 December 2012 (UTC) reply

No, it's not necessary. The only thing of interest to us in the first paragraph is the language he wrote in, not his ethnicity. To establish ethnicity in the second or later paragraph of the article, be sure to cite sources about his parents. Thanks. Yworo ( talk) 19:49, 27 December 2012 (UTC) reply

Great, see also section is perfect until it can be integrated with text and citations. Yworo ( talk) 19:50, 27 December 2012 (UTC) reply

Hello. It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on biased users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote—in order to influence Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/László Kovács (writer). While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Transerd ( talk • contribs) 13:05, 6 January 2013 (UTC) reply

I reported you here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Canvassing

Da, kajkavec sem. Fejstkajkafski ( talk) 16:44, 28 January 2013 (UTC) reply

Začel sem pisati članek o kajkavske gramatike - morfologija, sintaksa, fonologija, i tak dale, to moreš videti ovde (ni gotovo i neke stvari niso povsem točne!). Namen mi je da bi ga, kad bu gotof, dodal v Wikipedijin članek o kajkafskem (na engleske varijante i na par drugih). Na wiktionary-ju često dodajam kajkafske reči, katere so izlistane totu. Če te zanima kaj o kajkafskam, pogleč na google-u "Mala kajkavska gramatika". Jošče nekaj informacij moreš najti z Google Scholarjam, [ ovde ter [ ovde, ampak jih ni vse mogoče otpreti.

[ ovde imaš međimurski rečnik

Če v Google napišeš "site:hrcak.srce.hr kajkavski" (bez ""), buš našel jošče nekaj člankof na temu kajkafskega. Fejstkajkafski ( talk) 17:41, 28 January 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Flensburg, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Danish ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:53, 22 June 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Víctor Israel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Catalans ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:17, 22 July 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Battle of Biskupice, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Komarno ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:10, 10 November 2013 (UTC) reply

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! Greetings, -- Norden1990 ( talk) 21:43, 23 December 2013 (UTC) reply

Thanks! Doncsecz ^talk 21:58, 23 December 2013 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Branko Pintarič 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/Branko Pintarič (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on 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. Eleassar ^{my talk} 16:57, 4 February 2014 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Streltsy (Hungary) 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/Streltsy (Hungary) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on 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. ansh 666 07:30, 30 September 2014 (UTC) reply

Hello, I think you might be thinking of Rab C. Nesbitt. Bob talk 18:32, 7 October 2014 (UTC) reply

Thanks! Doncsecz ^talk 06:40, 8 October 2014 (UTC) reply

23:30, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

12:15, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 17:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cry Chicago, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Margaret Lee. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:17, 28 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Please read WP:RS/IMDB, IMDb is user-generated and includes many inaccurances (I myself fixed dozens of them). Also, often IMDb editors use to add languages which are only featured in a couple lines of dialogue (it could be that case). All the sources I checked say the film is an Italian production in Italian language, I am pretty sure they are reliable. Among other things, IMDb itself as well as the other sources do not list any Spanish company/person among the producers, nor any Spanish involvement both in the technical or artistic cast. Also, according to the book Italian Crime Filmography the film was enterely shot in Italy, between Milan and Ancona, and apparently it film was not released in Spain. My best, Cavarrone 20:21, 27 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello, Doncsecz~enwiki. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Your signature links to User talk:Doncsecz so I have redirected that page here.

You are probably the same editor as User:Doncsecz, so I recommend that you use Wikipedia:Changing username to request that your account be renamed back to that one.

Let me know if you need help, but no-one else can do it for you. – Fayenatic L ondon 17:12, 20 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Thanks for creating József Dravecz, Doncsecz~enwiki!

Wikipedia editor Boleyn just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thanks for creating this article - it's appreciated. It's just been reviewed. Could you please look it over and see if you can help address the improvement tags? Thanks in advance for any help you can offer. Best wishes, Boleyn ( talk) 21:40, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

To reply, leave a comment on Boleyn's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Thanks for creating Alojzije Jembrih, Doncsecz~enwiki!

Wikipedia editor Boleyn just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

PLease add your sources inline

To reply, leave a comment on Boleyn's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Boleyn ( talk) 18:33, 31 May 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello, Doncsecz~enwiki. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm Toddst1. I noticed that you made one or more changes to an article, April 18, 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! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Toddst1 ( talk) 01:23, 6 May 2018 (UTC) reply

Hello, Doncsecz~enwiki. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC) reply

Hello, Doncsecz~enwiki. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm Andrzejbanas. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, 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. If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Andrzejbanas ( talk) 14:48, 3 April 2019 (UTC) reply

The file File:Coat arms of Habsburg Monarchy.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

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 files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 01:01, 15 June 2019 (UTC) reply

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:09, 19 November 2019 (UTC) reply

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Gordana Šövegeš Lipovšek, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot ( talk) 01:34, 1 January 2020 (UTC) reply

Hello, Doncsecz~enwiki. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Gordana Šövegeš Lipovšek".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! JMHamo ( talk) 21:26, 26 January 2020 (UTC) reply

Hello Doncsecz~enwiki,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Eva Kurnik for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Jmertel23 ( talk) 17:28, 25 March 2020 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Đuro Blažeka, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. SCP -20 00 14:49, 26 April 2020 (UTC) reply

An article you recently created, Đuro Blažeka, 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) 22:04, 26 April 2020 (UTC) reply

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 01:41, 24 November 2020 (UTC) reply

Hello, Doncsecz~enwiki. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Đuro Blažeka".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian ( talk) 23:15, 1 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm sending you this note because you need to update your signature. You have a custom signature set in your account preferences. Your signature does not link to your account. This is usually because your account has been renamed.

To fix your signature, you need to find the signature section in the first tab of Special:Preferences and either blank it or change the link to your current account name. More information is available at Wikipedia:Signatures#Customizing how everyone sees your signature. mw:New requirements for user signatures/Help#Wrong user links. If you have followed these instructions and still want help, please leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Signatures.

Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) ( talk) 23:46, 25 January 2021 (UTC) reply

The article Innocent Himbaza has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Did not find signs of sufficient notability per WP:NACADEMIC or WP:BIO and 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. CommanderWaterford ( talk) 20:08, 30 April 2021 (UTC) reply

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:23, 23 November 2021 (UTC) reply

An article you recently created, Japanese invasion of Taiwan (1616), is not suitable as written to remain published. It appears to be a low quality machine translation and it contains a number if unsourced statements. 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. Mccapra ( talk) 15:16, 9 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello Doncsecz~enwiki! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Japanese settlers in Manchuria, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted material from other websites or printed works. This article appears to contain work copied from https://web.archive.org/web/20211214160847/https://www.monash.edu/arts/philosophical-historical-international-studies/eras/past-editions/edition-five-2003-november/1094-2, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate your contributions, copying content from other websites is unlawful and against Wikipedia's copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are likely to lose their editing privileges.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

• Have the author release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License (CC BY-SA 3.0) by leaving a message explaining the details at Talk:Japanese settlers in Manchuria and send an email with confirmation of permission to " permissions-enwikimedia.org". Make sure they quote the exact page name, Japanese settlers in Manchuria, in their email. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If you hold the copyright to the work: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Japanese settlers in Manchuria. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0", or that the work is released into the public domain, or if you have strong reason to believe it is, leave a note at Talk:Japanese settlers in Manchuria with a link to where we can find that note or your explanation of why you believe the content is free for reuse.

It may also be necessary for the text to be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

See Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries for a template of the permissions letter the copyright holder is expected to send.

Otherwise, you may rewrite this article from scratch. If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Japanese settlers in Manchuria saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.

Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! — Diannaa ( talk) 23:45, 4 February 2022 (UTC) reply

The article András Horváth (teacher) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Longstanding enough that it's not an A7, but I don't see an assertion of notability here, nor sourcing in the other language versions that would indicate he was a notable teacher

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. Star Mississippi 20:36, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello, Doncsecz~enwiki. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Japanese invasion of Taiwan (1616), 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) 16:01, 11 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello, Doncsecz~enwiki. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Japanese invasion of Taiwan".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:54, 9 July 2022 (UTC) reply

The article Stephanus Zagrabiensis has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{ prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Asparagusus (interaction) 13:07, 15 August 2022 (UTC) reply

@ Asparagusus: Stephanus Zagrabiensis was born in 1669. This is a living person???? Doncsecz ^talk 13:11, 15 August 2022 (UTC) reply

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) 00:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello, Doncsecz~enwiki. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Stephanus Zagrabiensis, 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) 00:01, 24 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Hello, Doncsecz~enwiki. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Stephanus Zagrabiensis".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:09, 23 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Japanese invasion of Taiwan (1616), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sino-Japanese War. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 14:44, 20 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your contributions to Matjaž Klemenčič. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it has no sources. 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. BoyTheKingCanDance ( talk) 09:04, 18 May 2023 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your contributions to Mitja Žagar. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it has no sources. 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. BoyTheKingCanDance ( talk) 09:06, 18 May 2023 (UTC) reply

Hello, Doncsecz~enwiki. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Matjaž Klemenčič, 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) 10:01, 18 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Hello, Doncsecz~enwiki. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Mitja Žagar".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗ plicit 14:05, 19 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:27, 28 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your contributions to Bertalan Koczuván. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources and it has too many problems of language or grammar. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, 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 OR move the page back. Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 05:56, 15 January 2024 (UTC) reply

On 3 February 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Satoshi Kirishima, which you created. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. PFHLai ( talk) 11:18, 3 February 2024 (UTC) reply